Thanks for answering, JeffG (nprofile…x9xy) . I don't think I can talk about most teams' experiences now, since **my use case** is to actually open the door to bring in collectives that are still not here (they live inside a project I work with called Socialroots). One major need we have (and this is based on a decade of user-research) is for the collective concept to be more flexible than the usual list of members in a server. Long (design) story short: **Collectives need to be able to connect in networks**, which means sharing permissions to common resources and sub-groups. I came up with three broad/reusable concepts to implement in the Nostr space: Collectives + Capabilities + Commons (which you can read more about in the same repo).
All that to get to the Policy-based Signer: If collectives are represented by nostr-native identities (npub), we'd get a lot of the social-graph flexibility by default, BUT we need a shared **governance model for those identities**. Stewards need to agree on the policies that the signers must enforce. The main proposal for the policy-based signer is to convert the policy into Nostr kinds. That would help with policy design outside the signer, improve transparency in multi-steward approval procedures, and allow for policy reuse across signers. (Side note, I would like some of those properties even as an individual user.)
I hope this helps.
n1.g1.n1
npub1vj…8ejkd
2026-03-26 19:00:12 UTC
in reply to nevent1q…5n8a
Author Public Key
npub1vjhrl4k2uj6sttu5y3xahz29esk2nfn274de8qtn5jkv06zwn7gs68ejkdPublished at
2026-03-26 19:00:12 UTCEvent JSON
{
"id": "f66a8d4c111c166eb4025afdefbb693ca530618a5f0b9299767ac07b0a42c904",
"pubkey": "64ae3fd6cae4b505af94244ddb8945cc2ca9a66af55b938173a4acc7e84e9f91",
"created_at": 1774551612,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"p",
"1739d937dc8c0c7370aa27585938c119e25c41f6c441a5d34c6d38503e3136ef",
"wss://relay.jeffg.fyi/"
],
[
"e",
"4503ea1370bd721d1ccb30d692d5c2c22fbf382484f8463b165fd5cf6a35369f",
"wss://nos.lol/%20",
"root",
""
],
[
"e",
"1a73be0308c03679a98fa5defeaa59b2c7ac0abe3a5f1711bf9c4d4fe8b876e7",
"wss://nos.lol/",
"reply",
"1739d937dc8c0c7370aa27585938c119e25c41f6c441a5d34c6d38503e3136ef"
]
],
"content": "Thanks for answering, nostr:nprofile1qyt8wumn8ghj7un9d3shjtn2v4nxveewveukjtcppemhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mp0qy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnyv9kh2uewd9hj7qpqzuuajd7u3sx8xu92yav9jwxpr839cs0kc3q6t56vd5u9q033xmhsudx9xy . I don't think I can talk about most teams' experiences now, since **my use case** is to actually open the door to bring in collectives that are still not here (they live inside a project I work with called Socialroots). One major need we have (and this is based on a decade of user-research) is for the collective concept to be more flexible than the usual list of members in a server. Long (design) story short: **Collectives need to be able to connect in networks**, which means sharing permissions to common resources and sub-groups. I came up with three broad/reusable concepts to implement in the Nostr space: Collectives + Capabilities + Commons (which you can read more about in the same repo). \n\nAll that to get to the Policy-based Signer: If collectives are represented by nostr-native identities (npub), we'd get a lot of the social-graph flexibility by default, BUT we need a shared **governance model for those identities**. Stewards need to agree on the policies that the signers must enforce. The main proposal for the policy-based signer is to convert the policy into Nostr kinds. That would help with policy design outside the signer, improve transparency in multi-steward approval procedures, and allow for policy reuse across signers. (Side note, I would like some of those properties even as an individual user.)\n\nI hope this helps.",
"sig": "6453bdf71be4a302cd8ba1a18a5f555c7a28f307e749018308042d993f18ccc70cc3d8c11f8f2da1d09b31943d907f72b186b295f106b90ee1295ee84a6df209"
}