hodlbod

This seems fine, but again, similar to [NIP 101](https://github.com/water783/nips/blob/nip101/101.md). I'd also like to see zaps as an alternative to PoW. That wouldn't help relays since they can't verify zaps, but...

> Isn't l used for labels already? Yes. Which leads to the question: why not define a label for language? It would work exactly like we're discussing, but with an...

I just drafted a PR to relax the requirement for `L` tags. They're only necessary if you want to query something for namespace use, which doesn't really make sense in...

These are very specific kinds. I wonder if they could be made more generic? Also, I'm curious how they would be linked to the room.

I'd like to see this too, my preference would be a new verb that asks for recommendations so that relays can implement it if they want to (mostly so the...

Related: - https://github.com/nostr-protocol/nips/issues/213 - https://github.com/nostr-protocol/nips/pull/493 It's also worth mentioning that in my opinion recommendations may be doable by using custom relays with no explicit update to the protocol. IOW you...

> I think I understand where you're coming from, but there isn't a booming marketplace for relays, let alone relay "personalities." This can be solved, but yeah, you're right that...

> a way to communicate and share algorithms at the protocol layer Completely agree, again, https://github.com/nostr-protocol/nips/pull/259 But yes, it would be cool to come up with a NIP that also...

NACK, alternative: https://github.com/nostr-protocol/nips/pull/1091

Editing kind 1s is not collaborating on a document. Kind 1s are tweets, edits are bad for tweets.