I was going to keep Outer Space super private/mysterious and assume another nym but it’s really hard to do given (1) I work in a coworking space (2) I historically “work in public” online. I’d have to fake a drug addiction or something and pretend I just wasn’t getting anything done.

Anyway, Outer Space is where I’m going to attempt to build SN-like things into/on/for nostr. SN will remain and continue to be improved - ideally sharing as much code/improvements with Outer Space as possible. Outer Space is like an R&D project answering the question of whether the problems SN solves can be solved in a decentralized way (with nostr as ground zero).

Outer Space is just a landing page right now where you can reserve a NIP-05 and lightning address, but I wanted to kickstart it and have somewhere to host the progress.

AFAICT Roadmap

1. NIP-05
2. Non-custodial & hybrid custodial Lightning wallet/address/etc:
   a. Support fully non-custodial wallet connections
   b. Provide optional sat capped custodial wallet for offline receives and in app payment simplicity, i.e. a small custodial buffer with non-custodial (or other-custodian) overflow
3. Basic nostr client/relay
4. client/relay with value rank support

It’s been an open question whether I can build SN into nostr since its inception. I guess we’ll find out.

:) Let me explain the experiment a bit then, since it doesn't make any difference for the results, and I would be happy to hear suggestions and criticism of any kind.

I am interested in ways to encourage people (in tight-knit communities: i call them pseudofamilies) to express terrible ideas.

Pseudofamilies (e.g. stacker.news, countries, religious sects) have collective intelligence because it's ok to be wrong, and you will be error-corrected without fear of exclusion. There is psychological safety, as google puts it.

In this way, error-correction, the collective gains intelligence. But unlike biological families where genetics determine membership, pseudofamilies determine membership by way of dogma. Axioms. E.g. If I believe that transwomen are all simply men who dress like women, then I am excluded from the trans pseudofamily.

These two phenomena lead pseudofamilies to stagnation, loss of swarm intellect. How many times must you error correct an altcoin-supporting new member before you ignore/ban them instead? The more a collective learns, the more axioms are established, and the more haram it becomes to say dumb ideas.

So to answer the question about the experiment:

• If the winner is the most zapped one, then the incentive for players is "write something that coyly implies I know our true values". But I want to incentivize fearless error expression:
  I want players to "write something wrong".
• By telling people to guess what the pseudofamily thinks is wrong, there is no implication that the writer should be excluded; it is not their own opinion they are expressing. It is a way to incentivize collective observation of what dogma/axioms we actually have.
• The game is designed so that zapping people is hurting their chance of winning. Instead, the incentive is to zap those you don't want to win. This means players who zap are forced to either support a position they disagree with, or let it win 80k sats.
• Conversely with zonks (which is a word i just invented to describe our "downvotes", flagging. correct me if you have better nomenclature). It also encourages new comments/errors.

In summary, I want to encourage tolerance of expression of bad ideas by letting players de-radicalize themselves though performing haram actions. If you ask a man a small favor and he agrees, he is more likely to agree later to a greater favor. To give a fundamentalist the chance to consider the ideas of their heretics, first convince them to shake the heretics hand.

• The "second to last ranked" vs just picking the lowest ranked comment is left as an exercise to the reader :)