So the child porn still remains present, effectively.

So Ada described Nostr like this:

"Nostr uses relays. In some ways, a relay is like an instance on the fediverse. Where they differ though, is that a) relays don’t talk to each other and b) users can sign up to many different relays and pull/push content to all of them.

So in practice, in order to see a wide amount of content, you need to end up connecting to multiple relays. And even though a relay does have some moderation capabilities to block content, unless every relay you use blocks the content from the bigoted account, you’ll see it.

If you signed up only to a single relay, and that relay had good moderation, then in theory, your Nostr experience wouldn’t be terrible, but a single niche relay like that will mean you see basically no content. And as soon as you connect to a larger public relay to get more content, you lose all of the moderation advantages offered by your first instance. Which means in practice, there is no incentive to run a well moderated instance.

And so all of the moderation ends up on the end user, who has to manually block accounts only after they appear and dump their load of hate (at which point, the bigot will just spin up another account). Some people prefer that experience, but when you’re the regular target of hate, that approach just doesn’t work for many folk."

This is accurate?

That’s why there’s no limit on the number of relays (events usually publish to multiple) or subscriptions to them (clients usually subscribe to multiple).

I’m lost. If a mod removes child porn on NOSTR, it removes it for everyone, right?

Still off topic, and the moderators here aren’t reddit moderator scum so far.

Well, sure, but you can still be moderated.

Legal compliance is different from legally unnecessary moderation.

Right, so there would still need to be moderators. And if they can remove that, they can remove anything.

Not the topic of discussion, which is function & protocol.

Right, but you’re just gunna have an unpleasant time here if you loath all moderation. It’s that simple.

Yup, better.

Why is that better?

Moderation should be opt-in & is better handled at the client: the user could opt-in to a “moderation community” that publishes tags their client would follow.

Debateable given that any community anywhere online still needs to remove CSAM and gore and other things.

And what do you mean by “tags” here? Just hashtags or something else? Because a hashtag under a no-moderation concept could still be hijacked.

Far better than moderators we don’t get to choose.

Well I suggest you go there then, because the fediverse will never be what you want it to be.

It’s not about that even if you reduce it to purely that. Without moderation every platform becomes infested by spammers, trolls, astroturfers. Topical communities lose focus and communities become little more than hashtags.

Yeah, but what I mean is that wasn’t a reaction to Australia here. Since your threshold here is 18, not 16.

March? Over 18?

Reddthat presumably was reacting to the Online Safety ACT UK there.

Similarly UK has tried to get 4chan, kiwifarms etc but they have no UK footprint so they just ignore them.

No, that’s a matter of enforcement. UK is still trying to fine 4chan - but failing. Australia has just outright said the law doesn’t apply to them.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/oct/09/4chan-not-blocked-australia-under-16s-social-media-ban

Apparently aussie.zone is asking users to DM evidence of being over 16, and the implication is that of those who don’t - he’ll ban/delete their accounts.

But absurdly enough, 4chan is exempt from this because all activity on there is anonymous. Not through accounts. So if the Fediverse had anonymous, non-account posting on-top of regular account-based posting then people could post anonymously happily, but anyone with an account would have to verify.

Make it make sense.