I know we don't want one bad *record* to break an entire *repo*. I think PDS should be very strict, ours maybe is not, and that is urgent to fix. I would love if every SDK and service consistently did full validation and consistently rejected bad records...

but in our IETF text we should only reference formal standards, so we will ref CBOR RFCs and re-describe details. still no floats. more ambiguous question is where all this is expected to be validated, and behaviors if it fails. PDS, relay, SDKs, etc

but yeah have wanted an "Automated Account" indication forever

I kind of feel like the affordances should be generic though, not limited to accounts with a permanent "type". eg, institutional announcement accounts could also benefit from group control. or bourbaki posting

(just to clarify, folks don't need permission or blessing from bsky to set up a mod service)

having then be mod service only would reduce the awkward situation when bsky takes action on a personal account and it has an impact on any blocklist they host. separating that feels important from a power perspective

aka there are definitely groups of 8 friends I would care more about being excluded from that 800k strangers

I think that both of you would actually agree if it came down to it, and are engaging in bad faith internet argument and cheap dunks

if your big receipt is somebody maybe going to a big meetup with Bad People long ago, then it sounds like you don't have much of a critique at all. which is disappointing because we do make mistakes and need effective critique to hold us accountable.

the team has been operating openly for years now. there are plenty of actual statements and actions you and others can hold us account able for. you don't need to speculate.