Freakoverse on Nostr: So current forum type content on #nostr isn't good imo, since it uses kind 1 posts ...
So current forum type content on #nostr isn't good imo, since it uses kind 1 posts (similar to what you're seeing now). Whenever the time comes to add a forum system to DEGMods (npub17jl…825x) it'll either be the exact same system, but being new separate kind (same, just a different number, and maybe with extra stuff).
AND
I noticed that there are issues with someone having control over a community/space, even if someone can just make a new one with the same name, that brings in one UX issue in favor of another, and what I'm about to mention favors the other side. The issue being is that one or a group can control the details of the community/space (profile image, banner, name, description, etc) and its moderation (what gets to be seen, what doesn't, etc), and while that isn't necessarily bad, it's more of a 'sometimes its bad and sometimes it isn't', where some people would prefer if there wasn't any control and let each individual decide how to handle the previous two issue points, but that of course results in some chaos in favor of that expanded freedom.
With that said, I think the best course of action is to have both, so to what what I mentioned in the first paragraph, and also to have a another NIP running in parallel where people can post to a 'name' community/sub-forum that's based on that only, where it doesn't have to be created, but just pointed to, and its customization is up to the individual viewing it it.
Example for each:
Type 1: Someone creates 'gaming' sub-forum, how we currently know how it usually works (with a different kind of course), with a unique id for it that gets created, and people can find and start posting in/to it.
Type 2: There's no process of creating a sub-forum, someone can just create a post and point it to 'gaming' (doesn't have a unique id in a sense of a generated string).
In terms of discovery and presentation, the first type is discovered and viewed as 'sub-forum by username', indicating that it's a controlled space, while the second type is discovered/viewed as 'sub-forum', indicating no-control.
I think this is the best way to go about this. Thoughts?
#asknostr
AND
I noticed that there are issues with someone having control over a community/space, even if someone can just make a new one with the same name, that brings in one UX issue in favor of another, and what I'm about to mention favors the other side. The issue being is that one or a group can control the details of the community/space (profile image, banner, name, description, etc) and its moderation (what gets to be seen, what doesn't, etc), and while that isn't necessarily bad, it's more of a 'sometimes its bad and sometimes it isn't', where some people would prefer if there wasn't any control and let each individual decide how to handle the previous two issue points, but that of course results in some chaos in favor of that expanded freedom.
With that said, I think the best course of action is to have both, so to what what I mentioned in the first paragraph, and also to have a another NIP running in parallel where people can post to a 'name' community/sub-forum that's based on that only, where it doesn't have to be created, but just pointed to, and its customization is up to the individual viewing it it.
Example for each:
Type 1: Someone creates 'gaming' sub-forum, how we currently know how it usually works (with a different kind of course), with a unique id for it that gets created, and people can find and start posting in/to it.
Type 2: There's no process of creating a sub-forum, someone can just create a post and point it to 'gaming' (doesn't have a unique id in a sense of a generated string).
In terms of discovery and presentation, the first type is discovered and viewed as 'sub-forum by username', indicating that it's a controlled space, while the second type is discovered/viewed as 'sub-forum', indicating no-control.
I think this is the best way to go about this. Thoughts?
#asknostr