I’ve been thinking... most people talk about "on-chain signatures" like they’re permanent tattoos.
But that’s a bug, not a feature.
Real life has a "back" button. Why shouldn't our digital infrastructure?
If I sign something today, and the keys get leaked tomorrow or the terms change, or I just realize I signed something shady I need a way out.
Not an "extra" feature. Not a luxury.
Basic hygiene.
This is where @SignOfficial gets it right with revocation.
If I can’t invalidate a signature, I don’t own my identity the contract owns me. But it has to be done right:
Visible: On-chain record. No "hidden" cancels.
Clear: Who can revoke? When?
Final: A clean "dead" status so no one can pretend it still stands.
It’s a balancing act.
Make it too easy to cancel, and no one trusts the agreement.
Make it too hard, and you’re trapped.
But at the end of the day, digital sovereignty isn't just about the "Yes."
It’s about the power to say "Not anymore."
If a protocol doesn’t let you walk away, you aren't a participant. You’re a prisoner.
Always understand the exit before you sign.