[rollcat]

> [...] since Discord is also very not E2EE.

I have stated that at the end of my original comment. I'm not advocating for Discord (merely enumerating IRC's and XMPP's shortcomings), but I would like to point out once again, that post-2013 any solution that does not enable strong E2EE by default should not be advocated for - at all.

> That said, XMPP my preferred protocol that checks all of the boxes.

Read up soatok's breakdown on the design & status of OMEMO. I'm not a cryptographer, but I do trust a cryptographer when they say some protocol's design/crypto is broken.

[vidarh]

Maybe for your your use. For my use, not a single thing that goes over discord are things I'd object to being posted on a public website. That includes DM's. Not having E2EE means something isn't a solution for actually private conversations, but a lot of conversations happens in setting that are not actually private in any sense.

[collingreen]

I personally think I am unable to perfectly guess today what I will want/need to have private forever.

This is one of the tenets underpinning my thoughts about why privacy matters.

[multjoy]

But Discord & IRC aren't generally private spaces. They're no different to web forums in that you would reasonably expect that something you write today would be accessible without reference to you in 10 years hence.

That's a very different proposition to a private/group message exchange in WhatsApp/iMessage etc.

[vidarh]

It's really quite simple: Would I be happy to discuss it in a public space where people might record?

I wouldn't plan a controversial political movement in public, or on Discord. I would discuss videos game programming either place.