1) 30032 should have Kind 11 replies.
2) The only is difference is the target + the limits to who can post the articles there
In the personal blog case the target is the publishers own community, where only he can publish articles.
In the Ray Peat Forum case the target is the Ray Peat Community, where anyone can publish articles.
Same content type in both cases.
> The only is difference is the target + the limits to who can post the articles there
Why are you ignoring me when I say that nested replies is the key difference? This is a key part of the medium.
Because I don't get that part. In the NIP it says you can reference parents.
In NIP 22? Sure, but NIP 7D specifies not to do that:
> Replies should always be to the root `kind 11` to avoid arbitrarily nested reply hierarchies.
Maybe I should have used a different reply kind, but I don't really see why this is ambiguous.
I think we'll just build:
:article: Forums on Kind 30032 and Kind 30040 (type: article) in one feed
:thread: Threads with Kind 1
So far I don't see reasons to have any other content type
I think you should do that. It's ok if you don't understand why 7D exists, you don't have to use it.
Can you prove anyone understands why it exists?
Yep. Great!
Will not use 7D then. That's clearly not my thing.
Totally a deeply nested convo lover, on any content type.
yeah same... I think nip22 supports nested replies just fine from what I understand. just need to pick a root scope/kind
Yup!
nostr:nprofile1qy88wumn8ghj7mn0wvhxcmmv9uq3samnwvaz7tmxd9k8getj9ehx7um5wgh8w6twv5hsz9mhwden5te0veex2mnn9ehx7um5wgcjucm0d5hsz9nhwden5te0dehhxarj9ejxzarp9e5xzatn9uq3wamnwvaz7tmzd96xxmmfdejhytnnda3kjctv9uqzqla9dawkjc4trc7dgf88trpsq2uxvhmmpkxua607nc5g6a634sv57kxvxe what would you think abput using a different kind for 7D replies? Kind 1111 is sort of over-engineered for something so simple
