He doesn’t want a Pit thread about it in GQ, is my guess. I’ve preemptively moderated in exactly the same way in IMHO on occasion.
And…closed.
You can’t do that, because it’s part and parcel of why the thread should have been closed.
Great call, the guy is a shit disturbing idiot, and you just know that the next topic will be even more controversial.
How do you come up with your idiotic topics? Flip pages in your porn mags and point at a word then try to make a question out of the 5 most objectionable words you come up with?
Why do you want to know about little girls and vaginal lube ya sick fuck?
Oh knock it off 
It was answered. I closed the thread.
Pile on, people. I need the points in the yearly Mod Pitting contest.
Speaking of which, I think bubble pop electric makes a good point and that the OP’s question hasn’t really been answered.
Hey kids, what time is it?
Time for the monthly “2.5 is a troll” thread. :rolleyes:
Removing it would have caused a Pit thread too.
Naw, I recognized we were in zugzwang the moment the reports started to pile up. I just figured the chances of a Pit thread were 100% if I closed it, while there was a very small but finite chance of avoiding it by monitoring it.
But you are probably right that it was 100% either way. 
Asked and answered.
Perfect. Now they can Pit me for leaving it open, and you for closing it. Everybody wins!
never mind. why bother.
That’s not an answer to the question you were asked. I’m rather curious myself; why on Earth would you want to know such a thing and what could possibly make you think it was a good idea to ask here?
What point would that be, exactly?
No, no, QED. It was meant like this:
Why do you want to know about little girls and vaginal lube… (Asked)
…ya sick fuck? (and answered.)
Read this thread again from the beginning.
Good one.
Again, that’s not an answer to the question you were asked, twice now.
That someone who menstruates isn’t really prepubescent.
Aw c’mon. You always seem to make it a little more peaceful. 
Um . . . yeah. Over here he finally claims obliquely that the question had to do with the fundie cult in the news. (1) Why didn’t he just say that in the first place? (2) What the hell would this knowledge add to the discussion? Is child rape OK if the girl gets aroused and lubes up?
And what the hell was up with posting the (yes, broken) link to the graphic Wikipedia page which also added nothing to the discussion. Hee-hee, a picture of a hoochie! What grade is he in, anyway? I’m thinking of a number from 1 to 5.
Yeah, yeah, it was phrased as a factual question. So what? It was trolling, trolling, trolling, just more of the same from our bridge-dwelling friend. Tell me again why this twerp is allowed to stay?