Works on Satellite

nostr:npub1zdr58j526qsrkdjhcg9xs60xfutqeey2ucugms04efnlx3spnmns2eqha9

It's definitely the nuclear option. We can eliminate spam, but at what cost to adoption?

I think WoT it would work!

I'm imagining community admins being able to set a minimum WoT score, below which posters are queued for manual pre-approval.

It should definitely be possible for admins/mods to create a community-level block list. Beyond that, spam is hard problem because spammers can easily generate a new identity for every single note they post. The spam issue is a bit harder to deal with for communities because they don't even have to have anyone following them for their note to be seen. I suspect that the best solution to this problem involves an options where users must be explicitly pre-approved to post in communities. Currently working out the technical details of that.

This is on the roadmap. Currently working out the technical details.

Just pushed an update — quoted notes now render properly in discussion threads on Satellite (finally!)

Even when there's multiple nested quotes (like a note quoting a note quoting a note), it still works.

I stress-tested this with some nostr:npub19mduaf5569jx9xz555jcx3v06mvktvtpu0zgk47n4lcpjsz43zzqhj6vzk threads and it looks great, e.g. https://satellite.earth/thread/note1502qdl2dvnxc4pg67hp60y2s7xs2g86lxn6d0058c64l3z4qnsrs7kkzzx

Let me tell you, this was a tricky bit of coding — but as the saying goes,

To iterate is human... to recurse is divine

💯 I’m working on notifications for Satellite, which will include posts pending approval

Awesome! It’s late here in California so I’m about to sleep, but tomorrow I’d be happy to help. It’d be cool to talk to some disaffected Reddit mods to get insight in terms of what they hope to see (from a product design standpoint) as we iterate on this

1985 Toyota checking in

I see. Not a perfect solution, but I suppose for the other event kinds, the Twitter-like clients could just hide all events with an a tag. I still think allowing users to whitelist communities that should be aggregated is a good idea. Implementing that wouldn’t conflict with anything, it would just be a client-side thing

You mean have a new kind for community posts? That could work, but the drawback I see is that it limits communities from being able to take advantage of all the kinds of notes that already exist. For example, with Satellite I was planning to add the ability to display long-form posts, as well as media (kind 1063) posts. That was why I thought your original idea to just mark any note as a "post request" with an `a` tag was such a good idea.

So this is an important question — right now everything posted in a NIP-172 community will show up in your profile feed too. I think there are pros and cons to this.

Pros of showing community posts in profile feed:

1) Promotes discoverability of communities, i.e. there can be a link next to posts like "posted in n/such-and-such"

2) Helps "bootstrap" communities since other users don't have to specifically go to that community or even know that it exists to engage with content posted there.

Cons of showing community posts in profile feed:

1) A user's profile feed may get filled up with notes from communities that are not particularly relevant to a wider audience

2) There may be certain posts that a user doesn't *want* to be easily discoverable by a wider audience

This is the problem inherent in trying to combine the *breadth* of Twitter-like content with the *depth* of Reddit-like content.

So what to do about it?

One idea I had for a solution would be to allow users to mark communities as "visible" by adding an `a` tag to their kind 0 metadata event. That way Twitter-like clients could know to only display posts from these communities in the user's main feed.

Thoughts? nostr:note17gv07xnqyf90h7tth4zzmgwx7q2v8wva5j8ygsz2jf34lgfrx8xs8hzkh3

Ah I’m thinking about “indexing” generally, not just for search engines - nostr in general is not very search engine accessible. The moderation role is just deciding which posts to allow in your version of the community. They’re all independent in that sense. An interesting question, I think, is what signals/metrics should be used to determine the “default” version if a community. Like how do you quantify “good moderation”? Zaps are certainly one such signal

Pretty much, yeah. The URL scheme on Satellite is /n//

This way you can have competition and one person is not able to monopolize a valuable namespace.

I’ve been thinking a lot about indexing - it’s a very interesting open problem

On Satellite go to “Communities” in the user menu, there’s a gold button “New Community”

Love to hear that! Yeah I think adding notifications is going to really improve the UX. Especially now with the subcommunites thing, people really need to get notified when there are new posts pending approval, otherwise you have to keep checking

Way to go nostr:npub1alpha9l6f7kk08jxfdaxrpqqnd7vwcz6e6cvtattgexjhxr2vrcqk86dsn !

Just an fyi to the person who created "n/cannabis", "n/weed", AND "n/420" 😂 . . . nostr communities are namespaced to the pubkey of the founder, which means there is no scarcity of names. It's not like reddit where the first person who registers a name is the only one who gets to use it!

nostr:npub15wyty5cssz4ezu3hpnkt05d4v2vnvlllq2xcpfgp7rtcf3jnj05qu5rdwm

I agree! It's on my todo list!

Go to the frontpage of Satellite an click the "Communities" tab