Just curious, why? Because of the subject matter and links, because it didn't have NSFW? Because the linked article I thought was pretty good discussion material.

Always wondered why one can take the time locking a thread yet not spend 20 seconds to give a reason.

I'm guessing cuz the link links to porn sites? That is what I just found from looking at the linked site.

Either way. Always shitty when there isn't a reason. Not a big deal in a way but still shitty when they're just locked and no reason is given by the locker. Just...common courtesy, man.

I looked at the article on my smartphone and it didn't show any links to porn, just a pretty nondescript, plain looking blog page article. If it shows link banners with porn in it that makes sense, although editing the title to NSFW seems like it would make more sense when considering there's a leaked nude pics thread.

I actually thought for a moment that the mods didn't want to give in to Kim Kardashian's desperate attempt to stay relevant. Not that DVDTalk is the hubbub of activity these days, but it's the effort, not the result that matters.

No interest in the particular thread, so I don't know what was discussed. But even if the mod locking the thread was pressed for time, a short "pending review/under moderator discussion" note would seem to be appropriate.

Yeah, I still don't get why this is constantly an issue with locked threads.

If that was the reason then every thread on dvdtalk would need to be locked.

Somebody posted a NSFW pic in there. Looks like it was removed and mod just closed the thread rather than comment, remove, and risk more.