Thinking about my last note, I had this thought as well.

The gap between engagement quality and follower count reveals something interesting about how attention works on Nostr. When we consistently find ourselves drawn to smaller accounts for substantive dialogue, we’re seeing the gap between visibility and actual value. Just because someone got here early or built a large network doesn’t mean they’re offering the most interesting perspectives.

Without an algorithm, smaller accounts face a pure discovery problem. They’re not being suppressed, but they’re not being surfaced either. The best conversations often happen below the visibility threshold, with people who take time to think through their responses and genuinely engage rather than broadcast. These accounts offer the kind of interaction that makes social protocols worth participating in, but they rely entirely on people like you actively seeking them out and responding.

What makes your observation valuable is that it points to something many of us probably feel but don’t articulate. The most rewarding exchanges aren’t happening where the follower counts suggest they should be. They’re happening in replies from accounts with 240 followers who actually read what you wrote and had something thoughtful to add.

So this is both an encouragement and a thank you to those Nostriches; your contributions matter more than your reach suggests. The people finding you and engaging with your ideas are getting far more value than the metrics reflect. And to everyone making the effort to engage back, as you do, you’re solving the discovery problem one genuine interaction at a time. 🫡

That’s how good networks get built.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​