The demand is here. nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzq5xeflpdskqvdq4swxj59793uvdzqzc9pzatjk3nhmcg2h0js8trqyg8wumn8ghj7mn0wd68ytnddakj7qpqpw6d4ug8cyy5zrv959ferh2fv8j8l2tul37nt7purgwlpw6y65cswydjsx But I am starting to wonder if the perceived apathy is a sign of good old skill issue. Consider this proposed workaround for the repeating pattern of follow lists being nuked: nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzq5xeflpdskqvdq4swxj59793uvdzqzc9pzatjk3nhmcg2h0js8trqy88wumn8ghj77tpvf6jumt99uqzpz24fw6fm220dnzlmlacm8ln6ypexcqfajy5vtnkqgfpdfpre5aq8u7ft3 Someone came up with an implementation of that idea a few hours later: From my perspective CRDTs (or something similar) are the obvious solution for this kind of problem (it could also help with the long standing problem of follower count), but that sounds complex and complex is scary. Somehow, a half-baked mitigation at the relay level is perceived as a good solution because it can be hacked into existing infrastructure without much changes, which in turn actually increases the complexity without giving a proper return. Nostr “simplicity” is deceiving. It can only afford to stay simple so long as it does not work. Distributed systems are hard, but now you sold a hard system for people who want to brute force their way out of problems with “simple” solutions that only make the system more brittle and unreliable.