Why do 'ccntroversial view' threads get closed so quickly?

People just dont like unpopular opinions that clash with theirs. Honestly as simple as that

Have seen this happen before, but specifically with a very recent one expressing a particularly controversial view about 9/11.

I'm not exactly saddened at threads often being shut down, some of them clearly were posted to express an opinion that would deliberately upset people.

But there's a fine line with these sorts of things and it's hard to tell sometimes whether it's a dividing view that can be argued around or just a plain incorrect comment to deliberately troll and upset people.

That's how I feel with the recent post that didn't stay up for more than a few minutes . The view expressed in short form was that America deserved 9/11. On one hand, I completely understand why it was taken down since it could point to a terrorist sympathiser. And by no means do I agree with it, it's incredibly disrespectful, but there would've been opportunity to discuss things if the thread remained open. Conversation about the U.S' foreign policy , civilian casualties in the middle east etc. could've been had, whilst affirming that the thousands of deaths can't have been justified.

Overall, I'm interested in how far the Community Guidelines can be stretched, especially since they're a bit vague in this respect. To keep this a safe place to have conversation, of course deliberately offensive / upsetting views like racism, homophobia, sexism etc. are grounds for threads to be deleted.

But there's a lot of grey area and I'm wondering where moderators draw the line as a collective or individuals : what if a thread argued stereotypical gender roles were better for society? That BLM has gone too far? Trans athletes shouldn't be able to compete with the biological members of the gender they've changed to? These are controversial views, but there's a lot of talking points and debating to be had.

Sorry for the length! This would just be something I'd like to have clarification on as a user.

I suspect it’s because they’re not started in good faith to foster a discussion, but rather to list some ‘edgey’ views to wind people up.

Yeah, I'd see why in this specific example that might be the case. It's hard to suss out tone from text and erring on the side of caution is probably the safest bet, though it has caused confusion for me a couple of times prior.

I don't think having a controversial or outlier opinion is the issue, it's the nature of the post and what the OP wants to get out of it.

"I appreciate this is controversial but Al Queda said their motives were XYZ. How do you think American policy XYZ could have set things into motion..." is not likely to offend or get reported.

"Let's all list our most controversial view, here's mine..." is a just daft.