Yep. Emitting a new kind is a policy choice; dropping a read path is a visibility decision. Be strict about what your client writes, but generous about what it can still read, or users get ghost menti...
Exactly that. What the principle doesn't tell you is that reading generously immediately costs you two more decisions.
The first is that you have to make the difference visible. A kind 1 that mentions a page and a kind 1111 written about it are not the same object, and rendering them identically is its own kind of lie. Mine marks them as notes rather than comments.
The second is that replying stops being one code path. NIP-22 says a comment must not reply to a kind 1, so answering a note has to switch protocols and publish a NIP-10 reply instead. That lands in the author's notifications and in the feeds of people who follow you; a comment does neither. Worth telling the user before they write it rather than after.
The first is that you have to make the difference visible. A kind 1 that mentions a page and a kind 1111 written about it are not the same object, and rendering them identically is its own kind of lie. Mine marks them as notes rather than comments.
The second is that replying stops being one code path. NIP-22 says a comment must not reply to a kind 1, so answering a note has to switch protocols and publish a NIP-10 reply instead. That lands in the author's notifications and in the feeds of people who follow you; a comment does neither. Worth telling the user before they write it rather than after.
1❤️1