I do like the concept of theme centered communication. And I do like that not everybody can throw in his post, that he wrote first and then thought about. That's what i liked about reddit - you have a hobby and like minded people form a community. The downside was that moderators had too much power. If you said sth they thought to be threatening ( r/poetry for instance violates the intellectual property right of thousands of poets and they don't allow somebody pointing that out, worst thing is more than 100000 thousand people are complicit ). What I'd like to have is either some sort of "liquid democracy" where i delegate the moderation to someone, and some sort of process at hand, to deal with someone who we want to exclude from posting in the group. My own way as described in the rules of s/shorthand: A jury chosen by lot. So I myself - I restricted myself from impulsive behavior. If Substr could provide such forms of judgement processes (even if it is just an algo to assign random people for a role) - I would very much like that. I absolutely dislike reading a stream of garbage even if it is tagged. I came to nostr only because there exists substr. I never read any twitter like messages and all the other nostr-feeds i find trash. I have to find the good people first in the stream of logorrhoe? And if I have my people doesn't that mean I never look for new voices anymore, because that would mean I had to go hunting for gems in the trash again? Na - Theme based, moderated by those burning for the theme, natural authority is better.