One of the problems with nostr is that you can say it has any feature set you want because it does not specify global system behavior. So, when convenient, proponents and opponents can use one relay/client set to make a point, and another relay/client set to make an opposing point.
The problem lies in regarding nostr as a system. To its benefit and detriment it is not. It is a protocol for signing and sending and finding notes in different places, and is explicitly inconsiderate of the whole. So you can only talk about client and relay sets, and anyone describing nostr as a system, except to say variants of "nostr is not a system," is making a category mistake.
Sadly, nostr is funded primarily through grants so accountability is low so everyone talks about it like a system when convenient (systems sell), then an anti-system when convenient (systems can be criticized), and progress is impossible in that kind of noise.
One of the problems with nostr is that you can say it has any feature set you want because it does not specify global system behavior. So, when convenient, proponents and opponents can use one relay/client set to make a point, and another relay/client set to make an opposing point.
The problem lies in regarding nostr as a system. To its benefit and detriment it is not. It is a protocol for signing and sending and finding notes in different places, and is explicitly inconsiderate of the whole. So you can only talk about client and relay sets, and anyone describing nostr as a system, except to say variants of "nostr is not a system," is making a category mistake.
Sadly, nostr is funded primarily through grants so accountability is low so everyone talks about it like a system when convenient (systems sell), then an anti-system when convenient (systems can be criticized), and progress is impossible in that kind of noise.