Background Pony Numeral Uno 
"[@Derpy Whooves":](/meta/artists-vs-comments/post/4427159#post_4427159
[bq="Derpy) Whooves"]
>" [@Background Pony Numeral Uno":](/meta/artists-vs-comments/post/4427147#post_4427147
)
> Discussions of meta issues or things like site-wide rules on fanartist's works is never appropriate. Those discussions should happen in the appropriate forum, never on an artist's work.[/bq]
I can't agree more.
[bq="Derpy Whooves"]
>"@Background Pony
>Numeral Uno":/meta/artists-vs-comments/post/4427147#post_4427147
The second example was site staff discussing a moderation action outside of the normal moderation channels, so I suggested that we go someplace private to discuss it.
[/bq]
>
Fair enough. My mistake.
Having a deleted post with no reason given for the deletion makes it look like you're just refusing to discuss the topic of the thread and, without context, it sounds like you're saying the thread topic itself is inappropriate.
You could have avoided the confusion by either leaving the post alone or deleting **both** your posts instead of just the one you thought belonged elsewhere. At the very least, deleting a post for violating a nonexistent rule is just a very poor look.
[bq="Derpy
>
> Discussions of meta issues or things like site-wide rules on fanartist's works is never appropriate. Those discussions should happen in the appropriate forum, never on an artist's work.
I can't agree more.
[bq="Derpy
>
>
[/bq]
>
Fair enough. My mistake.
Having a deleted post with no reason given for the deletion makes it look like you're just refusing to discuss the topic of the thread and, without context, it sounds like you're saying the thread topic itself is inappropriate.
You could have avoided the confusion by either leaving the post alone or deleting **both** your posts instead of just the one you thought belonged elsewhere. At the very least, deleting a post for violating a nonexistent rule is just a very poor look.