Let's presume you're right and this is why the channel was legitimately deleted.
Was there a warning? Was there some communication with the owner saying "Hey, what you're doing violates or Ts&Cs"? It seems like if there was, the owner would be tweeting that he disagrees with the deletion rather that completely not understanding why it happened.
Putting more humans in the loop would be more expensive, but it would help end these puzzling situations where creators don't know why they've been told to stop creating.
> Algorithms do whatever humans program them to do, which can be delete, warn, email, slack, or call phones.
I think it's worth noting that algorithms like these are deployed specifically to take employees out of the loop, and adding a communications step would almost certainly pull them back in.
> Communicating which rule the video broke could be done without an employee in the loop.
Potentially, though another consideration the algorithm implementers have is to make it difficult to "game" them. If it provides feedback, you make it easier for someone to figure out what will slip through and subvert the it.
This is why algorithm creators are as guilty as any executive that comes up is with stupidity like this. What happens to executives should happen to algorithm writers!
However, there is still less manual work being down if videos are flagged via an algorithm versus checked one-by-one by a person. Though, results may vary.
Was there a warning? Was there some communication with the owner saying "Hey, what you're doing violates or Ts&Cs"? It seems like if there was, the owner would be tweeting that he disagrees with the deletion rather that completely not understanding why it happened.
Putting more humans in the loop would be more expensive, but it would help end these puzzling situations where creators don't know why they've been told to stop creating.