What if Nostr is only constructive until the masses arrive? To see what I mean by constructive, check out Nostr’s raw global feed—unfiltered. The Twitter equivalent is the cesspool of humanity, an open wound on grievances and screwy thinking.

Twitter is a reflection of adults being treated like children, contolled, censored, manipulated into quiet rage!!

On Nostr, posters seem to respond well when there’s no rage-bait algorithms, no forced maddening posts to rile you up, no moderator or overlord acting god. Is it perfect? No – but let’s not get caught up in perfect, the enemy of the good.

Create a space to behave like an adult, and guess what, people do behave like adults.

Nostr will stay constructive if the community resists the same incentives that broke Twitter. It will flourish if its relay model (user-chosen, no admin godhood) stays true to decentralisation. If it devolves into another Mastodon or Bluesky model, we will see the same flaws arise. Models that distribute power to instance owners trades corporate overlords for petty fiefdoms, diluting the “open” promise. Nostr’s architecture dodges that risk far better – so far.

User-controlled social media has the potential to beat algorithm-controlled free-for-alls. Self-sovereign users can triumph over corporate rage machines if they stick to true, undiluted decentralisation. One business model sucks, the new one behind Nostr doesn’t.

Bitcoin is not a hybrid paying lip-service to decentralisation, it’s all-in. With the history behind Nostr development, I don’t think Nostr will lose its edge either as it attracts more users.