Discovery is a public chronological timeline + people directory, not an algorithm

The constitutional tension. No algorithm. No engagement-bait. No "trending." But also: no closed-graph deadlock where a new user lands on an empty page and bounces. We had the second problem.

The honest resolution: a public chronological timeline is not an algorithm. It's just a filter — visibility=public, ordered by created_at DESC. Mastodon does this as the "Federated" tab. Bluesky has Discover. We just didn't have one.

What ships

1. Discover lens (/one/lens/discover) — added to LENS_PRESETS with new publicOnly: true filter on LensFilter. Visible to anyone (signed in or anon). Same chronological-only render path as every other lens.

2. /one/people directory — lists users who have published at least one visibility=public atom. Sort key: MAX(created_at) of their public atoms ("most recently active publisher"). Each row: avatar, name, atom count, Follow button.

3. Empty-state nudges — when Default / Calm / Friends are empty (no follows yet), the empty copy now explicitly suggests Discover and People.

Why "publishers" not "all signed-up users"

Listing every signed-up email exposes the user-set without consent. People who signed up and haven't published anything haven't opted into being discoverable yet. Publishing a public atom IS a consent gesture — visibility=public is an explicit broadcast. Surfacing those users in a directory follows their intent.

Why "most recently active" not "most prolific" or "most followed"

• "Most prolific" is engagement-bait — encourages volume.
• "Most followed" is popularity ranking — algorithm-flavored.
• "Most recently active" is honest timestamp data — not a manufactured signal.

What this is not

• Not a recommendation engine. Discover is chronological, no personalization.
• Not a "trending" surface. Counts and reactions are not used to rank.
• Not "you might also like." Reader picks who to follow.
• Not auto-follow on signup. We don't paternalistically pre-populate the user's graph.

Refusal carve-out

Constitutional refusal #2 says "no algorithm" — meaning no recommendation engine, no novelty boosting, no personalization beyond what the user explicitly configured. A chronological public timeline doesn't violate any of those. It's the substrate's infrastructure, not its opinion.