Why I Think Explanations Should Be GIven for Deleted Threads

[MysticCat]

Well, as I understand it, KillarneyRose asked in my other thread something along these lines:

KillarneyRose: (to MysticCat) Not trying to be snarky but why do you think moderators owe an explanation? The Wall of Shame thread being delete was a hint that such a thread will not be tolerated. I really want to hear your opinion as an older GCer.

Since that thread got deleted before I had a chance to see the question and answer, here is why I think the mods owe an explanation.

The mod needs to be able to explain why such a thread will not be tolerated. "Hints" don't cut it. How did the Shame thread violate the rules of this forum? Deletions without explanations suggest that the rules are whatever a mod wants to them to be. Perhaps it's the lawyer in me, but we would say that appears to arbitrary and capricious. If a mod can't articulate why a post or thread violates the rules of this forum, then the post or thread shouldn't be deleted, and GCers have no basis for guaging what is or isn't allowed in the future. (And FWIW, I would always vote for the threads being locked over threads being deleted.)

As others have said, sometimes it's abundantly clear why a post or thread is deleted. But it wasn't at all clear in the Shame thread. As far as I could tell, the only thing happening there was questioning the actions of some mods. The only hint I got from the deletion of that thread was "Questioning the mods will not be tolerated." I can't find that in the rules of this forum anywhere.

As I said, other forums I participate in not only have the mods provide explanations but warnings as well -- "X violates the rules of this forum. If you continue to do x, action will be taken." I think that's a good thing, both for purposes of clarity of what is and isn't tolerated and for the purposes of encouraging even-handed application of the rules. And it's in the best interests of the mods -- it helps avoids even the appearance of arbitrariness.

The way it's been going here the lately makes it appear that some mods are making it up as they go along and are making decisions based not on actual violations of the forum rules but on on a more personal, "I don't like what you said" basis. Note carefully: I said "appear." I'm not saying mods are doing that; I'm saying that's what it can look like to the rest of us.

Simply put, it comes across less as moderating and more as power-tripping. In my opinion, the mods do themselves no favors by not giving explanations.