cloud fodder on Nostr: possibly yes. I had recommended this to hodlbod in the past, where a community can ...
possibly yes. I had recommended this to hodlbod (nprofile…8x3z) in the past, where a community can run an 'agent' somewhere (a bot, with the community root key).
The reason that devs keep wanting to put logic directly into the relay is that nostr has no official spec for moderation of a relay and the nostr world is very opposed to talking about moderation or making it easy, so it is a green field.
As a relay operations team (could be a person, could be a team): The requirement of moderating a relay will not be going away.
And then, we have communities that *also need the exact same same types of moderation capability.
So, this is why I believe fiatjaf (nprofile…c9z9) concluded in nip29 it would be simpler architecture wise, to combine these. Which does sacrifice the separation of the two and removes the ability of a community to use a relay that is multi-purpose. I'm unsure how 0x is managing to have multiple communities on their single relay, as my understanding is that the operator of that relay is also the admin for the community (the relay has the private key).
The basic structure of moderation I employ on relay.tools is for example: Relay is owned by a root key, this is 'super admin level' access to the relay settings. The next level of access is moderator level which can do anything except for change moderators and change relay profile/description. Then there are the relay user level which is the normal join/post/read. This could be refined but its what i started with.
Say I'm a relay operator and i want to contribute to a community by mirroring the content, if the group allows my relay into the list, ideally i should not need the community admin key for this..
Communities will likely want a similar tiered access scheme and it will *have to combine with the relay level access scheme at some point if the community wants to delete notes that they do not have a key for. This is all a lot to think about.
Enjoy 🌝
The reason that devs keep wanting to put logic directly into the relay is that nostr has no official spec for moderation of a relay and the nostr world is very opposed to talking about moderation or making it easy, so it is a green field.
As a relay operations team (could be a person, could be a team): The requirement of moderating a relay will not be going away.
And then, we have communities that *also need the exact same same types of moderation capability.
So, this is why I believe fiatjaf (nprofile…c9z9) concluded in nip29 it would be simpler architecture wise, to combine these. Which does sacrifice the separation of the two and removes the ability of a community to use a relay that is multi-purpose. I'm unsure how 0x is managing to have multiple communities on their single relay, as my understanding is that the operator of that relay is also the admin for the community (the relay has the private key).
The basic structure of moderation I employ on relay.tools is for example: Relay is owned by a root key, this is 'super admin level' access to the relay settings. The next level of access is moderator level which can do anything except for change moderators and change relay profile/description. Then there are the relay user level which is the normal join/post/read. This could be refined but its what i started with.
Say I'm a relay operator and i want to contribute to a community by mirroring the content, if the group allows my relay into the list, ideally i should not need the community admin key for this..
Communities will likely want a similar tiered access scheme and it will *have to combine with the relay level access scheme at some point if the community wants to delete notes that they do not have a key for. This is all a lot to think about.
Enjoy 🌝