There are two ways to start a thread
1. Neutrally, that invites discussion
2. Evangelised, that exist to push a notion or agenda
I suggest you learn the difference between the two. Because threads that fall into category 2 are likely to continue being closed. As always the mod team is unsympathetic to those who bait their hooks. You catch what you fish for. The fact you use 'ponies' and 'xbots' in the first place tells us everything we need to know, and that we are right to trust our instincts with posters like yourself.
I know the difference quite well. Since the thread title was deleted I do not recall the exact wording. What I do remember is that the title was quoting the words from Jeff. The title went something like this: "Giant Beastcast: Xbox Series X gets "toasty" aka really hot during standby". Something to that vein. That was to me, a fair interpretation of his word and overall message in that video.
The thread had neutral polling:
113 users took part. Votes were widespread in 6 options.
Which is to say that the thread was open to opinions that differed from my own interpretation and users were free to vote on that after watching the video OR reading the transcript I provided for those who couldn't watch the video for whatever reason.
As an OP I did my job. Within the body of the thread I reported the news and set the table for debate. People were free to interpret the words from the OP(video, transcript etc) and come up with their own opinions.
"The SSD being the only issue and the only proper interpretation" was vigorously debated and vouched for by some xbox fans. And they had the floor to make their arguments. Although many chose the way of throwing insults, harassment, thread whining and used bad faith argumentation to frame the topic and get their way..... but I already said that, and it's no news to anyone who read that thread - it's in plain sight. Plenty of ban worthy, warning worthy offenses there. But that's not my job - that would be yours and your fellow moderators. Which is why I ignored most of the incoming my way while I engaged some with cool and calm.
What is unreasonable is to say that I misrepresented the whole thing about the SSD and didn't set a neutral table. Not only that but to cite one possible interpretation (and use that to close the thread), and misrepresent the thread as if I denied such possibility, is to me, not only wrong, but absurd and far cry from neutrality (arbitrary).
Which btw is just arguing semantics. If the SSD gets hot, the boards and some of the other components are also hot - the console is therefore hot, requiring cooling. As Jeff said in the video: "It seems like this thing might be doing something while you're not using it
to the point where it needs to exhaust heat" (in standby). In other words latching to that narrative is really of no consequential significance other than pointing a symptom. The problem or potential issue, being unknown.
But to be fair to varying interpretations I made the poll with those 6 options. Because as you said a good OP thinks of potential differing interpretations than his own. But it's clear some posters simply had just one intention - close discussion.
I continue to repeat that the grounds in which that thread was closed was rather poor. As it was explained to me at the time and as it's being done so now it's still poor. It's clear that it's using an opinion, an interpretation of the words in the video as an excuse, a technicality, an exercise in argumentation, to close the thread and shut down discussion. And I'm not the only one that sees it for what it's. To prescribe my bias as a deflection does nothing to present better argumentation as to the thread closure.
What has happened since then is that discussion on this topic has been lessened on the fear of mod abuse taking sides as the bodies pile up. Despite posters with opposing views being just as nasty with agenda's... going away unscathed in heated debates. To not sugar coat things: there the impression that a lot of BS is going on behind the scenes. That suppression of discussion on this topic is taking place for poor arbitrary reasons. Whether that is the moderation staff intent or not thus becomes somewhat inconsequential. Results matter too.
However, you are right, this place exists to have discussions, not post the equivalent of tweets that basically paint your favourite box in a positive light. Or to repost news articles because they can be aligned to push a point of view you like to espouse. A good thread opener should be neutral, factual, set context and be counter balanced with control statements and highlight gaps/deficiencies in the source. You start a thread about 'clickbait bloggers' fishing for viewers who obviously over react for the drama, yet fail to state the differences in the reaction and statements of the box and the SSD. You fail to provide any control data about how hot the average NVMe drives get for comparison or heat dissipation statistics. You fail to mention if there is a comparison between current market devices made (e.g. mobile phones), or any real world comparisons drawn so people can gauge how credible it is. All this fell to the roadside because you just wanted to start a topic that said one console got hot, let's sound the alarm bells and get one over on the other side. Similarly we have no time for those who said the PS5 was quiet because the one on the desk was off and it was acually another PS5 wired into another room.
Obviously this is a lot to ask for every thread so we don't. But we do ask that in certain cases the bias and evangelism is taken out the situation when you start a topic that is likely to be contentious. As an example, look at the effort Bo_Hazem put into the pixel counting thread. This was one such topic that caused massive arguments simply because of how it was initially started. One of the mods reached out to Bo I (believe, might be the other way round) and the new thread is excellent and fostering heathy discussion. The bottom line is if threads are started ambiguously, reactionary or antagonistcally then you leave the decision on whether they should remain open to us. Some may be fine, people may ignore the bait, people might just choose to discuss anyway - however in those threads that derail because of the framing then yes, they are likely to be closed and you are likely to be asked to learn a lesson from it.
That's indeed a lot to ask.
If that criteria was enforced on Gaf; discussions would be more or less dead on an infinite number of topics - including technical ones. Majority of Gaf is tech illiterate, and doesn't have specialized knowledge on these topics. Even those that have some knowledge do not have access to info to specifically discuss with 100% certainty. Having absence of this knowledge does not mean a user can't make a thread about news, or hands-on experiences or tech or whatever else. Which is what is common place on GAF every single day.
As an OP I presented the topic, the user experience and set the table. Anyone was free to contribute with their opinions, specialized knowledge (if in possession) etc.....to make their arguments either direction. Some users suggested it could be faulty hardware and I included that observation quickly in the poll. I provided flexibility.
The reason given for the thread closure looked and appeared arbitrary in nature, based on an interpretation, made with the intent to mock the OP, and to set a warning to others, which has had the ultimate result of suppressing discussion and fear.
There is no lesson to learn here for me. There are lots of ways of closing a thread and letting me know what may be the issue. Mockery and arbitrary opinion is just a brute's tool. Not that I see anything wrong in the title itself (as I've explained - the SSD is a merely a symptom - to make it all about the SSD in the title is being "un-neutral"). The body of the thread and polling in itself are as neutral as they come for reporting news.