Choice would be ideal but i understand how it could get complicated, especially on mobile. There's a fair number of users that want public mute lists so they can can share them with others, in addition to WoT applications. I would lean towards private mutes, if I ever felt I needed to start muting. But either way, muting something or someone twice doesn't seem like a big deal if it's known in advance that it's a likely possibility. Over time, people will settle into their favorite selection of clients, and it would be nice if they could do so through those types of choices.
Serves me right for testing using my main npub... 😂
I like what nostr:nprofile1qqsgzfdez8ksa9xmuvqg5zly3nl9e5xqkpvj8nllj9aw06ra4pqq3qcq9n0c5 is going to do with Jumble, giving users the choice between "private" (encrypted) mute or "public" mute.
I can see there being situations where a user might want to use one or the other.
Discussion
I also lean toward private mutes, but I am also sympathetic to use-cases like nostr:nprofile1qqsf03c2gsmx5ef4c9zmxvlew04gdh7u94afnknp33qvv3c94kvwxgsm3u0w6's web-of-trust scoring that deducts score based on how many within your WoT have muted a given npub.
That's another way that choice is advantageous, though. The ones you would most want to be taken inter consideration for WoT scoring would be muted scammers and spammers, which a user probably has no issue being publicly shamed. Whereas the mutes you most likely want to have kept private are just people who you don't get along with, and that sort of reason for muting probably doesn't need to be taken into consideration for WoT score, as others may get along with them fine.
I completely agree. If an interface struggles to make choice work, a clear statement could be a fair compromise.
