>you deleted a notable, that was called notable and baked, without telling anons in the next bread.
>THIS IS NOT HOW BAKING WORKS.
The above is incorrect. Some clarifying of terms is in order since you keep spreading disinfo in your attempts to stir up FUD here.
Bakers, like all anons, cannot "delete" or edit posts. Only mods can do that.
Mods only delete illegal content and high volume, transparently repetitive spam.
Illegal posting can include publishing of personal doxx of public figures.
8chan's global mods make edge-calls there.
When in doubt, use the report function.
The job of baker is merely to serve as editor of "QR news" – diggs & aggregation – that anons post. Bakers neither create or censor it. Everyone is free to post. All posts remain available for view so long as neither illegal or high volume spam.
Notables merely highlight what baker thinks anons will find most interesting, as a service to increase ease in finding it, not to gatekeep it.
Baker's editor function is an at-will, mutual trust relationship between baker and anons assuming both will communicate in good faith toward upholding our standards of relevant, sauced, novel content in notables.
But we're all volunteering our time, so we also try to be mutually respectful and cut each other slack. Mistakes happen. So do disputes, but its bakers discretion to make the final call. Unless the call is egregiously off-base, anons will support it by consensus.
Anyone who continues to harp on an issue at that point, and harass baker just to induce heckler's veto, is engaging in shilly behavior.
If the heckler eats too much bread and spams doing so, he invites a time-out from BO/BV.
Any serious, persistent problems with a baker failing to uphold our standards and respond to legit anon feedback should be posted to Meta with explanation and linked-post evidence. BO/BV will investigate. But the expectation is we'll work this shit out ourselves and we usually do.
You did the right thing, baker, anons. The post made big claims in accusing criminal behavior. Big claims require big evidence, not a bunch of dots that don't appear to connect.