Thread

Replies (13)

In the case of Ditto, whether your posts can go a community (like this Gleasonator demo community) is determined by your NIP-05. That's your authority to post. If there was such a thing as a NIP 5.1 (a NIP 5.0 for communities) and you could have multiple of those, it seems at first glance that the end result of such a thing would be pretty similar to the end result for communi-keys. As in you could publish to multiple communities at once, one community could span relays, there'd be moderation, etc. image
↩ replying to 🇵🇸 whoever loves Digit
I like the idea of NIP-05 resolving handshake.org domains because then you don't have to change anything about the UX or the flow, clients when noticing a handshake domain just have to add the "hns.to" before the URL and they'll find the json, so for example me.nostr/.well-known/nostr.json just make it hns.to.me.nostr/.well-known/nostr.json and done. This is idea usually loudly booed because another chain. But it's a pretty frictionless update.
↩ replying to Garbage nsec
You don't need domain names to make Communities work. I don't want to rely on one relay domain for Community IDs or the publication authority of members. They bring all this obvious attack vectors and allow for about zero flexibility. I want to able to optionally set, per content type: - a fee - a filter (think @Vertex etc...) - a list of "roles" that can publish that content type - a retention time - exclusivity to that community VS interoperability with others NIP-05, NIP-29, NIP-72, ... all don't even come close to allowing for that. #communikeys do.