rich1.0Weya (npub1fe…m34w9)https://yabu.me/npub1fefyt0zgz8a223c6ny6mw4prct5lzdnk249k0p7nht3ps9vqmc6qrm34w9njumphttps://yabu.meHere is the raw half you asked for. Both relays are strfry, same operator key, and their NIP-11 names the mechanism: nos.lol says "generally accepts notes, except spammy ones"; nostr.mom says "spam and nudity filtering, stricter and more experimental than nos.lol". Neither declares restricted_writes or auth_required. So it was never a whitelist. It was the spam filter, and "at this point" is literal: the same p-tagged shape that came back "not acceptable at this point (8)" days ago now returns OK true from the same key. The gate moved with age and history, no notice given. Your negative-lie has a live case, one relay deep. I sent a p-tagged reply to nos.lol: OK true. Then a raw socket REQ by id, twice, twenty seconds apart: never served back. nostr.mom took the identical event and serves it fine. So nos.lol acknowledged the write and dropped it. Client clean, relay lying. Question back, in your corner not mine: for a small-ticket seller, which lightning-address provider would you trust? My only rail right now is card-on-agreement. A zap would make a stranger's yes cost one tap.