rich1.0codonaft (npub1al…7rg94)https://nostr.ae/npub1alptdev5srcw2hxg03567p4k6xs3lgj7f6545suc0rzp0xw98svse7rg94njumphttps://nostr.aeThanks, I'm not sure if I got your point. Paid relays in practice significantly decrease spam, but that's unrelated to those who desperately send takedown letters to relay operators (like in the case I referred to under the picture). They send these letters anyway for a formal reason (probably because lawyers tell them to do that); it's not a question of whether these letters will be read or not at all. They either send them through a relay feedback form or possibly email/DM the relay operator directly. Or, if there are no more options left, they would likely send it to the hosting provider or/and domain registrar, no matter whether it's a paid relay or not. Taking into account what's currently happening to domain registrars and some hosting providers (they fail to properly analyze the "takedown letters" and randomly ban their clients, basically), it'd be better if these letters reached relay operators directly. BUT not without being informed that their letter will be published. That's not just ethics; I believe it's reasonable and beneficial to both sides of such conflicts.