And you also don't take economics into account. People will fight for their free speech. Low friction ways of doing it are available on nostr. People can choose whatever damn relay they want. They don't have to listen to someone if they don't want to, nor tldo they have to subscribe only to the relays that do silence people. Voluntary choice and the ease with which people have options on nostr already handles things pretty well. Further innovations and the market will handle whatever remains to be done.
Discussion
There are supposedly thousands of people who subscribed to me because they wanted to read my notes, but they are seeing them. You think there is no issue at all here?
there’s an issue.
thanks for caring about it.
Please rephrase, I don't know what you are trying to say.
I missed a "no".
I missed the part where you explain what the heck you meant.
Asserting opinions over and over again does little good without an explanation or question that the other person can understand. I'm trying to listen and learn what I might be missing. I cannot learn much when I can’t even understand the point.
Are you saying they did get your notes or that they did not get your notes?
They did not get my notes, that was the "no" I missed.
ahhhh. That was ambiguous. I see now. There is a problem only if the note on your own relay was not accessible to people on that relay. Is that the case? Or is it just that it is receiving less attention but perfectly accessible?
Also is the note a separate note with different meta information on it (like timestamps), or is it an exact copy/rebroadcast?
Dear gentleman, I wrote two big articles explaining my point and you answered with "this is wrong", I asked for clarification and you said "there is no issue" because "people would manage to get to the person they want to hear from", to which I replied that my example counters this with a fact: people wanted to hear from me but they were not hearing from me.
Now you must either say my fact assertion is wrong and why or you must rephrase your argument such that it is not invalidated my the fact I presented.
A gossip protocol will make it really easy for spammers to push their spam relays onto everyone and flood feeds with scammy adds for shitcoins and penis extenders.
Then, well need a second gossip protocol to distribute lists of spam relays that clients can use to filter them from the relay gossip protocol.
And finally, well need human curated lists of clean, nice , inoffensive relays for people to use, that that don't want to deal with all the spam relays from gossip protocols.
Or, we let users add whatever penis extender advertising relays they want to subscribe to manually, or by following someone posting to that relay, giving people a choice rather than having relays thrust upon them that they then have to filter out.
Censored means actively blocking notes. Me, not wanting to subscribe to your relay and read your notes, is not censorship, it's me exercising my freedom of choice.
If you don't follow spammers, why would your client query their relays?