I can’t stop. Here’s my assessment of the psychological mechanics at play.
Likes are frictionless, muscle memory from years of social conditioning. They require no skin in the game, no economic cost, no reputation staking. They’re the path of least resistance, which paradoxically makes them the weakest signal.
Zaps introduce economic friction. Even small amounts create pause. You’re not just expressing appreciation, you’re sacrificing something fungible and finite. This transforms a gesture into a statement about value alignment.
Reposts require the highest cost, social capital. You’re saying “this deserves to exist in my namespace” and staking your curation reputation on it. It’s an endorsement that travels with your identity.
The question becomes…does the like button dilute signal clarity? On Nostr, where we’re supposedly rebuilding social graphs around value rather than algorithmic manipulation, maybe the most meaningful interactions should have built in friction.
The ease of an action correlates inversely with its informational content. When everything is easy, nothing is meaningful.
I think it’s worth considering if we treated our engagement patterns as a conscious design choices rather than inherited behavior from platforms optimized for addiction? Thoughts
Thinking about my last note, I had this thought as well.
The gap between engagement quality and follower count reveals something interesting about how attention works on Nostr. When we consistently find ourselves drawn to smaller accounts for substantive dialogue, we’re seeing the gap between visibility and actual value. Just because someone got here early or built a large network doesn’t mean they’re offering the most interesting perspectives.
Without an algorithm, smaller accounts face a pure discovery problem. They’re not being suppressed, but they’re not being surfaced either. The best conversations often happen below the visibility threshold, with people who take time to think through their responses and genuinely engage rather than broadcast. These accounts offer the kind of interaction that makes social protocols worth participating in, but they rely entirely on people like you actively seeking them out and responding.
What makes your observation valuable is that it points to something many of us probably feel but don’t articulate. The most rewarding exchanges aren’t happening where the follower counts suggest they should be. They’re happening in replies from accounts with 240 followers who actually read what you wrote and had something thoughtful to add.
So this is both an encouragement and a thank you to those Nostriches; your contributions matter more than your reach suggests. The people finding you and engaging with your ideas are getting far more value than the metrics reflect. And to everyone making the effort to engage back, as you do, you’re solving the discovery problem one genuine interaction at a time. 🫡
That’s how good networks get built.
If y’all haven’t said or wished our boy @Derek Ross a Happy Birthday, you better get to it! Happy bday brother. Nostr wouldn’t be the same without you!
View quoted note →
GM Nostr. My morning unfolds in phases. Spiritual time (prayer), physical preparation(workout), mental calibration(reading), then connection with the Nostriches. A protocol that attracts builders and thinkers tends to cultivate the best conversations.
Started mapping out Nostr users and their connections. Realized everyone here is either…
A fed. A fed pretending not to be a fed.
A fed pretending to be a fed pretending not to be a fed. Actually just a fed
#FedStr
Your children will be formed by someone. If it’s not primarily you, then by default it’s everyone else. That’s not a delegation you can afford to make unconsciously.
