[hashtagmarkup]

By making the DKIM keys public, you are converting solid evidence of something that was said into something that was either really said, or someone else pretended that they said.

Evidence was destroyed.

[Natanael_L]

No, destruction of evidence involves things like making something impossible to analyze and evaluate. Publication of a key doesn't erase the original messages and does not make it impossible to look into their contents to try to establish authencity by external means. Causing ambiguity is not destruction of evidence.

[hashtagmarkup]

What do you call it when someone pees into someone else's pee sample?

[mthoms]

This describes all encrypted and short lived messages.

Edit: Removed the word "literally" because it was incorrect and caused distraction from the actual argument.

[hashtagmarkup]

It doesn't at all. You're misunderstanding. Or, are you using the word "literally" in the modern sense of "not literally"?