Did X just seriously close a thread blaming a guy for a post made THREE AND A HALF YEARS AGO?!

OK, I can see closing the thread (though removing the individual post would make much more sense), but calling out the member and chastising him about being "still not mature enough to have one now" years after the post is made seems just a trifle ridiculous, don't you think?

I didn't notice the offending post was from 2008 when I first saw it.

Yeah, I would've made the same point had the thread not been closed.

I don't know why clothed boobs are so offensive, but I suppose in the past the gif threads always became nothing but tiresome jigglefests, which is why the site management cracked down.

Noticed that as well.

I'd like to thank the person who sent me a PM pointing out that it was an old post. That helped get my attention more than the posts here.

One wonders what causes a person to dig up an old thread like that and resurrect it.

And the reason for the new one being closed? Pick one:

A) The offending (last) post actually did show (kind of) boobs and it was closed for someone being a smart aleck.

B) Because inevitably some jackass will post some ridiculously offensive (at least to the rules) gif, all future gif threads will be closed preemptively to prevent said jackass from striking.

Just curious because I often thought about starting another thread of funny/interesting gifs and appealing to the masses to please get their jiggly fix elsewhere.

Are we allowed to create a new gif thread? I appreciate all the rules concerning the jiggling of skin because I do most of my browsing from work, but why can't we give it another shot? Didn't we have the same problem with the pic threads a couple years back?

No new thread until the mods have finished discussing the way this'll be handled going forward.

And, yes, picture threads have been a perennial PITA in terms of moderating.

Fortunately [‽], I'm not often called into Other in a moderation capacity because, if it were down to me, I'd probably be handing out lengthy suspensions to the line-crossers who spoil it for the rest of you in these kind of threads. The envelope-pushers, too, deserve their share of the blame...

I think most of would prefer to have had you moderating Other and suspending people Benedict.

Then again, on the other side of the coin, it's pretty weird how a site that has a prominent link to adult dvd reviews on every single page of the site doesn't allow clothed bouncing boobies.

/\ Don't forget this one...

When a decision is made, I'll announce it here.

In the meantime, if anyone has a beef with any particular aspect of how the site is financed, please take it up directly with Internet Brands.

Thank you in advance for your cooperation and understanding.

The Other forum mods have confirmed that they are fine with an orderly pair of "one and only" animated and non-animated picture threads.

The main proviso is that those DVDTalkers who don't like the SFW/no-nudity rules realise that they will be named, shamed and subject to administrative action if they decide they know better and choose to cross the line or to take up excessive moderator time by wilfully skirting just along the edge of it. Them's the rules.

Finally, as mentioned above, anyone who doesn't agree with IB's advertising policy remains at liberty to address any queries/concerns in this regard directly to IB. We're not ducking the issue but, essentially, it really isn't something that we, as mods, are in a position to address.

Thanks to all, in advance, for their cooperation and understanding.

Thank you