Don't rely on the official GitHub definition of the protocol, rely on ... newspapers (!)
Lol Wikipedia
Wikipedia Nostr entry keeps getting edited to remove references to censorship resistance.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nostr
I'm starting to understand why WikiFreedia needs to be a thing.
Discussion
I saw that and was confused as well. What could the logic possibly be to see "too many" primary sources as problem?
Seems that Wikipedia would like editors to not insert their own interpretations, at least not directly, and that's being applied overzealously
Wikipedia is a well controlled psy-op for any non mundane topic
This is their policy, you need "reliable" secondary sources that interpret and explain things. This is unfortunate because all "reliable" secondary sources are garbage these days.
I see it as a way of including legitimate criticism. Primary sources will not include it and a lack of secondary sources perhaps shows that this thing doesn’t have enough popularity to be subjected to critical analysis. I feel like this is a good policy, if a little cumbersome for something new.
It's such an obvious gatekeeping move. "The new-ish thing you're writing about hasn't been written about enough already by state media, so references to its own documentation aren't tolerated".
If you can't write a wiki about it, it's harder for others to learn about it, thus harder for "non-primary" sources to write about it, thus harder to provide citations that wikipedia gestapo approve. nice and circular.
The lines are drawn. Probably better to just stay outside them and flash the middle finger to the pearl-clutchers standing inside as you Exit.
nostr:note1v6yxxpqxvgxelxwraksexj6ppd5ushkmdtnwjlmhma4ypaemjd3q5k78v8