An administrative contact may be listed with a `pubkey`, in the same format as Nostr events (32-byte hex for a `secp256k1` public key). If a contact is listed, this provides clients with a recommended address to send encrypted direct messages (See [NIP-17](17.md)) to a system administrator. Expected uses of this address are to report abuse or illegal content, file bug reports, or request other technical assistance.

About librekitty: FOSS zealot, game developer, and lifelong learner 👹👾📖 freedom maxi, solarpunk, cypherpunk, and anarcho-communist (anti-statist/anti-stalinist) 🌞💻 🟥⬛ centralization is the root of all evil looking to connect through this protocol 💜🫂 zaps/XMR to me is optional, feel free to save your sats 💜⚡ 🇺🇸🏳️‍🌈🏴‍☠️ contact 💬: - white noise: npub1avxs6urpqyflcrua027e53kure5emfwhhqf5khf2np7rcc0gkvdqcwsa2t - simplex:

SimpleX Chat - Invitation

- matrix: @mewmeow:matrix.org - XMPP: badcodecat@conversations.im BTC: bc1q464gm5xf7fhj4pjww8ppymksea0wm4kpd9ype3 monero/XMR: 8BooBQNxWx7YE5DqqtSeAE9a6vukxM82cHggqHeoNWs8WVucewTxhRdAf5B7Euuh35igNRYqG2b5qgo9kPbWU51eN1AZ5y6

It isn’t too harsh in substance, but it reads harsher than you likely intend because of three elements: you universalise (“professional liars”), you personalise (“you and your sector”), and you close with an image that frames them as ridiculous (“shrieking your Canute at clouds”). All three sharpen the sting beyond the argument. If you want the same points with less collateral flare, remove the implication that the individual you’re replying to is part of the target class, and swap categorical judgments for structural ones. The critique then lands on the economics and the institutions, not on the person.