Dale M: Stop deleting answers which are not yours

Question

Yesterday a user submitted a question regarding his draft of a contract. I was able to post an answer before the post could accumulate five VTC. There was only one VTC and the post was closed by a moderator. This is not the first time this happens and I think this question falls under feetwet's presumption of mods being scrupulously open and objective to scrutiny.

Not only was the post closed, but my answer was also deleted. For those who cannot read the contents, the answer at issue is:

This post is hidden. It was deleted 12 hours ago by Dale M.

I added this section to our contract, do you think it is okay?

The section altogether is too repetitive. Although not necessarily wrong, being so repetitive is pointless and renders the whole contract harder or tiresome to assess.

The semantics of the first paragraph is odd. The expression "even though" is misapplied. The purpose of that expression is to avert a conclusion or understanding that typically would follow from the premise that "even though" encompasses. Since the premise "the contractor [...] does not [materially] contribute to the creation of the work" already is consistent with the notion that he would not be entitled to IP rights, there is no need for a rectifying element such as "even though".

If anything, keeping "even though" in that paragraph might enable the counterparty to devise some convoluted argument that defeats your intent. Instead, consider stating that the contractor agrees that neither he is materially contributing to the creation of the work nor would he in any event be entitled to the IP rights.

Which court should be responsible and have jurisdiction over any possible case?

Since the parties are located in different jurisdictions, you might want to specify in the contract which country's/state's laws are to be applied in the event of a dispute as well as the forum & venue where the disputes (if any) would be litigated.

Why was this answer deleted? Where in that answer is the insult, the obscenity, the mockery, or even the lack of substance? The answer clearly addresses the OP's inquiry and contains no elements that would justify deletion. The answer ought to be reinstated.

One can attest from Economy SE, Philosophy SE, Hermeneutics SE, Money SE, Music SE, and many other SE sites, that when a post is closed as "off-topic" the answers that were posted are not deleted. That was the case also on Law SE and this changed.

These answers from posts closed as off-topic or otherwise were not deleted. Please respect the fact that many of us spend thoughtful effort in our contributions.

(The following renders my prior remark of "worse than vandalism" a moot issue and will be of interest to users: I figured out that by typing deleted:yes in the Search field, a user can get the list of that user's contributions which have been deleted, and accordingly ascertain when these were deleted and by whom.)

Arbitrariness and moderation are incompatible.

Answer 1

I have been critical of some uses of the "specific legal advice" closure reason, as can be seen in this meta question and its responses. But if there was ever a question clearly falling under this rule, the question referred to in this post is it. I gave the initial VTC, and I think the prompt closure was appropriate and indeed anything else would have been unjustified. While the poster (or anyone else) is free to attempt to edit the question to make it on-topic, I don't see how that could be done without essentially rewriting the question totally, and any such rewrite would make the answer that was deleted not responsive.

One of the reasons for this rule is specifically to prevent posters from relying upon unqualified advice on matters where they really need proper legal advice. Another is to prevent accusations of Unlicensed Practice of Law (UPL). When a response (answer or comment) is well over into the UPL zone, as this answer was, promptly deleting it is appropriate, and indeed I think it is required by the site rules. I would have done the same if I were a moderator. I would have flagged the answer for moderator attention had I noticed it.

IMO the rant in the question is not justified. Deleting inappropriate posts is part of what moderators do. In some cases this tool may be used excessively, but this is not one of those cases. Protecting a poster from probable reliance on this sort of post is a proper concern, and protecting the site from becoming a venue for UPL is another proper concern, and answers to such questions encourages them.

I understand how frustrating it may be to have a post deleted, or even to have a question closed after responding to it, but that is part of the way this site works.

Answer 2

The question

This question asked directly for a review of proposed contract clauses the OP had drafted themselves. It was also apparent that the OP was likely to act on any responses they got.

It was 100% off-topic as asking for legal advice and this was clearly obvious. There is no doubt in my mind that the question should have been closed ASAP and I stand by my decision to do so.

The answer

The answer was not deleted because the question was closed. As of last Sunday, 6 June 2021, when the data dump happens, you have 65 undeleted answers on closed questions - none of these has been deleted.

It was deleted because it clearly provided legal advice by suggesting edits to proposed contract clauses. While many answers here nudge that line, this one was clearly over it. In my opinion, there is a not-insignificant chance, given the naivety of the question, that the OP might act upon it. The basis for deletion of the answer was that it was "extremely off-topic" - the same is true of the question but the question, once closed, is not potentially harmful, the answer is.

"a mod's removal of others' answers is shady and quite lacking in transparency"

I am not responsible for the way Stack Exchange implements its code. I was unaware that authors are not notified of deletions. In future, I will leave a comment to the author.

I will not stop deleting answers (or questions) that I think should be deleted

You see it as an abuse of privilege.

I see it as the discharge of a responsibility.

Stop the personal abuse

Look, I don't care if you want to rant at me - there is a circle of people whose opinions I value: you aren't in it.

You don't agree with the way I moderate: fine. I'm open to an inquiry as to why I did what I did and I'm open to professional criticism and growth. This question was your opportunity for that. Instead, you unloaded a torrent of ill-informed, assumption-ridden invective accusing me of malice, favouritism and arbitrariness.