LezKoma on Nostr: That is a good question, I can see that you have dig in deeply. The answer is yes, or ...
That is a good question, I can see that you have dig in deeply.
The answer is yes, or no, depending on what you mean by leaving the tribe.
A tribe is basically a multi-level curation of pubkeys by the leader. In this sense you have no control over what tribes you are contributing to.
So lets suppose there is a friendly tribe with good vibes, whose leader is Bob.
And by leader I mean the chief, boss, CEO, alpha, whatever at the top of the hierarchy. Bob has put a lot of work into building a good tribe, and takes responsibility for it.
Then Mr. Troll comes by, creates TrollTribe and stamps Bob. Now the Troll can trick people into believing that all these shiny people belong to TrollTribe.
This is where the other side of the relationship becomes important. There should be a rough consensus among tribe members about who the tribe leader is, and they should state it publicly if possible. Otherwise a tribe cannot act a single cultural entity. By "acknowledging" the leader I meant that members explicitly consented that they want to READ content curated by Bob's tribe and they don't care about attackers who stamped Bob.
This is why forking (as you described) is hard to do, and it's easier to spin off a new tribe, stamp everyone you like and advertise it as a new tribe, already with some content from your sub-tribe.
I don't know if this is what you meant by leaving the tribe :) On the UI "leave tribe" button will probably just remove the acknowledgement of the leader and forget about the tribe. There's no way to control who curates your content anyway.
The answer is yes, or no, depending on what you mean by leaving the tribe.
A tribe is basically a multi-level curation of pubkeys by the leader. In this sense you have no control over what tribes you are contributing to.
So lets suppose there is a friendly tribe with good vibes, whose leader is Bob.
And by leader I mean the chief, boss, CEO, alpha, whatever at the top of the hierarchy. Bob has put a lot of work into building a good tribe, and takes responsibility for it.
Then Mr. Troll comes by, creates TrollTribe and stamps Bob. Now the Troll can trick people into believing that all these shiny people belong to TrollTribe.
This is where the other side of the relationship becomes important. There should be a rough consensus among tribe members about who the tribe leader is, and they should state it publicly if possible. Otherwise a tribe cannot act a single cultural entity. By "acknowledging" the leader I meant that members explicitly consented that they want to READ content curated by Bob's tribe and they don't care about attackers who stamped Bob.
This is why forking (as you described) is hard to do, and it's easier to spin off a new tribe, stamp everyone you like and advertise it as a new tribe, already with some content from your sub-tribe.
I don't know if this is what you meant by leaving the tribe :) On the UI "leave tribe" button will probably just remove the acknowledgement of the leader and forget about the tribe. There's no way to control who curates your content anyway.