Then it's kind of censorship, isn't it? Or at least users should have the option to see or not what was deleted. It could be part of the "algo" scheme that users could choose from.
A settings with a lot of filter options would be neat, so everyone could use typical filter models and then adapt to their needs by removing more or less.
People are free to post vitriol of their own - that doesn’t need to be censored, but if they are trying to use your posts as a platform to transmit their vitriol, that’s not cool. It’s a policy that a relay could implement.
If I reply to one of your posts, you could cause my possibly long, well considered, reply to be deleted? This could chill most controversial/contentious conversations.
If I am well-measured, I’d be happy to leave the reply. If I am a jerk, I can delete. My gain, my loss. No platform moderation required.
As a third party reader of the thread, I think I’d rather make my own decisions on who I would want to mute rather than have to depend on the decisions of whoever started the thread. Though I’d like a mode or filter of sorts where I can see that lots of people have muted someone’s post or their entire account.
If "some jerk" deletes my post, it wastes my time, and will cause me to reply less in the future (to everyone else too), that's the "chilling effect" I was thinking about.
Ultimately, I think the poster/replier should own their own notes (undeletable), that's like a basic principle of nostr.
I tend to agree with nostr:nprofile1qqs2qzx779ted7af5rt04vzw3l2hpzfgtk0a2pw6t2plaz4d2734vngpzamhxue69uhhyetvv9ujumn0wd68ytnzv9hxgtcppemhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mp0qy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnyv9kh2uewd9hj7hycrvd that reports (kind 1984) seem to be the best way to do this. I can reply to you, and you can tag my reply as low value/spam, and other readers (or their clients) can decide for themselves.
