In response to the OP - the word “Napster” was not deleted because everyone knows what and where Napster is. If that word had been deleted, you wouldn’t have been able to tell what the thread was about at all. Further, posting links to Napster will in short order become harmless (if it’s not already - I don’t keep track), because an injunction will prevent them from giving you anything illegally. On the other hand, posting names, or worse, links to sites that are less well-known essentially encourages copyright infringement, and the Chicago Reader will not tolerate it.
Actually I doubt they will be shut down. There is nothing illegal about trading mp3s it is only illegal to trade copywrighted MP3s. The ruling esentially told napster to quit making it so easy to trade copywrighted MP3s, But there are already several workarounds to avoid the ruling and still trade any MP3’s (due to the very topic of this thread I’m obviously not going to go into the specifics, but it’s pretty obvious). I doubt Napsters going anywhere very soon.
Besides, many of the alternatives don’t rely on any cantral server, which makes it practically impossible to shut them down, or control what can and cannot be shared on them.