Moderation can be done in millions of ways: whitelist by pubkey, blacklist by pubkey, whitelisted content (post submit, this is what nip 72 did), blacklisted content, in-protocol via clients, out of protocol via relay (in which case you need to know which relays are supposed to be used, and a plan for migrating), relativistic to user, relative to admin/mod/relay, or any combination of the above. No community solution is going to work that only prescribes a subset of use cases (not to say architectures, that should be prescribed)
Discussion
Thanks. By architectures you mean specs? Seems like we'll have several coexisting then.
Moderating by content seems like insanity. Users should still be able to mute.
I would use WoT (Personalized Pagerank of the admins) and also kick out users who misbehave (could be whitelisting as I do rn). Whether at relay or event level, not sure. I am definitely tempted to give it a shot - make up a kind and let's go.
Lastly, I saw the groups on Coracle, and I dislike the "item is content" UX (I know its the spec not you.)
There should be a required plain text title to summarize. This is how Reddit/forums work. This is how stacker.news works and why so many people love these sites.
Yeah, Coracle groups are long dead. The new way is flotilla, which differentiates by content type (but is not reddit-like). Different people will use different architectures, but we seem to be converging on relay-supported. Here's my guide for making groups that are compatible with flotilla, which includes more detail:
Kind 30023 in Communities and you've got your stacker.news / reddit / hackernews / ray peat forum / ...
Good point on "item is content" not being the go-to for discussions on specific subjects.