This is a very important point that probably has crossed your minds as well. If in a Web of Trust nostr, follow ==trust, I would need to unfollow about 90% of you.

nostr:nevent1qqsqqpj47gvgpn4lhvktfjtucnp0z365rzvx29azvt847qr49rwe04cpgdmhxw309ahx7um5wfkxzmnyxfnkgaehvuehjdehvd6xvar0wemxjmphxem8zatfwpuk6mehw3ekxarv0pcxjamtdejhv7nxd9jzummwd9hkuq3q9mun7qwdyjf7qs3456u8kyxncjn5u2n7klpu4utgy68k4aenzj6sxpqqqqqqzp357gm

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

i also don’t trust anyone to make mute report/mute decisions on my behalf. I would maybe delegate that to one or two other crazy trusted person, but even then.

IMO there should only be explicit mutes + WoT. Mutelists are pure cancer, web2 tech

calling nostr kind 3 follow list a Web of Trust is a misnomer since we don't "trust" them in the traditional sense. Its more like we "trust" them to not post spam, or we trust them to post things we could be interested in

IMO it would be better to call kind:3 follow lists a Web of not Spam. but that doesn't sound as catchy

It seems clear we need some sort of alternative "trusted contact list" NIP. This would also be useful for stuff like app binary distribution if we replace pgp verification.

Truth. we are mostly shady af money transmitter types