{
  "$type": "site.standard.document",
  "bskyPostRef": {
    "cid": "bafyreibacrmpj4yqpilic2whxggneijcjsiclz5ux75rsa55lufa3picxm",
    "uri": "at://did:plc:haakkg7y3xdghcdmprxeexso/app.bsky.feed.post/3mk44lkqes4z2"
  },
  "path": "/t/what-are-your-thoughts-on-signals-policy-for-edited-messages/37347#post_4",
  "publishedAt": "2026-04-22T18:12:41.000Z",
  "site": "https://discuss.privacyguides.net",
  "textContent": "lyricism:\n\n> t is poor UX for the recipient to not be able to see changes to a message they already have on their device and may have already seen.\n\nI hear you, but I am specifically referring to a message the recipient has not seen. Also, I am not against the recipient knowing that the message was edited even if they haven’t read it. But giving them access to previous versions in this context is IMO, unnecessary.\n\nlyricism:\n\n> If you are trying to hide something about a message you are sending from the person you are sending it to, you will have no guarantees that any measures will actually succeed because they may be using a client that simply doesn’t cooperate while reporting it does.\n\nMaybe so, but most people use the default client. Most Signal users use the official Signal app. They don’t use Molly. Also, when I send a message that was unread and deleted before it’s read, I am confident that the recipient hasn’t seen it. So why not have the same feature for edited messages? The risk level is the same.\n\nlyricism:\n\n> There is no such benefit for this feature, it would only be for the purpose of helping you against an adversarial recipient, which Signal is not capable of actually providing safety against.\n\nI disagree. The recipient doesn’t have to be adversarial. Hiding edits to an unread message achieves the same thing as deleting the message. So why not allow it?",
  "title": "What are your thoughts on Signal's policy for edited messages?"
}