david on Nostr: I think the most natural interpretation of a follow is “I trust this person to have ...
I think the most natural interpretation of a follow is “I trust this person to have some measure of control over the content I see on nostr.” It doesn’t mean you agree with anything that person says. And so ideally, that is exactly how the baseline / generic / vanilla Influence Score (as currently implemented, based on follows) will be used: to curate content on nostr.
If people are willing to attest they AGREE with someone on some topic, and you are calculating an Influence Score that will be used for that purpose (“my grapevine AGREES WITH npub A more than B on topic X”), then that should carry MUCH more weight than follows or zaps or some other proxy indicator. This is what the Influence Score excels at: you can take the best sources of data that are available to you at any given time, and weight them appropriately.
If people are willing to attest they AGREE with someone on some topic, and you are calculating an Influence Score that will be used for that purpose (“my grapevine AGREES WITH npub A more than B on topic X”), then that should carry MUCH more weight than follows or zaps or some other proxy indicator. This is what the Influence Score excels at: you can take the best sources of data that are available to you at any given time, and weight them appropriately.