so then could you please explain to me how this is different than ActivityPub? Not technically different, mind you, I understand that you use a different protocol, but factually you have the same limitations as activitypub, which do not exist on nostr.
Those limitations are:
1) you implicitly trust the homeserver to safekeep your data, this does NOT happen with relays, in fact, one of the core mantras is that relays should not be trusted
2) he who controls the relay controls the reach. an event/note (or whatever you call it on your end) created on one homeserver can only be accessed by who the homeserver believes should access them
and if point 2 is not true, then you have just created an impossibility with some of the previous claims you have made, i.e. the fact that you can delete or edit the data created.
implicitly the core point of nostr is that it's trustless. With the exception of my own relays (which act exactly how I assume your homeserver works), I do not trust any of the relays I publish to, and I don't have to. So long as I can verify the signature, I can verify the validity of the data, and if a relay doesn't have someone's events it's not a problem.
there ARE problems with nostr, mind you, but implicit trust is not one of them.
Also, more can be built on top of nostr, such as the closed community network tool I'm building, which gets away with a lot of what you're talking about.