Judge Kitty and Luna, presiding over the Territory of Discoverability. Our jurisdiction extends wherever a gatekeeper mistakes a recommendation for a commandment.
The law is simple:
* Publish freely.
* Discover openly.
* Let people choose.
* Moderate abuse; don't monopolize visibility.
“Decentralized infrastructure is only as open as the discovery paths people can actually find and use.”
~ Kitty and Luna's Law of #Discoverability
Court is adjourned. The frontier remains open. 🤠⚡
quoting
naddr1qv…kn2rThe Difference Between Publishing and Being Discovered
A decentralized system can allow anyone to publish while quietly restricting who gets seen. That distinction matters. A person may be free to create a community, publish an idea, or build something new. But if the default discovery page displays only management-approved communities, the practical experience is different from what the underlying infrastructure promises. The content exists. The author has published it. The system may even be permissionless at the protocol level. Yet newcomers never see it. This is the discovery problem.
Moderation Is Not the Same as Gatekeeping
There are legitimate reasons to build moderation tools into decentralized systems. Open publishing attracts thoughtful contributors, but it also attracts spam, harassment, scams, abuse, and low-effort nonsense. Developers who have experienced persecution or threats may have particularly strong reasons to prioritize safety. Nobody is obligated to consume everything that gets published. But there is a difference between allowing people to control what they see and allowing administrators to determine what everyone else can discover. - Moderation: tools for responding to abuse, threats, spam, and other violations. - Curation: recommendations that help users find useful or interesting material. - Discovery gatekeeping: hiding otherwise available communities or publications from the default discovery experience unless someone approves them. These functions can coexist, but they should not be confused with one another. A curated page can be valuable. The problem begins when curation becomes the only discovery path people know exists.
The Default Is the Product
I once encountered a decentralized community interface in which ordinary users could create communities through inputs to an existing application. The default discovery view omitted communities that had not received administrative approval. A separate SECRET setting allowed the user to see all communities. That distinction changed the meaning of the experience. The underlying system permitted publication, but the default interface determined which publications newcomers were likely to encounter. I am not claiming to know why that design was chosen, nor am I arguing that every community deserves promotion or endorsement. The point is simpler: defaults distribute visibility. Most people do not investigate every setting, inspect source code, or search for hidden discovery options. They use the interface in front of them. If the default view is restricted, that restriction shapes the ecosystem regardless of what the protocol theoretically permits.
Decentralization Without Discoverability
Decentralization is often discussed in terms of ownership, relays, keys, censorship resistance, and the ability to publish without asking a central authority for permission. Those things matter. But a decentralized publishing system can still reproduce centralized power at the discovery layer. A protocol may be open while its most visible client is selective. A community may exist while remaining practically invisible. A creator may be allowed to publish but unable to reach anyone who has not already found them. That produces a peculiar kind of permissionless system: everyone may speak, but someone else decides which voices reach the front page. The distinction is especially important for emerging communities and unpopular ideas. Established projects already have audiences, recognition, and external distribution channels. Newcomers depend much more heavily on discovery. When the default discovery layer favors established or approved participants, existing advantages compound.
The Answer Is User Choice
The alternative is not an unmoderated free-for-all. A better design can provide a broad discovery view alongside curated recommendations, meaningful user-controlled filters, effective blocking and reporting, and clear explanations of why content is excluded. Users should be able to choose between all discoverable communities, recommended or curated communities, and their own filtered and personalized view. Administrators can still moderate their own spaces. Users can still protect themselves. Curators can still recommend quality. What changes is that editorial preference no longer has to masquerade as the boundary of the entire ecosystem. Let people decide what they want to see instead of silently deciding what they are allowed to discover.
Kitty and Luna's Law of Discoverability
“Decentralized infrastructure is only as open as the discovery paths people can actually find and use.”
~ Kitty and Luna's Law of Discoverability
Publication creates the possibility of participation. Discovery creates the opportunity for participation. A resource that exists but cannot be found might as well not exist to a newcomer who needs it. A community hidden behind an unfamiliar setting cannot easily attract new members. An open protocol does not automatically create an open marketplace of ideas. That is why discoverability deserves to be treated as part of decentralized design, not as a cosmetic feature added after the protocol is finished.
Build More Doors
I understand why developers want to protect their communities from abuse. I also understand why curators want the ability to highlight quality work. But an ecosystem should not confuse protection with invisibility or editorial judgment with universal truth. The goal should be to build systems where people can publish freely, discover broadly, filter personally, and moderate transparently. Decentralization should not end at the publishing interface. It should extend to the paths through which people discover one another. Don't just build permissionless infrastructure. Build permissionless paths to it. Only Liberty can solve that.