@jackyalciné

While a post will always be an accessible part of your log/blockchain, you can e.g. post a reply — directly or as a fork in the thread — to the post you wish to ‘retract’ and state why you feel the original post needs an erratum. That way, the original post will always have a note attached to it.

You could also tag the post with a tag of your own liking. Although I've been sailing the scuttleverse for some three years, I'm a newcomer to patchwork, so I'm not quite sure how tags work. Perhaps some of the butts you mentioned do.

@jackyalcine Likes create a log entry {type: 'vote', value: 1} and "unliking" creates a another entry {type: 'vote', value: 0}, so nothing gets actually "deleted", but the app's UI knows how to not render the original like. We could also implement a "hide post" functionality, but this would be app specific, meaning that one app would implement it first, but probably the other apps would take some while to implement it, so you would still not have an immediate "delete" effect. We can/should eventually implement this kind of stuff, but even better would be to actually delete the log entry.

Check out #gabbygrove and its implementation in #planetary which allows soft deletes (also of the log entry), as well as the new #earthstar. If I remember correctly #bamboo also allows soft deletes.

(No such thing as a hard delete in a p2p system, because of eventual consistency, you can't be sure the post is nuked from every computer on the planet)

@jackyalcine

Do you think an 'edit' would solve this? I'm worried that soft-deletes would have weird effects (what do we do with comments on deleted posts? links to it?) but an edit function would at least let you revise / retract what you've said.