Hey, sorry I'm a few days late in my reply. I somehow missed your response (reddit might have been bugging up when I went to check my new PMs).

No need to start defining confirmation bias, etc.

Sorry about that. I have in the habit of doing that not usually for the person I'm replying too, but for anyone else who may be reading. Since I'm a default mod, I get in the habit of 'speaking publicly'.

I was proposing that part of it would be to see if TIL is biased on that topic when compared to other subeddits

Unfortunately, due to different rules in each subreddit, I don't think you could compare - the data sets wouldn't be equivalent. For example, since we have a "No Politics" rule, if you were to compare posts about Obama from our subreddit to say, r/Conspiracy, you're not going to find any posts to compare in TIL. Granted, that's a bit of an extreme example, but the general idea is the same. It's difficult to make any sort of meaningful comparisons when the rules of each subreddit are different.

Though you might be onto something with comparing topic within our subreddit (Say, those removed versus those we leave up, or one particular topic versus another topic within TIL). I actually think that might be an interesting thing to follow up on. Definitely worthy of a ToR post.

indicating that mods who had a goal of treating all topics equally could consider it when they decide what actions should be taken, if any.

Normally I would agree with you, I think that's actually a real good idea, but I'm not sure it's necessary. Given the spotlight that's on us and the potential backlash just waiting to happen every second of every day, we're already walking on eggshells 24/7 (believe it or not). I think we're already doing this. :P I personally have a habit of paying extra special attention to topics I might be biased towards. I try to be more 'judicial' in my judgement if the post is in a grey area and I specifically try not to give it any special treatment. Most, if not all of the other mods know at least a little bit about me (my likes, dislikes, profession) so if I were to give those things a pass, I'd look like a bit of a douche-bag to them.

I actually take pride in being able to remove myself, my emotions and my own personal bias from a situation and make the tough call (though that goes both ways. I also have to suck it up and sometimes remove extremely popular submissions for breaking rules which often end up here in this sub ... and knowing full well I'm going to have to deal with all the complaints, attacks and harassment). It's corny saying this, but I feel like I need to lead by example for any of the new mods we may have added, and it's also for myself as well because if I do moderate judiciously and without bias, then I won't be accused of having it later on. It's almost a self-defense mechanism. Consistency is the name of the game, and I do admit we could and need to do a better job at that.

I had one of your mods literally tell me to suck his dick, twice

Grumble... I thought we went over this. :) That mod is no longer with us. The way you say that, it implies he's still on the team. If you would say "I had one of your former mods tell me to..." then I wouldn't get upset. I think it's fair to include "former" if you want to bring that up again.

it's the mods who decide what to remove, and it's the mods who are responsible for clicking delete. You can't pass the buck to your users just because they're the initial source of the reports.

While you are correct, it still means that any data or analysis wouldn't/couldn't indicate mod bias. At the very least, it would make it infinitely harder to prove. All of our modmail reports get answered and points awarded (if you doubt me, create a sockpuppet account or use an already existing one and report a few rule breaking posts). I could, if you want, run a report to see how many modmails we get in a certain amount of time and how many of those go unanswered (but I doubt it's very many, just ones we may have missed during a busy hour, or duplicate reports, etc). Though, I would have to check with the other mods to make sure the numbers would be OK to release publicly.

I guess my point is that we do remove a lot of front page posts, but those that are on the front page are seen more by our users so they tend to get reported more. It's just a matter of circumstance but it's why some posts can slip through the cracks while popular front page posts do not. There's no grand conspiracy, 出る釘は打たれる。Translated: The nail that sticks out gets hammered. :P

Somewhat tangentially to the topic of how to prove or disprove bias, do you not see how a system where your deletions are largely based on the volume of reports could be abused?

Yes. Though, the volume of reports we get aren't at a level yet where we wouldn't notice trends and/or people trying to push specific agendas/goals. It's a concern, but everything still has to be verified by a mod. There may be attempts in the future, but we're fully aware (keep in mind, some of us having been doing this for years upon years.) Coincidentally, we actually just dealt with exactly this situation in r/Videos where someone from JukinMedia created a false report to try to get a submission removed. They even created fake evidence, using a fake twitter account, the whole shebang. Unfortunately, it's a constant battle.

In conclusion, though I'd really like to see mods and users work together to create a study like what we've described

Me too. I may take up the reigns myself and see what I can find. I personally think it would make a great ToR post.