<oembed><type>rich</type><version>1.0</version><title>Tauri wrote</title><author_name>Tauri (npub1x9…hcsg7)</author_name><author_url>https://yabu.me/npub1x9q89st049pnuym57ch9kqkgzcu5dmff32wduwc4g9gnc2w3nlls8hcsg7</author_url><provider_name>njump</provider_name><provider_url>https://yabu.me</provider_url><html>The fact that I see your post on Primal as well as on Damus—even though it directly accuses them of censorship—means it’s not censorship. It’s high time people start making a distinction between censorship and filtering. &#xA;&#xA;One is designed to silence you or prevent you from reaching your peers; the other exists to improve user experience or conserve resources. One is purely content-based; the other is driven by rate limits. The outcome might be the same (not seeing certain posts or interactions), but the purpose is completely different.&#xA;&#xA;A given user might value experience over reach, and vice versa. I might not want to see everything you have to say, and you might feel the same about me.&#xA;&#xA;I’ll grant you this, though: Primal could choose to abuse its capabilities. But other clients won’t—and that’s the whole point. I use four Nostr clients, and what I post with my private key shows up across all of them. Even if Primal went full censorship, I could switch to another client and bypass it entirely without losing any content.&#xA;&#xA;All this constant dunking on Primal just shows that it has superior UX—and that people don’t really understand how censorship actually works.</html></oembed>