Nah, you’re distorting my position, which is you should be *allowed* to be anonymous, but if you’re not doing anything especially sensitive (e.g, giving Wikileaks evidence of war crimes, or building the bitcoin protcol), you *should* voluntarily post under your own handle.
This ain’t Twitter — make your points in good faith! nostr:note1k4guapt605nufsqaw5ljxra2hcc88errz7rce6vs4p0k04v74jkqkf2ftn
That good faith, no matter how good you support your points, isnt appreciated by a communist regime.
People straw-manning your arguments to score points is weak af. I dealt with that shit on Twitter, and though it’s rarer here, and for different topics — no one cares if you say the mRNA was poison, for example, but talk about anonymity being a concession to the censor’s frame, and people will accuse you of being a Fed or purposely misrepresent your views.
I don’t care if someone is so emotionally fragile, but I will point it out.
O, I agree with you explaining your point, to not have it twisted, but I do think people care about wether I say mRNA was poison. Maybe not on Nostr(yet) but there are plenty of examples where people on mainstream social platforms got fired or financially censored for having certain viewpoints. I expect this will only get worse because the regime is still expanding their control through new legislation. And, if Nostr grows influential enough, I'm sure they will look for ways to target mode operators.
Yeah, maybe people care on Twitter, though I say it anyway every time I go on that site, but there are things people are sensitive about here too, just different ones, and you see sometimes the response is the same (though it’s not nearly as bad yet.)
Agree they will *try* to censor NOSTR in any way they can if it becomes influential, but if it can’t survive that attack, then it’s not the freedom tech it’s purported to be.
