A pubkey could of course nonetheless use follow lists to signal not that the followed key is interesting, but that it is human and not a spammer. It's ultimately a matter of intent and convention. But yeah, using follow lists this way might be confusing, and have technical limitations.
We currently have basically only two pre-defined modes of expressing approval or disapproval of a pubkey, through public following and public muting. Expanding this to include other information - e.g. "is human" or "is not a spammer" - seems useful, although one wonders how far the range of pre-sets should go (one could have verifiers for "is safe-for-work", "is appropriate for children" etc.).
Login to reply
Replies (1)
Verifiers could choose whatever criteria they want and users could chose what verifiers they want to follow, but I think the purpose of excluding spambots is the most sound one.
There would be many ways of doing it (CAPTCHAS, government IDs, meeting people in person, checking membership to certain organization, you name it).
I don't think this mechanism would be ideal for checking "proper" accounts that don't post naughty stuff you don't like. Cutting out spambots is also most important, since what they generate is noise, corrupting all signal.