↳ 回复 事件不存在
91bbf840ebbed49c209ada33813f64db414fa95e4807f0d7dead30f68c4996e0
This is a newer version, with a preset "meritocracy" list filtering the landing page and discussions. Some of the people on the list didn't know they ...
This is a newer version, with a preset "meritocracy" list filtering the landing page and discussions. Some of the people on the list didn't know they were on the list and some of them are barely active anymore, but they are from the GitHub repo. You can change to your own preferred "experts" or simply delete them all, but changing it only effects what _you_ see. Everyone else unwittingly sees the filtered version. (You also have to manually change the settings to include your own relay list.)
The idea of porting the NIPs to Nostr is largely mine. That's why so many NIPs have been available on the wiki 30818s, since early 2024. Our own specs were stuck in permanent PR on GitHub, so we eventually gave up and moved them over to Nostr, as well. That is why they are listed on the GitHub kind list, but the link goes to wiki events. And that is why they have NKBIP-11 identifiers, instead of NIP-11 identifiers. They told us at the time that the number of NIPs is hard-capped to 2 digits, so that they didn't have any free numbers to give us, but that they could add us to the kind list to prevent kind number collisions. After we gave up and closed our PRs, they merged NIP-A1. Okay.
Then someone (Alex?) came up with a new "wiki spec" kind 30817 and republished them all there. My client has generic cards, for unknown kinds, so I could see the activity and figured out that there was a new wiki kind. I started republishing our specs to that kind and implemented it in my own app. I didn't know about the new filter on their client, at first. I overlooked the change. I was just confused by the stuff I was seeing and not seeing, as it was suddenly less relevant to me, and started fiddling with the settings.
We have lost so many new devs, struggling to publish specs someplace someone might see them and get constructive feedback. This seems like a step backward, to me, and it's a bit depressing to see. But it's not my app. I'm pointing out that there are now alternative apps. I hope the number of apps rendering this kind grows, so that the protocol remains welcoming to independent developers.
Kind-1 (TextNote)