> The public aspect of follows has a wot side-effect, which is also a primary feature. I agree, but it's also too limited. Other possibilities exist and they're not being explored. Mainly in my mind right now is the idea that by following some relays you're open to see posts from people you don't know, and that you trust that relay enough to accept their judgement about who is a person that is worth listening to, and they can have clearer criteria more uniformly enforced, like "whoever pays", "whoever gets manually approved by such and such", "whoever has produced these many hashes", "whoever has a PhD", I don't know (of course since follow lists can still exist this can also be based on the current WoT criteria).

Replies (1)

Agreed. The ability to follow a curated relay output could be very powerful, but how is that different to the end-user than subscribing to a curated list published by individuals? One could pay to be on that list, in addition to being curated/endorsed, without needing the list owner to run a relay.