An interesting study happening on nostr. I'm calling this "aggressively agreeing with each other without realizing".
Will pushes quite aggressively against Primal for having a caching server or some centralized server infra arguing that Primal users don't see some content because of this. Miljan and Will call each other out for fudding, but the conversation brings some important concepts and point of view to light.
Then Will posts a comment that is interpreted by others as "all grants to Damus are getting denied by some unknown force, presumably one of the organizations giving out grants in the space, like OpenSats".
This triggers somewhat offtone, but also understandable reply from ODELL taking this personally. Will adds a jab/question about whether ODELL did it because he's also an investor to Primal questioning ODELL's integrity. That very predictably makes the conversation go south.
Upon further chats it becomes clear that Will means specifically grants directly to ALL other Damus contributors are getting denied while Will himself is getting notable sums from OpenSats monthly (and presumably not granting his contributors from those funds). At the same time Will shares that he doesn't have that much visibility into the situation with grants. And then it's just "he said, she said" that goes nowhere (i.e. even if you prove the other person wrong, you still lose. Marriage 101).
Other people use this public thread to attack either of the apps, but then a general consensus establishes that there are different ways to build nostr clients and we will have to stay humble and see.
In my opinion folks are 95% agreeing with each other and are unfortunately talking over each other and lacking some skills around communication.
During my career of managing engineers I have seen this with some engineers again and again. They get themselves into a situation like this without understanding how did they get there. "Why is he now so aggressive against me? I just told the truth I don't care about anything else. They are attacking me without reason."
I have heard a similar sentences multiple times. One time about minor change in Angular testing framework, a different time about a choice between backend A or B...
What I would sometimes do with the engineer is to go through the specific situation and "debug" it. We would "debug" it especially from the the perspective of the other person. We would try writing it down. Often it becomes obvious that engineer made action A that led to B and B led to C and C is quite bad, so next time we need to handle A differently.
