“In my view, the best way to handle spam (in a permissionless system) is to allow the original poster to decide which replies are spam. Then the end user can decide to toggle on or off “criticism and spam” for the replies. After all, if you’re following someone, you trust their judgment on the subject they are speaking about. And this decentralizes the decision to each individual poster.” … so obvious actually, why is no web3 social doing this?
I think it‘s fine to let spam be handled by the original poster. I even wanted to do that with Kiwi News eventually. But there needs to be also a more global moderation system where the operator can censor, and that is because of free speech restrictions for which operators are often made accountable.
depends, for a system like kiwi where it's a website on a domain, yeah because you're on the hook. for something like farcaster/lens on hubs or on-chain, there's less liability. Lens would decide same as arweave nodes I'd think?
Kiwi runs the same hub system as Farcaster, I still have to comply with the regulation of running the website
do you know if Layer 2 Farcaster can be seen by the layer 1? Is there censorship on posting to channels if you're new?