we could, you know, use actual engineering principles to define the protocols instead of democracy. that would be a good start. axioms are not negotiable. democracy is inherently error prone.

Where is democracy on nostr?

do you have push permissions on the github nips repo? you're not in the constituency.

Lol, we still consider that piece of shit repository as nostr? 🤣 I've not even raised PRs for my recent NIPs 😛

yeah, so, wen nostr nips specs on nostr then? they don't have to be authoritative. syncing them up could be best effort based. and the actual protocols could be properly named. that would help a lot. maybe i'll make a nips editor for my smesh.lol client and define a nip for defining nips. they would be one event per protocol, and relays and clients hosting them can decide which of them they agree with and pin those versions it would still be better than github. ultimately the entire thing doesn't fit with the concept of a top down consensus. it should be a case of many people listing the ones they agree with, and then people can decide among themselves which ones they are going to pin. and give them human readable, meaningful titles.

Nostrhub.Jo?

Nostrhub.io *

is there a nip for their publishing method? nice, tho. this is the kind of thing. i remember @Laeserin was trying to build something like this at some point. verynice.gif

I think there's a nip