I’d suggest that we apply a naive model of WoT when we look only at follows and followers. nostr:npub1u5njm6g5h5cpw4wy8xugu62e5s7f6fnysv0sj0z3a8rengt2zqhsxrldq3 is doing much deeper work to build a more meaningful web of trust.

I think as long as it's opt-in, I don't see any issues. But if I'm forced to see what my "friends" are following, no bueno.

you're not alone

Trust is context dependent. One trust does not fit all.

There's a use case for actively following people you DON'T trust. WoT by default probably messes with that.

This is true. Need a system where we can vouche for who we trust. As discussed with nostr:npub1wf4pufsucer5va8g9p0rj5dnhvfeh6d8w0g6eayaep5dhps6rsgs43dgh9 in Madeira

Web of Trust should not be assumed to be web of follow. I agree. Also we trust different people for different things.

Yes, absolutely. I follow two people who I know are complete nutcases. I definitely don't trust them but I enjoy it from a psychological standpoint. I'm working on something related to this

nostr:npub1u5njm6g5h5cpw4wy8xugu62e5s7f6fnysv0sj0z3a8rengt2zqhsxrldq3 also working on this with the Tapestry protocol

if you follow that user it is assumed that you want to see their notes

You’re not alone. Just like my IRL friends, the people I follow I generally only trust in a few categories and may explicitly distrust in others 😂

I trust you to post interesting content. That's all. Anything more requires applying weighting to categories of trust.

This is not a problem with WoT. This is a problem with 15 years of “follow” implemented by “walled garden” socials where trust is taken for granted. The problem is that “follow != trust” and this matters even more on Nostr. nostr:note1q2a2stds7ndxe9h9xz82u20szgur0yyp2gmdkz853dvdvl66st...

One of the many approaches to this problem: https://github.com/lez/nips/blob/master/77.md