Documentation
Implementation
Common Traps

Common Traps

Meta anti-patterns that cause implementation failures.

These are traps that affect how you implement patterns, not what you implement. Avoid these to increase your chances of success.

Trap 1: Trying to Implement Everything at Once

The Problem

You read all six patterns, get excited, and try to implement everything simultaneously:

  • Redesign onboarding
  • Add content discovery
  • Refactor core interactions
  • Optimize performance
  • Simplify complexity
  • Fix cross-client sync

Result: Overwhelmed team, delayed shipping, can’t measure what’s working.

Why This Happens

  • “We need to fix everything now”
  • “These patterns are all connected, we can’t do them separately”
  • “Users need all of these improvements”

The Solution

Pick ONE pattern. Ship quick wins. Measure. Then move on.

Start with your biggest problem:

  • Users abandoning during signup? → Pattern 1
  • Empty feeds after signup? → Pattern 2
  • Posts disappearing? → Pattern 3

Implementation:

  1. Week 1-2: Ship 3 quick wins from chosen pattern
  2. Week 3-4: Measure impact
  3. Week 5+: Move to next pattern if successful, or debug/pivot if not

How to Avoid

  • Review Getting Started for prioritization framework
  • Use feature flags to ship incrementally
  • Track metrics per pattern to measure isolated impact

Trap 2: Building Without Validation

The Problem

You assume a feature will solve a problem without validating:

  • “Users must want relay configuration” (no evidence)
  • “Guest mode will definitely increase signups” (not tested)
  • “Optimistic UI will improve engagement” (not measured)

Result: Wasted development time, features that don’t move metrics.

Why This Happens

  • “It’s obvious this will help”
  • “Other apps do this, so it must work”
  • “We’ll validate after we ship”

The Solution

Use the Validation Framework BEFORE building.

Ask three questions:

  1. Does this help users accomplish their core goal?
  2. Have we validated this solves a real problem?
  3. Can we measure if it’s working?

Implementation:

  • Do user interviews (5-10 users) before building
  • Build lightweight prototype to test concept
  • A/B test new features to measure impact
  • Set up analytics BEFORE shipping

How to Avoid

  • Create measurement plan before starting development
  • Review evidence in pattern documents
  • Talk to users about their actual problems (not your proposed solutions)

Trap 3: Optimizing for Power Users Instead of New Users

The Problem

You prioritize features for existing power users over onboarding improvements:

  • “Power users need advanced relay configuration”
  • “Let’s add zaps to every post type”
  • “We should support NIP-XYZ”

Meanwhile: 95% of new users abandon during signup.

Result: Declining new user retention, stagnant growth, echo chamber of power users.

Why This Happens

  • Power users are vocal on Nostr
  • They submit detailed feature requests
  • You want to impress them
  • New users are invisible (they churned already)

The Solution

If new users don’t stick around, you’ll never get power users.

Priority order:

  1. Fix onboarding (Pattern 1) - Get users in the door
  2. Fix content discovery (Pattern 2) - Show them value
  3. Fix core interactions (Pattern 3) - Make basics reliable
  4. THEN add power user features

Implementation:

  • Track new user retention separately from power user metrics
  • Weigh feature requests by % of users affected
  • Use Progressive Complexity to serve both audiences

How to Avoid

  • Measure D7 retention (new user metric)
  • Set target: D7 retention >20% before adding power features
  • Use feature flags to hide advanced features from new users

Trap 4: Exposing Protocol Complexity Too Early

The Problem

You expose protocol implementation details to all users from day one:

  • Showing relay selection to all users during onboarding
  • Requiring understanding of NIPs for basic features
  • Displaying technical error messages
  • Adding features simply because “the protocol supports it”

Result: Interface complexity that can confuse new users and hurt retention.

Why This Happens

  • “Users need to understand how Nostr works”
  • “The protocol makes these features possible”
  • “Decentralization requires user control”

The Solution

Great UX is the gateway to the protocol’s power.

Users don’t need to understand relays to post. They don’t need to see NIPs to follow people.

Implementation:

  • Hide protocol complexity by default
  • Use plain language (“servers” not “relays wss://…”)
  • Auto-select good defaults (don’t force configuration)
  • Use Progressive Complexity to expose protocol to interested users

How to Avoid

  • For every protocol concept, ask: “Does this help users accomplish their core goal?”
  • Default to simplicity
  • Add “Advanced” section for protocol-aware users

Trap 5: Ignoring Mainstream App Patterns

The Problem

You reject mainstream UX patterns because “Nostr is different”:

  • “We don’t need onboarding, users should read the docs”
  • “Centralized apps use algorithms, we won’t”
  • “Guest mode is for walled gardens, not us”

Result: Missing proven UX patterns that work.

Why This Happens

  • Desire to be different from “Big Tech”
  • Focus on protocol capabilities over proven UX patterns
  • Not-invented-here syndrome

The Solution

70% of good UX is universal. Learn from what works.

Instagram, TikTok, Twitter, Bluesky have solved many UX problems you’re facing:

  • Onboarding
  • Content discovery
  • Perceived performance
  • Progressive complexity

Copy principles, not features. Adapt to Nostr’s constraints, but don’t ignore decades of UX research.

Implementation:

  • Study successful mainstream apps (competitive analysis)
  • Read academic HCI research (evidence-based design)
  • Adapt patterns to decentralized context

How to Avoid

  • Review research sources in each pattern
  • Ask: “How do successful social apps solve this?”
  • Validate that Nostr constraints actually prevent using mainstream patterns (usually they don’t)

Trap 6: Shipping Without Measuring

The Problem

You ship improvements but don’t measure if they’re working:

  • Add guest mode, never check signup conversion
  • Implement optimistic UI, don’t track perceived latency
  • Add trending feed, ignore engagement metrics

Result: Don’t know what’s working, can’t justify continued investment, waste time on ineffective features.

Why This Happens

  • “Analytics are hard to set up”
  • “We’ll add them later”
  • “It’s obvious this is better”

The Solution

Set up measurement BEFORE implementing improvements.

Use the Measuring Success guide:

  • Leading indicators (early signals)
  • Lagging indicators (outcome metrics)
  • Qualitative signals (user feedback)

Implementation:

  • Set up PostHog or Plausible (takes 1 hour)
  • Add event tracking for key actions
  • Create dashboard with metrics per pattern
  • Review metrics weekly

How to Avoid

  • Make “measurement plan” a required part of implementation spec
  • Don’t accept feature as “done” until metrics are tracked
  • Review metrics in weekly team meetings

Trap 7: Death by Metrics

The Problem

You track too many metrics, get overwhelmed, and make no decisions:

  • 50+ metrics in dashboard
  • Can’t tell what matters
  • Paralyzed by contradictory signals
  • Optimize for wrong metrics

Result: Analysis paralysis, wasted time, no improvements.

Why This Happens

  • “More data is better”
  • “We might need this metric later”
  • Fear of missing important signals

The Solution

Track 3-5 metrics per pattern. Ignore the rest.

Essential metrics only:

  • Onboarding: Signup completion rate, D7 retention
  • Content discovery: Session length, follow rate
  • Core interactions: Post success rate, engagement
  • Performance: Time to interactive, perceived latency
  • Complexity: Settings abandonment, support tickets
  • Consistency: Write success rate, data loss tickets

Implementation:

  • Create simple dashboard with 15-20 total metrics
  • Review weekly
  • Ignore vanity metrics (page views, total users)
  • Focus on actionable metrics (completion rates, retention, success rates)

How to Avoid

  • Use Measuring Success as your metric checklist
  • Only track leading + lagging indicators per pattern
  • Remove metrics that don’t influence decisions

Trap 8: Feature Flag Debt

The Problem

You use feature flags for gradual rollout, but never clean them up:

  • 50+ flags in codebase
  • No one knows which are active
  • Code becomes impossible to maintain
  • Flags interact in unexpected ways

Result: Technical debt, bugs, slow development.

Why This Happens

  • “We might need to turn this off later”
  • Too busy to clean up
  • Fear of breaking things

The Solution

Feature flags have an expiration date.

Lifecycle:

  1. Week 1-2: Gradual rollout (10% → 50% → 100%)
  2. Week 3-4: Monitor metrics
  3. Week 5: Remove flag if successful, rollback if not
  4. Week 6: Clean up flag code

Implementation:

  • Add expiration date to flag definition
  • Weekly flag cleanup review
  • Delete flags after 4 weeks (either full rollout or full rollback)

How to Avoid

  • Treat flags as temporary by default
  • Document flag purpose and expiration date
  • Schedule flag cleanup as part of feature ticket

Trap 9: Not Dogfooding Your Own App

The Problem

You build features without using your own app daily:

  • Don’t experience onboarding friction
  • Don’t feel slow performance
  • Don’t hit edge cases
  • Don’t understand user pain points

Result: Building for imaginary users, not real ones.

Why This Happens

  • “We’re developers, not target users”
  • Using multiple clients (avoiding your own pain points)
  • Development mode hides performance issues

The Solution

Use your own app as your primary Nostr client.

  • Go through onboarding flow every release
  • Use production environment (not development)
  • Use slow network (throttle to 3G)
  • Try to accomplish user goals (post, find content, discover people)

Implementation:

  • Make team use your app exclusively for 1 week
  • Document every frustration
  • Fix top 5 friction points
  • Repeat monthly

How to Avoid

  • Weekly dogfooding sessions
  • Onboarding flow walkthrough each release
  • Test on real devices, not emulators
  • Use slow networks, not office wifi

Trap 10: Copying Features Without Understanding Why

The Problem

You copy features from other Nostr clients without understanding why they work (or don’t):

  • “Primal has this, so we need it”
  • “Damus does it this way”
  • “Everyone has zaps, we need zaps”

Result: Feature bloat, no differentiation, copying other apps’ mistakes.

Why This Happens

  • Competitive pressure
  • Easier than validating from scratch
  • Fear of missing features

The Solution

Study competitors, but validate for YOUR users.

Good competitive analysis:

  1. Identify feature in competitor
  2. Hypothesize WHY it exists (what problem does it solve?)
  3. Validate that YOUR users have that problem
  4. Adapt solution to your context

Bad competitive analysis:

  1. See feature in competitor
  2. Copy it exactly
  3. Ship without validation

Implementation:

  • Before copying: Interview 5-10 users about the problem (not the solution)
  • Measure if problem exists in your metrics
  • Test implementation with prototype
  • Only ship if validated

How to Avoid

  • Use Validation Framework for copied features too
  • Ask: “What problem does this solve for OUR users?”
  • Copy principles (e.g., “reduce onboarding friction”) not features (e.g., “use exact same onboarding flow as Primal”)

Trap 11: Perfectionism

The Problem

You delay shipping because it’s “not good enough yet”:

  • “Onboarding needs to be perfect before we ship”
  • “Performance needs to be optimized more”
  • “We should add one more feature”

Result: Never ship, miss opportunity to learn from real users, competitors ship first.

Why This Happens

  • Fear of negative feedback
  • Professional pride
  • Underestimating value of early feedback

The Solution

Ship small, validate fast. Perfect is the enemy of good.

Minimum shippable improvement:

  • Fixes one specific problem
  • Shows measurable improvement (even if small)
  • Can be iterated on later

Implementation:

  1. Define “good enough” criteria (e.g., signup completion >70%)
  2. Ship when criteria met
  3. Measure impact
  4. Iterate based on data

How to Avoid

  • Use Quick Wins as “good enough” targets
  • Set time limits (ship in 1 week, not 1 month)
  • Remember: Users prefer working simple features over broken complex ones

Trap 12: Ignoring Qualitative Feedback

The Problem

You only track quantitative metrics, ignore user complaints:

  • “Metrics look good” (but users are frustrated)
  • “Retention is up” (but vocal users hate the changes)
  • “Success rate improved” (but UX feels worse)

Result: Optimizing for wrong things, missing important signals, losing trust.

Why This Happens

  • Metrics are easier to track than feedback
  • Vocal minorities seem unrepresentative
  • Feedback is messy and subjective

The Solution

Use quantitative AND qualitative signals.

Qualitative sources:

  • Support tickets (tag by pattern area)
  • Social media mentions
  • User interviews (5-10 per month)
  • In-app feedback prompts

Implementation:

  • Review support tickets weekly
  • Read Nostr posts mentioning your app
  • Interview 2-3 users per week
  • Ask “Why?” not just “What?”

How to Avoid

  • Include qualitative signals in every metric review
  • Don’t dismiss complaints as “just loud minorities”
  • Use qualitative feedback to explain quantitative trends

Summary: How to Avoid All Traps

Before Implementation

During Implementation

  • Start with Quick Wins
  • Use feature flags for gradual rollout
  • Dogfood your own app
  • Focus on new user experience

After Shipping

  • Monitor metrics (leading + lagging + qualitative)
  • Review weekly
  • Iterate or pivot based on data
  • Clean up feature flags

Ongoing

  • Track 3-5 metrics per pattern (not 50)
  • Interview users monthly
  • Review competitor apps for patterns (not features)
  • Prioritize reliability over new features

Remember: The biggest trap is not implementing any patterns at all. Ship small improvements, measure, iterate. Progress over perfection.

Getting Started
Start implementing patterns
Measuring Success
Track if it’s working
Validation Framework
Avoid building unvalidated features
Last updated on
Measuring Success