On Sat, Sep 5, 2026 at 4:54 PM Georg Lukas <georg(a)op-co.de> wrote:
Storing a recipient-side edit/retraction history is
the only reasonable
way to cover harmful / abusive messages - once they were delivered to at
least one of the recipient's clients, that is. In fact, that would
actually be an argument for keeping the original message in MAM, instead
of replacing it with a tombstone.
Under absolutely no circumstances would I want *my* server to delete
random messages from *my* archive just because a third party tells it
to.
If you look at
clients that actually implement Any Message Correction
the 15 year head start melts away.
Do you mean "Any" as a synonym to '308/LMC, or are you specifically
speaking of clients that have looser restrictions on which messages they
allow to be corrected?
Clients that accepts edits for any message instead of just the last
one should be fairly rare. And since 'retraction' isn’t just for the
last message I don’t think the wide implementation of *last* message
correct can serve as an adequate replacement.
I generally don’t understand why we are trying to pretend that edit
and delete are the same operation. I mean for early adopters of
"retraction" it was probably kinda neat that Conversations would not
show the edit history and that you could edit to a whitespace to
achieve roughly the same effect. At least in practice. However if we
just look at those two features without any implementation baggage
they are two very distinct features. Most platforms that I know of
have a history for edits but very obviously not a history for a
retraction. In scenarios where deletion is consensual, for example I
sent you a password for you to use, but we both agree that it should
not stay in message history, we obviously don’t want a history that
contains that password.
And yes, I agree that public channels operate under a completely
different social contract and moderation should in fact permanently
delete messages without history. (Very obviously you want that CSAM to
be gone and not accessible via a history viewer.) That’s why
Conversations implements moderation in public channels. But not
retraction.
To be very clear: I’m not vetoing this XEP. It’s good that clients
that want message deletion have a mutually agreed upon standard. I
merely truthfully answered the question "Will you implement this XEP"
with a "probably not right now". And I have fairly strong opinion that
edit and delete are not the same operation. But the current XEP is
fine because it does not recommend edits as fallback.