And that's sometimes very annoying since those deletions require only one person. No voting, no double checking. Delete-happy mods can definitely abuse it.
As far as mods that tend to be trigger happy, they can be filtered out since mods are elected by the user base. Technically, you can choose who you want spending their waking hours going over questions and filtering out what shouldn't be there.
It's also a community site, not my job. Even if I care a lot, dealing with meta is not worth it in most cases. I look through the close votes whenever I have spare time, and would appreciate if other decisions were also taken in the open rather than by one person who may be especially grumpy that day.
I'm not arguing about contents of the questions - some are stupid and deserve closing/deletion. Just want to make sure those decisions are always reasonable, accepted and possible to revert.
Yes, you absolutely can disagree with and even reverse actions taken by diamond moderators.
Reputation thresholds minimize this problem to begin with. Any remaining problem could be largely eradicated by focusing enforcement efforts on those people instead of exercising hypocritical control over what content the community is permitted to deem worthy.