First, I need to explain what Leoparis did, then I'll explain what I did in response. Then I'll explain why I did it, why that was wrong, and finally, I'll explain what I should have done.
It won't take long.
A few days ago, Leoparis made several posts in the Issue Analysis forum, dealing with a Deadpool run from 2013.
A typical post would be in the form of the book title and issue number, (e.g. Deadpool vol 5 #17), followed by a list of characters who appeared in the issue, in an MCP-style format. For illustration, something like:
I deleted these posts. Here's why:BILBO BRANNIGAN
DP5 17
DEADPOOL
DP5 17-FB
DP5 17
GRANDMA GERT
DP5 17
I didn't, and still don't, believe that these were "issue analyses"; I maintain that they were simply character lists, repackaged from posts in the Character Watch forums into an MCP format. To be fair, Leoparis did include links back to those character watch posts, but since it wasn't providing any tools for placement of the appearances, and was telling us things we already knew from the character watch, I deleted them.
Now, there were a couple of posts in this series where he did include some chronological notes and analysis. Because I thought he was contributing something to the discussion, those posts remained.
So there's the distinction: If he provided some chronological notes, I left them; if they were simply lists, I deleted them. That was the reasoning.
But that's not a good reason. There are plenty of posts in the forum that don't provide new information, and they're still here. You see, I was holding Leoparis to a higher standard than anyone else, and that's not fair, nor right, and an unfortunate use of my authority.
So I apologize to you, Leoparis, for my hasty trigger finger.
What I should have done was to move those posts to the Character Watch forum, and place them as replies to the original subjects. I'll try to exercise more discretion, in the future.
