Pretty sure your name was attached to a comment on something to do with Ariel over on hamster. Apologies if i'm wrong but I usually remember names/avatars pretty well .

Well, I normally only comment on pics and vids after I've saved them in my favourites, so have checked them out and can't see anything that would suggest I have, so apology accepted.

I second that, on both sides of the argument. There seems to be a lot of panties in a twist over this, and I don't see why this particular thread merits this much drama.

Thanks for the comment. I'd like to point out that the conversation on this thread took a turn toward the duty of the moderator to ban underage content, which is clearly an appropriate action of the moderator based on Section 5 of the Terms of Service.

I would also point out that I was in no way questioning such an action involving prohibited content since it clearly serves the purpose of rationally and objectively enforcing the Terms of Service. But the issue of the closed thread that I raised in my OP involved no such explicit Terms of Service violation. It simply involved an opinion complaining about excessive gay content on JC. While I don't think the complaint had any merit, neither do I think that a thread in which the subject is raised as an opinion should be locked by a moderator based on his personal whim.

PS: I might mention that over the last four federal election cycles (since 2008 ) during the time I've been an active member of Jackinchat, there had been a tradition that by this time in October, a lively and interesting thread of political opinion had been posted in the Coffee Shop. Such a thread is in full compliance with the requirements of the Coffee Shop forum, and Ben occasionally participated in such discussions. But when opinion threads must match the personal opinions of the moderator, such threads are not possible. (I miss Ben a lot.)

Kent, I can always count on you to get out the soapbox and excoriate me for closing threads "based on a whim" or my "mind reading"...which is all based on your own "mind reading."

The thread in question? Closed for exactly the reason I stated, although by using a casual term such as "trollish" instead of formal language, apparently closing the thread was inappropriate. Others here in this thread have hit the nail on the head...the thread appeared to be created specifically to incite. You say that, "Good moderators ignore such things." Good moderators ignore when someone insults the other members of the board? You further say, "In fact, I think it was about the fact that [Rod] thought it was a repost, and he was personally pissed about it." You're wrong. But, you're indulging in some mind reading of your own here, in the very same post in which you take me (and anyone else) to task, reminding us that we can't know the intent of the OP.

It's also all well and good to wax nostalgic about the "good old days" when the streets were paved with gold, the skies rained cotton candy and cookies, and only threads that violated specific terminology of the TOS and no other rules of the site were closed. But...none of those things ever happened.

Kent, you are and ever have been a valuable member of the board. It continues to sadden me that one difference of opinion on one thread some time ago has convinced you that I have some sort of personal agenda in moderating the site beyond keeping it as enjoyable a place to be as possible for as many as possible.

I can appreciate the sentiment. That's what the "report" button is for. In a peek behind the curtain, there's admittedly some gray area to the so-called "teen" material. The general rule of thumb is to see whether or not a given pic has information to indicate that it's from a source that has any kind of statement indicating compliance with requirements to check and keep models' ages on file. Barring that, if it looks sketchy, it's acted on. But, quite frankly, it's impossible to check every post, which is where that "report" button comes in.

So, if anyone sees anything that they feel should be looked into, it's always been encouraged to report it. And, as a favor, when doing so, it's helpful to get information beyond "inappropriate content" or "spam." The more information available, the better.

To set the record straight, here's exactly what Rod wrote when he closed the thread.

"OP must have double posted, because I could swear I locked it earlier."

Now does this or does this not indicate clearly that Rod thought it was a repost, exactly as I said? So why is Rod complaining about my comment? Was it my further statement that he was apparently "pissed" about it? Would "slightly annoyed" have been a term he prefers? He certainly indicates that he thinks he closed it before, and so he is doing it again now. And there's no indication that he's happy about it.

Rod parses words wonderfully when it suits him, but there is never any word parsing that might provide some explanation and justification when he decides to close a thread. If Rod doesn't personally like the opinion being expressed, it's not allowed here. In this case, Rod was clearly not receptive to an opinion that questioned the significant gay content on the board. So it was closed he says to keep it "enjoyable" here.

As for some more word play about "cotton candy and cookies" and the "good old days," there was in fact an earlier time when Ben moderated the board. And at that time, a thread was never closed except for content it contained which was explicitely contrary to the TOS. Ben never closed a thread simply because he personally disliked it, but that's the ONLY reason Rod closes threads.

This Kent guy sounds like a whiner. The bottom line is, my house my rules! Rod has a job to do. Its so easy not to come to this site if you don't like it. Maybe you're the guy whose thread he closed and you're upset? I see you're just a kid. Grow up dude. Oh, you can reply with one of your 600 word essays but it will fall on deaf ears. I won't go back and forth with you, that's exactly what trolls want.

If I'm just a troll, I've been around here years longer than you have and posted a lot more messages. Since you immediately went to name calling, I should thank you for proving one of my points. As soon as people read something they don't like on a forum, they yell TROLL.

Rod certainly knows that I didn't post that thread, and I resent your suggestion that I did. Did it escape your notice that the individual who posted it is now "unregistered".....and that I'm NOT? I put my name on anything I write. That's why it's so easy to sling your insults at me. For what it's worth, my personal contacts with Rod have always been civil, and our discussions have always involved the issues rather than personalities.

PS: Hmmmmm. Twenty five years of age, two university degrees, and a well paying job here. Any idea when I can start thinking of myself as maybe a "young adult?" As for your advanced age, do you spend a lot of time in your rocking chair on the front porch yelling at teenagers to get off your lawn?

The thing is, as this thread wears on, it looks more and more (to me, at least) that you've a personal axe to grind. I agree with you about name calling, but you don't have to resort to name calling in order to be insulting, mocking, etc., in a much more effective way. You are well aware of that. I see it in your posts about Rob, and it feels like it's personal, not just based on issues. Right or wrong, that doesn't help your case. (FWIW, I've seen it in Rob's posts, and I've been guilty of it...not saying you're the only one)

Maybe it's time to give it a rest, and resume next time you think a thread was closed arbitrarily?

Rod's use of "trollish" i think was an in-your-face way to say that he's in charge here and the actual words of the written rules don't even directly apply as far as the way he moderates the forum. I didn't see a reason to lock the thread, but I saw two sides to the question. The OP raised a valid point that could have been discussed without the name calling we see here. In this case, troll and whiner are the names, and the guy who writes the unpopular comment is told to go someplace else if he doesnt like it here. Id tell the name caller that he could take his attitude someplace else too.

the power is with he who hath biggest stick