D
@hko I guess that's where the crux of our disagreement is. "Forward secrecy" serves its communicative purpose just fine for me, I explain above how. But I'm one random guy out on the internets so this is anecdotal evidence at best. Not very reliable, that is.
Popularizing a new term for an existing concept is certainly possible, but difficult. Costly in terms of time and effort. I'm not sure it's worth for @delta to fight that fight. But that's their choice.
@delta yeah, I caught that bit of the intention. The goal is understandable. I'm just not sure the solution will work towards it.
I disagree with this being a more direct expression (admittedly, with my atypically wide interpretation of "forwarding") of what it's trying to say and it's most certainly at a massive disadvantage in adoption. The adoption of a new term for an existing concept is an uphill battle against an entrenched bit of natural language, so to speak. My concern is that it might end up causing more trouble than it's worth.
I'll refrain from commenting further until I actually watch the FOSDEM talk on AC2. Good news: for all the hosting providers Russia has been banning en masse lately autocrypt2's website is perfectly accessible at this time 
@hko ...no?
The author might not have meant it to be related in this way, but there is a sensible explanation for the etymology which I just provided. Honestly, I have no clue if it's a popular interpretation. I assume that it probably isn't.
So the idea behind the new term is to escape the existing association as something desirable by stopping the use of it altogether, which'll look to the public eye as the admission of not having it?
It's… a plan, I guess. It might backfire IMO, but I assume you looked into it much deeper than I did.
@lyyn that's just what the words mean in the general sense. Redefining them only makes it harder to communicate with wider audiences, which I take it was the rationale behind inventing a new term for this.
I've had a funny conversation from an opposite perspective with a guy from Vivaldi (the browser) last year who was very adamant about asserting their data collection is okay because it's not telemetry as it's known in the professional setting and utterly refused to even consider what their browser is even being accused of – to even begin explaining why accusations don't hold water, which he never got to. In doing so he sounded incredibly dodgy seemingly without realizing it (or knowing full well the accusations are valid, who can tell).
I understand that @delta is probably tired of explaining that FS isn't that big a deal by now… but gaining what is probably the closest thing to FS within the confines of mailing protocols – isn't that a win that can be celebrated? 
@delta I'm a decently-informed-but-ultimately-casual observer in the security parts, but the name "forward secrecy" makes more sense to me for what it defines: "secrecy" of the message after it's "forwarded" (sent anywhere else in addition to its destinations — which would include things like wiretapping and late retrieval, which aren't typically seen as forms of forwarding). It makes sense to me mechanically.
I'm not on board with "reliable deletion" because information cannot be reliably deleted without direct control over every single device involved. What you're doing in ACv2 is preserving *secrecy* — rendering retrieval of older messages useless. I can understand how it can be seen as a form of deletion from a user's perspective and making sense to the user is a fair rationale. I just have doubts this choice of words is going to be any easier to explain. 
I was explaining the same phenomenon wrt. post deletions on Fediverse literally yesterday 
@delta I figure @qyahxm is translating from Russian? "прямая секретность" is a silly attempt at word-for-word translation of "forward secrecy" that entirely loses its meaning but basically the answer is "yeah, very recently with Autocrypt 2": https://delta.chat/en/help#pfs
There is a reason Wikipedia in Russian doesn't translate the term in the title: https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_forward_secrecy – wherever the term is used, there seems to also be knowledge of its English counterpart and there's just no good translation for it.