92 out of the top 500 Reddit subs are controlled by just 4 people

Short and quick example:

Today I mentioned on the local /r/australia subreddit that it was 45 years ago this week that the film "Mad Max" had been released.

Now "Mad Max" is a famous and well-known Australian film. You'd expect that there would be some interest in that.

This is what happened to that general-interest post:

     post reply   Just ICYMI, "Mad Max" was released 45 years ago this week.
 
     from AutoModerator[M] via /r/australia sent 17 hours ago
 
     This post has been removed as an empty / very-short self-post. Chit-chat is best submitted to the daily thread.
 
     I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically.
     Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
 
     contextfull comments (1)reportblock usermark unreadreply
 

As I said above, censorship merely for the sake of censorship. What's the definition of 'very short'? Two words? Ten Words? One hundred words? One thousand words? Once you put the reason for a post, why should you need to add more unnecessary words to prevent it being "disappeared"?

As can be clearly seen, there is no REAL reason for removing this post.

Next time I have a another 'too short' post, I will try an experiment and add about 10-15 lines of extraneous material to pad it out. See if that changes things.

Revenue is usually before expenses. But it's Reddit not Wikimedia--I imagine they're efficient enough to have the $3.4M without having to put up donation pleas.

I think this is a case where reddit shouldn't listen to mods at all. Because some do use the available tools to randomly ban people some mods do not like. On the contrary, limit the tools to check and approve topics by content.

Those that moderate many subs need to give up some of that responsibility to others. It maybe would improve reddit again.

Bad mods are worse than bad users.