Isn't that what relays are for?

And if an event leaks off a community relay?

all FLAT with #tags - community = private = controlled disccusion - any m0r0n spin it with own words - means the same

Huh?

Any information you send to another party can be shared by that party. Using an event type vs a relay doesn't change the laws of information

Yeah, that's why I said gated not private. The gated events basically shouldn't be displayed alongside global events.

Yeah, well, that's why my response ended with a question mark. Can I trouble you to enlighten me on the functional difference between gated and private?

Gated is like an event that can be shared publicly but isn't necessarily. For example, a gated community can open their gate and let people on their road for a garage sale, but the rest of the time they keep it closed. For example, imagine I share my location as kind 1 in my gaged community, it makes sense in some context of a discussion that's happening in that group, but is out of place in my global feed. Another example, marketplace items I only want picked up at my meetup. Another example could be a long form article explaining something niche about the meetup, its not private information, but it doesn't make sense to display it alongside global context.

If you want privacy, Nostr is not the tool to use.

Did you read anything in this thread? I repeatedly said gated != private.

Yes, I did. Just because you make a statement doesn't make it true. If you want something "gated", some form of privacy is required, otherwise it's public.

No, it's not. As I said before, gated implies it makes sense only in a specific context. Just like a gated community. An event for HOA meeting Saturday, makes sense in a group with those people in the neighborhood, but is out of context in global. It's not "private", but it doesn't make sense in global. It's not a binary public and private. Another example is Telegram chats. A message in a telegram chat isn't private, but if telegram was just a stream of millions of messages it wouldn't make sense, it only makes sense because each little channel is gated and only shows messages inside that gate. That doesn't prohibit sharing messages from one telegram to the other, because they're public, they could be shared to multiple communities if the context arises, like a mining group forwards a message about bio gas to a farmers group.

In that case, I'm confused why you care if info from a community ends up on "global". Does it negatively effect anyone, other than people that only follow a global feed?

Ah, interesting. I still wonder if relays are not the answer. The primary distribution scope of Nostr was really intended to be relays (I think, still a bit new to the protocol). But there does seem to be some use for ad hoc grouping. If we all ran personal relays and someone could host, that would work. "Have a few people over" vs "let's go to the tavern" sort of. I'm curious about this now. Thanks.

Yeah, that was my initial reaction too when @hzrd149 was describing this too me. But inherently, the events "leak", which is not a problem, but you need to signal to the clients that "this doesn't make sense in global". Its like when replies to long form posts were just kind 1 and ended up showing up in feeds as orphaned notes making no sense. That way, they can choose to display them, bc it'd allow them to display them differently, for example the way meetstr does calendars is that events belong to a calendar, these community events could/should be displayed separately. Like John Doe putting out weekly coffee meetup with no description into public makes no sense, but in the context of it being on a community calendar it does

Its not negative, it just doesn't make sense. Like you could also have global events shared to a gated community, goes both ways.

A gated community isn't the same analogy as Telegram groups. People don't join a gated community to share information. They join it for being able to close the gate; for privacy, or to keep the public out. Compared to Telegram groups, where information is categorized, but also sharable with anyone that is outside the group. The equivalents in Nostr would be a hashtag, or "relay turned into a category/group". People that are members share info, yet anyone can share that info to people that aren't members. I still don't see what the issue is with this data being on global, aside from "it doesn't belong there". Based on what? It's not private information, and there's no negative aspect. What practical cause would necessitate non-private data being hidden from the "everything firehose"?

I don't see how telegram isn't a gated community. There are mods. Only specific topics can be discussed, even if most groups say talk about whatever, if it's too much off topic they will tell you to take it else where. "It doesn't belong there" is a ux problem. Let's say I am a member in 5 groups. I post 1 event per week per group. If I just show all of my events for a specific group that is basically spam to that group. Ok, you say the solution is tags, which I accept solves that single problem. However then the problem is events on global, that, while not private are not shown in their context. If I go to global, I want to see events in context. While grouping these by tags makes sense, I don't want these shared to global unless I explicitly share them as global. For example an event where I can only fit 10 people in the venue. If I use the same kind, the event gets too much attention and then my venue doesn't work. The context also is a bigger issue than you're making. Showing global where half of the events aren't intended for you to see them (but it's not a problem if you do) is a ux problem. Imagine you're at a conference. The location of each session is just room a, b, etc. That event only makes sense in context of "we are all in this building" so showing that on global is dumb.

@hzrd149 can you make this point better since it's your idea? I still agree with it I just don't think I'm making it succinctly

It sounds like you're trying to make global useful for something. In all of your examples of sharing data, etc, the global feed has no relevancy.

Opposite

You would solve for this differently. I'm not sure if it was discussed in the times before I showed up on nostr, but, kind 1 has always been a bit frustrating. I believe the better implementation would be to tag kind 1 notes with a new identifier. In my mind it would be beneficial to have a type of "broadcast" signifier to determine "this kind 1 event is meant to appear in any global feed" versus.. some other type of kind 1. If the tag were a "gated" post then it would need to include the relay in which it is intended, as to be ignored by clients and not passively republished to every available relay. Spaghetti as fuck. Sounds cool if someone wants to try reworking kind 1. I would wonder what kind of schemas people consider in Nostr forks. Would possibly deprecate some other kinds, or at least affect them. My original solution was to use relays-as-communities if it had to be so- but that doesn't work quite right, either. Headaches and echo chambers doot doot

Tell me more about what you tries to implement and why it failed. I agree if we designed from scratch, your gated tag would work, but that isn't going to happen. So I think other best option is identical kinds designed for gates. Then you have e another kind (6?) For sharing if you want the gated post to be viewable globally. That way existing clients with global views can choose to look at the share and then render the event being shared.