I would understand a client charging an upfront or subscription fee. I am then able to choose wether or not to use them.
Taking a cut of a zap that I send to another user will not be tolerated tho. I’d rather not use Nostr altogether in that case.
Just because Apple or Google does something doesn’t mean it’s fine to adopt it.
Not a dev but ain’t that the whole point here?
I'm no dev either and agree just cause someone else does it doesn't make it right.
The point isn't free here though, it's freedom and if you read what the devs are saying lately ... the hardware and software you and I are using to send/store our messages currently has no long term funding.
So they are talking about different models that might work. Subscriptions, ads, vc funding, donations through open sats etc.
I would personally be ok with a fee structure on zaps...
opt in model would fix this.. maybe a toggle under the bitcoin lightning address slot with 'allow 5% to be deducted of all zaps to support clientname' '
