Could a mod have notified me that my post risked being “permanently” deleted?

Question

Is there an unwritten rule that prevents a mod from advising an OP that they had better edit their question/answer because their post risks being permanently deleted? Is there some rule of conduct that says a mod cannot explain to an OP why a post risks deletion before it is deleted?

Yes, there was a link attached to the now-deleted answer on this question. And the reasons for the deletion by one mod is the following:

Why was my answer deleted?

• commentary on the question or other answers

• asking another, different question

• “thanks!” or “me too!” responses

• exact duplicates of other answers
• barely more than a link to an external site
• not even a partial answer to the actual question

If you wish to improve an existing answer, click the edit link beneath it

But the irony is that I cannot do anything to improve it, because it was deleted by a mod. It's gone. I have the 10k rep to see the phantasmagoric post, but I cannot do anything about it. For example, I cannot vote to un-delete it. I cannot ask fellow members on the site to reopen it either.

I am the OP who flagged several "obsolete" comments for deletion because her gut feeling told her that the train of comments was getting too long. I am the OP (read sod) who posted the question, but was not forewarned that all the comments (80% on-topic with the rest being either cheeky or funny) were going to be wiped out. And indeed they were, shifted to a nursing home by a different mod.

I am the OP who pleaded with two users to post their comments as answers, because

1. although amusing and "nerdy", they were relevant.
2. they were said in plain English, which I'm partial to
3. they were both heavily upvoted by visitors.

Those comments have gone to a chat room. Who visits those abandoned chambers? The comments might as well be in limbo.

I retain myself to be a reasonable person, the fifty-year-milestone is fast approaching and yet, I'm treated as a child. Things have to be done behind my back.

Talk to me. Leave a comment, give me the opportunity to improve the post AND to undelete it. If three users downvoted a post because they thought it "didn't answer the question" it meant they didn't understand my aim, and that was my fault; however, the CW post contains excellent links, dictionary entries, and present-day e-magazine articles.

---

Addendum

This question also touches on the role, the authority and responsibility a mod has; it also hints at the unilateral decisions they sometimes make.

Quite often a single mod will decide to put on hold a question that is off-topic, as defined in the Help pages, or unanswerable for any reason; this temporary closure may occur in as little as twenty minutes.

Obviously, if the post is spam, deemed offensive and blatantly off-topic; e.g. a proofreading request, it's a relief to see a "bad" question being dealt with swiftly. However, in the majority of cases, all is not lost. The OP, it is argued, has the opportunity to rectify, and improve his or her question. Users will often post suggestions, and help the OP to finalize that aim. In order to reopen a question put on hold, five users have to cast re-open votes. In the end, it is the community, or the users who frequent the site most often, who approve or disapprove of a question.

But what happens when it is an answer that is deleted by a single mod? I know full well that in my case the community-wiki post earned three downvotes, I can live with that. I can see it as an indication that users disagree with it, or that they disapprove of it. A comment is useful, and one user left such a comment, and probably downvoted the c-w post too. Fair dues. So give me the chance to fix it (I know how to fix bad posts) otherwise, leave me to decide to delete it myself, leave as is, or improve the post. But before it is deleted summarily by a mod.

The answer, two mods have pointed out, is off topic, I disagree. I have K34+ that stands for something. It represents experience, it represents a member who knows the "rules" and has abided by them. I don't want to post a new answer, it was never meant to be a "proper" answer, it was meant as a tribute to all those users who contributed to making a question fun and informative.

---

EDIT November 20 2015

I quit. I'll still upvote and downvote answers and questions from time to time, but as of yesterday, for a variety of reasons; e.g., users (plural term used deliberately here) pretending not to know that an awarded answer is a duplicate; I will no longer post answers or questions.

EDIT 20 December

I've started posting answers again, I like contributing and sharing.
Kill me.

On 18th December I finished editing the CW post, I sincerely believe that it now complies with EL&U standards, and I ask that the post be undeleted by a mod.

Answer 1

Sorry for the delay to my answer. I wanted to give myself time to forget your post so I could take a fresh look at it.

Having reread it I have to agree with Andrew.

As to why I didn't inform you that the answer wasn't an answer. Is that something that needed to happen? I've never done it before, when someone posts and answer that doesn't attempt to answer the question.

We've both been members here for a while, so we know how the site works. If something is posted via the "Your Answer" box and it isn't answering the question, it will be deleted. Bearing in mind that "not answering the question" isn't the same as someone who tried to answer the question and got it wrong.

I honestly can't see how a collection of comments, some of which were just jokes, and the rest being a confusing melange of attempts at answering and counter points, could be thought to be an answer.

Now I've read this question, I get what you were trying to do, but we need a sculpture, not a slab of granite.

Answer 2

It wasn't me who deleted it (for those who can see deleted posts, it's here) but it's not an answer to the question. It's a collection of comments in the answer box, and you have found the justification in the Help: "commentary on the question or other answers".

As if to make that point, it attracted three downvotes before you were saved from any more; and a user actually posted a comment,

This is not an answer and "Community wiki" does not mean "This wouldn't be acceptable as an answer but it's OK to post it this way so I don't get rep for it."

You attempted to justify the post with a response to that comment,

You know, I think these comments are actually helpful, and provide essential background information. A few of the links are very on-topic, and could have easily been posted as answers. I think the downvoters have misinterpreted the objective behind this, admittedly, unorthodox way of using the community wiki. But you see, the reason why this is a CW answer, is NOT because I don't think it is an answer, but because of the word community. It is a joint effort. And why shouldn't other users contribute, improve, or edit their own comments?

...in which you appear to acknowledge that it is not an answer, that the use of a CW post was not obviously what it was intended for, and that the comments could easily have been posted as answers in their own right. However, they weren't; the authors didn't consider them worthy of being an answer, or couldn't be bothered, or didn't have the time.

Comments are comments. They might contain the answer; they might even be a complete answer. But they need to be posted as an answer which answers the question if they are to be retained.

The post was correctly deleted, in my opinion.

The comments are preserved in chat, as far as chat is preserved. Comments are ephemeral and can be deleted at any time. They are designed to allow clarification of a post. They are not permanent, and no-one should have any expectation of permanance at all. Upvotes on comments do not bring immortality. The system does users a favour by allowing comment threads to be removed but still available; that system should not be subverted.

Now, if you would like to create an answer, that's a different thing altogether. You can still see your post, and the chatroom is available too if that makes collecting links easier.

Answer 3

To sum up; Andrew Leach♦ says:

The post was correctly deleted, in my opinion.

Matt E. Эллен♦

Who deleted the answer, says

As to why I didn't inform you that the answer wasn't an answer. Is that something that needed to happen? I've never done it before, when someone posts and answer that doesn't attempt to answer the question.

Consequently, the answer to the question, which no one has really affronted, “should a mod warn a user that their post will be permanently deleted” is “no”.

Answer 4

First of all, don't panic. Wait, it gets worse.

I'm on your side here.

I know it's a lousy feeling. You spend time and energy putting something together and someone just pounces on it and starts doing things to it. They sink their filthy claws, or malodorous tentacles, into it, and just go at it, the unnatural bastards. You're bound to feel violated. Oh yeah.

Listen: I really would like to see that answer of yours, after this kind of promotion. But I realize that's just otiose curiosity on my part right now. Maybe not. Doesn't matter. Not right now.

What does matter is there's gotta be a rule of some kind, or something. Maybe one needs to get past a certain number of those precious rep points, or whatever. But posts by certain people should never be touched except by their authors. Don't kill me yet. It gets worse still. Dark and tortuous are the roads we travel, quirky and unreliable the jalopy.

They can suggest whatever edits they deem necessary, or express derisive incredulity in a few elegantly supercilious phrases. They can ridicule my post, and me along with it. They can mock me to their heart's content. They can even be petty and downvote everything I write here. But they shouldn't be allowed to touch my post, or any other post, if it's written in proper English, or even just fluent and coherent English, except their own. Unless they've asked and received the author's permission. Or the author has expressly asked them to do so. Anything else is worse than reading other people's mail. It just ain't decent, is all.

Listen. I think your questions, answers, and comments are well-written, informative, oftentimes captivating, and extremely valuable to this place. It was a lousy thing they did to you, and I hope that answer can still be recovered, along with the comments. I also think you're a good person. As well as an intelligent one. Please calm down, and stay. Shit happens.