It’s made pretty clear that their motivations are entirely internal. This seems more like an artist defacing their work because they feel strong negativity towa

It’s made pretty clear that their motivations are entirely internal. This seems more like an artist defacing their work because they feel strong negativity towards it. He says the original story was written out of depression, so it seems reasonable to conclude he was maybe suicidal at the time, no longer is, and feels repulsed by seeing his own suicidal ideation reflected back at him. That’d be an understandable reaction. The only issue is that the work was already shared with the world and copies sold. Ethically, he's fine to change future versions, but eliminating the version that people already paid for crosses a line. It seems like consumers should be allowed access to at least whatever version was available when they made their purchase.