nostr:npub12vkcxr0luzwp8e673v29eqjhrr7p9vqq8asav85swaepclllj09sylpugg is showing a different note
And nostr:npub18m76awca3y37hkvuneavuw6pjj4525fw90necxmadrvjg0sdy6qsngq955 shows a different one too 
Discussion
nostr:npub1zafcms4xya5ap9zr7xxr0jlrtrattwlesytn2s42030lzu0dwlzqpd26k5 nostr:npub1xtscya34g58tk0z605fvr788k263gsu6cy9x0mhnm87echrgufzsevkk5s I didnโt know notes could be different between clients
This is due to how Damus/Primal handles NIP-10 and nostr:reference
The Daniel's note in question has 3 different mentions/references
** Embedded note that Daniel wanted to mention (this uses nostr: format)
**Onyx's note to which The Daniel replied
(This is in NIP-10 format with "reply" marker)
nostr:nevent1qqs94afkfchld4zc9hkaenttdwnaaf8z6qvywnqu28879seds49xqjcmntm6u
** The Daniel's original note "Never forget..." to which Onyx replied (This is in NIP-10 format with "root" marker)
I am not sure why the nostr: embedded reference was ignored by Damus & "root" note is shown instead.
Maybe it's because the quote format is different in Damus -- it's uses a "q" tag instead of "e" tag ๐คทโโ๏ธ
I am not even sure what you're seeing in this post of mine as I am adding Amethyst too to the mix now ๐ ๐
Thank you nostr:npub1qn49n06hdwwyrtvdyymu2wx57jvhz7anmu20tgsdjjyae3zhwaxsjtl6rj
Yeah NIP-10 is a bit janky, and the devs dont have a test suite as of today. Hence why results differ.
Bookmarked for #nostrability analysis.
