That is a…

…this is a very loose but potentially volatile way to contextualize “people” versus “item”… and (speaking from one end of my mind) kind of makes sense. It decouples wallet from event and to a person. Potentially pushing forward “identity holder as wallet.”

So yea, it can sound bad, or unwanted. But, if you press on the bubble just a bit here, the resolution given might actually affirm “decentralized identity (holder),” leaving protocols to just be ???

To make a definition where content isn’t valuable, people are… that… that actually kinda sounds like what nostr wants.

Just thinking/riffing… but don’t think I’m that far off. Whether nostr/NIP evolves to this, or some other protocols see this, is another story. There’s a map in that response to something that might actually be a clearer focus… even if it is a harder vision to make happen nostr:note1cmykkjkvc7mg642gxpexyt9rpvr55cskyj3ny7rz8vl75vvuud0q8xlunk