> it does not rely on P2P techniques, therefore it works. That's awesome! Way more decentralized projects should be like this. I think it's worth keeping the

> it does not rely on P2P techniques, therefore it works. That's awesome! Way more decentralized projects should be like this. I think it's worth keeping the custom protocol. SSB is a bit limited, it's missing the ability to pseudo-delete like most social sites have, and it's not natively multi-writer. That's a lot of complexity added. I was interested in building something with a similar model, for IoT devices, and one thing I was going to use to make things easier was a pseudo-DHT. There could be a list of servers with random IDs, that people could add themselves to using pull requests. Your suggested default server is the one in the default pool(Or whichever other pool you selected) that has the closest ID. Any two nodes could always find each other as long as they used the same pool. Also, another thing I was going to do was to have relays have "upstream pools", and know what their "peers" are, so that pools could join together. Your records would be replicated to the closest relay in the pool you select, and if the upstream pool had an even closer node, on that one too. After that I was going to have relays automatically try to fetch things from upstream, so that people could over time build a network that worked like a P2P network, but without the P2P. I think the big challenge with this is that open servers will fill up very fast with crap. Some way of clearing out said crap seems essential. Maybe relays should be able to request things from clients. After a few weeks they could drop old posts, but clients would mark themselves as archives, and the relay could get stuff again from the original poster or friends. This looks like an incredibly promising approach, maybe even one of the better ones I've seen. It's been a while since I saw something decentralized I might actually use!