@Derek Ross @Alex Gleason @ManiMe @nosfabrica @Avi Burra @Jon Gordon @Vitor Pamplona
Decentralized curation of the entire nostr protocol.
This can probably be implemented pretty quickly with our existing tools.
View article →
Login to reply
Replies (41)
We are the protocol now. 🤟
Up/Down votes better than Attestations for this.
Some early discussion here:
Prbly should be two separate issues:
1) NostrHub Support - voting, WoT score display, etc.
2) MKStack Support - knowledge of NIP NIPs with high WoTs from the perspective of the builder.
GitLab
Reference Custom/Community NIPs (#11) · Issues · Soapbox / mkstack · GitLab
MKStack should also have knowledge of the NIP NIPs (kind 30817) and refresh this knowledge periodically. Hell, we should create kind 30817's for al...
This is a good roadmap. First, basic NostrHub support so we can see how well this works. Hopefully we can get this up and running quickly.
Next, enable the vibe coder’s grapevine to select custom nips (by naddr) to feed into MKStack.
How feasible would it be just to feed this article into Shakespeare and say “have at it”?
#vibestr
I like this article … but details still need ironing. I’m working on a PR, which might likely be debated.
- NostrHub already has “upvotes” (disguised as a stars), and might not see the value in adding “downvote”. If adding WoT powered weights to these votes is the primary objective of this feature, it may be more effective to only do this.
- Nip 25 doesn’t specify a UI (beyond + or -) to represent upvote or downvote reactions, except to say that “explicit emoji reactions” should NOT count as up or down votes. NostrHub uses the “star” emoji to represent “upvote” for NIPs … while the “thumb up” and “thumb down” emoji are made available for emoji reactions in comments. This would prolly need updating, if we added downvote capability.
- Should the adding of “upvote” or “downvote” be accompanied by a comment input to allow for clarification? If so, we should update the UI for voting AS WELL AS the UI for adding comments.
you should talk to alex about your PR as he may already be working on this integration for NostrHub as we have been discussing internally for 2 days now.
Downvotes provide a method to identify and weed out spam. If all we have are upvotes, then we have no method to separate valid NIPs with zero upvotes from spam.
@Alex Gleason … I’d be happy to take a stab. 👀
I’d say to keep the UX as clean as possible. Perhaps popups with very simple 1 or 2 sentence explanations of what the user is looking at.
And I’m inclined to resist the temptation to provide too much in the way of a didactic explanation of what the upvotes and downvotes “mean.” The like button on social media ends up meaning different things to different people, and that’s fine. We can add more sophisticated methods of feedback in the future, but we don’t need to do that now. Baby steps.
Yea. “comment input” to accompany the up or down vote is what I’m considering.
NostrHub already supports comments.
Yes. I’m considering making the whole “vote and/orcomment” experience more integrated.
Keep it simple. Click a button, done.
The subset of people who want to add comments can do that separately.
While working on this PR for NostrHub, I discovered that comments (no ability to like ... yet) on 'official NIPs' are 'hard linked ' to the primary GitHub repo. While comments and likes on 'custom NIPs' use (best practice) an 'a' tag for reference, the likes are published as kind 7 'standard' event reactions. I also noticed that there are MULTIPLE event kinds (30817 & 30818, at least) that people use for publishing NIP specifications across nostr.
If we are going to leverage WoT to decentralize NIP curation, our ability to comment and react to them NEEDS TO BE STANDARDIZED (using kind-17) across NIP publishing styles. Therefore, I've proposed an addition to the NIP-75 specification for referencing external content.
Please review.
@david @Alex Gleason @Vitor Pamplona @Laeserin
GitHub
New spec in NIP 73 for referencing arbitrary NIP specifications by manimejia · Pull Request #2102 · nostr-protocol/nips
Allows 'all of nostr' to reference, comment, and react on any published NIP spec in a standardized manner, regardless of which repo or nostr event ...
I’ll take a look.
But don’t wait for comments to get sorted out before doing the other steps: add downvote, show totals for + and -, and filter totals using Trusted Assertions. We can attend to comments later.
I added 30817s to Jumble Imwald, and they'll eventually make it onto Wikistr and Alexandria.
I've submitted a PR for NostrHub which adds WoT powered up-vote and down-vote for NIPs.
But is seems that neither @Derek Ross nor @Ditto by Soapbox have published their preferred Trusted Assertions provider (nor have calculated scores for their network) . You should talk to @david about doing this via Brainstorm ... and then the weighting of upvotes and downvotes will have a sensible default (in the case that an end user hasn't published their own preferred TA provider).
GitLab
Add WoT powered up-vote and down-vote for NIPs (!9) · Merge requests · Soapbox / NostrHub · GitLab
Deprecates the useNipLikes and useLikeNip hooks, in favor of useNipVotes and useVoteOnNip. Adds a down vote button and restyles the like button as ...
hey Mani. mine has been calculated for several days. ill ask Alex about Soapbox though. he may not have done that yet. thanks for the PR.
Derek’s TAs are done, Soapbox not yet signed up.
Yea. My console output says the app wasn’t able to retrieve kind 10040 authored by either pubkey. Maybe I’m checking the wrong relays?
Brainstorm sends 10040 events to Brainstorm relays ( nip85.brainstorm.world and straycat.brainstorm.social/relay ) but also primal, damus, nostr.band, maybe 1 or 2 others
OK. My bad. Found it... We're all good.
YOLO merged.
This is awesome 💪🏻
Are there any spammy NIPs that I can downvote? Or have they been removed by hand?
i believe we're good on those for now, but im sure we'll have candidates in the future for testing :)
I await them with great anticipation 😅
I didn’t see any blacklist in the code. Not even sure you’d wanna do that?
#yolo 
This is awesome, but there are some z-index issues
i see that.
that's what you get for YOLO merging on a friday afternoon.
@ManiMe
Yea. That’s the “overflow” issue …
The “z-index” issue comes into play when you hover over an “official” nip. 😆.
The sort by button worked for me at first and then stopped working — is that related?
Time to pull out ‘ol faithful…
z-index: 9999999999999
Looks like the first three NIPs are excluded from the sort
followed 🍻
Totally something my vibe bot would do. Gotta keep short reigns on that one if I want scalable code!!
still a huge improvement
Thanks. That means a lot! I’ll keep polishing over the weekend.