See, that identifier might be an option. Or .. it might not be necessary. If that identifier would be the core &#x27;me&#x27; on Signal, why wouldn&#x27;t you be able to add me by phone number - if I gave Signal one to share&#x2F;associate with? Mum and Grandma would see no change. People like me could run around without a phone number.<p>It&#x27;s not as if that hasn&#x27;t been done. twitter.com&#x2F;darklajid is me (not worth checking it out). See? A name, tied to an identity. Same here. I used to have a FB account and even _there_ you can have a profile name that is unique and shareable. I really think you conflate things here: I DO NOT want to make life harder for mum&#x2F;granny&#x2F;the average WhatsApp fan. If you love that random people show up in your roster because you store their number (or vice versa: You show up on your Ex&#x27;s roster because she didn&#x27;t delete you yet) that&#x27;s fine. And could continue to work like that.<p>I really have a hard time understanding why it isn&#x27;t impossible to opt out. If I have a key, registered with Signal - why would I need a number on top? _Especially_ given that there&#x27;s no federation to speak of, so I assume they don&#x27;t need to &#x27;shard&#x27; base on the identifier. foo@example.com -&gt; talk to example.com? That&#x27;s not happening here. And I don&#x27;t see why&#x2F;how they&#x27;d shard on numbers? +49 -&gt; route to a German server?<p>Why is a phone number (and all the things that come with it: Discoverability for example) a requirement? You didn&#x27;t answer that.<p>Yes, Signal might not be for me. I&#x27;m reasonably sure that I mentioned that before in this thread ;-)