this post was submitted on 25 Feb 2026
8 points (75.0% liked)
Lemmy.world Support
3608 readers
37 users here now
Lemmy.world Support
Welcome to the official Lemmy.world Support community! Post your issues or questions about Lemmy.world here.
This community is for issues related to the Lemmy World instance only. For Lemmy software requests or bug reports, please go to the Lemmy github page.
This community is subject to the rules defined here for lemmy.world.
You can also DM https://lemmy.world/u/lwreport or email report@lemmy.world (PGP Supported) if you need to reach our directly to the admin team.
Follow us for server news 🐘
Outages 🔥
https://status.lemmy.world/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The solution: A three‑layer deletion model This is the only model that satisfies both Lemmy’s architecture and user expectations.
Layer 1 — Local hard deletion (guaranteed) When a user deletes a post/comment:
the content is wiped from their home server
the object can remain as a placeholder to preserve thread structure
media files are fully removed
This part is already possible.
Layer 2 — Federated delete signal (best‑effort) When deletion happens, the home server sends a message:
“This content is deleted — purge your copy.”
Servers that respect federation will:
delete their cached copy
update the thread
remove the content from search
Servers that don’t care will ignore it — but that’s already true today.
This is the missing piece Lemmy needs to implement.
Layer 3 — User‑initiated purge request (optional escalation) Admins already have a purge tool that:
deletes content locally
sends a federated purge request
is accepted by most servers
Expose this to users in a controlled way:
rate‑limited
confirmation required
optional admin approval
This gives users real deletion power without enabling abuse.
You say you understand the technical limitations, then immediately ask if there are technical limitations in the next paragraph? And then this comment is clearly written by an LLM. Maybe if you tried to use your brain you'd have better luck.
I’m trying to understand the current behavior as clearly as possible, which is why I asked for clarification. The replies from others in the thread have helped fill in the gaps about how deletion works across different servers.
My goal isn’t to argue about federation limits — it’s to understand whether the user‑side deletion experience can be improved, even if perfect deletion across all nodes isn’t possible. That’s the part I’m trying to explore here.