And as others have said, scored well on a screen test; so clearly looks and/or stage presence is part of why she was picked. And something she should be proud of as well. Having known people to both qualify and actually get on the show to compete, my impression is you can be well away from the top in intelligence and “make the air” in reality. If the qualification/testing was blind and all that counted was the final score I would say SlackerInc was worth a note. But since it isn’t ------- I’m coming down on the over-the-top side.
Whenever this subject comes up now, I’m reminded of this thread, in which Chronos suggested an alternative woman to ogle.
When on one side there are women who have repeatedly expressed disappointment with unnecessary comments on the attractiveness of women, and on the other side a group of men ready to argue to the death for their right to tell the rest of us who they find attractive, I see the loss of the first as being worse than the loss of the second.
You feel differently, so have at it.
Because participation on the dope was booming before?
In turn, that reminds me of the golden age of message boards. Back when everyone know how to link to a specific post.
Chronos’ moderation was just fine for where the board is right now. I thank him for it.
What’s the relevance of that, is it supposed to be a “gotcha”?
That was a thread started explicitly about the physical appearance of a broadcaster. I don’t know if such a thread would pass muster now, but in the context of that thread existing, Chronos’ comment was pretty innocuous. The comment that’s the subject of this thread was also innocuous in itself. It’s a recent development that there has been a growing consensus on the board to be more inclusive, that there are plenty other places where men can feel free to share with the world what makes their penis hard. And since (as SlackerInc has demonstrated in this thread) it’s hard to draw a bright line about when things veer into the inappropriate, it seems understandable that the mods might now choose a path to steer the conversation away from the physical appearance of women (and for consistency men) altogether when it’s irrelevant, even if a particular comment is in itself innocuous.
If board policy changes, do you think it’s reasonable to scrutinize every mod’s past postings to see if they were sufficiently omniscient to anticipate future changes in board policy?
Forget it. Any semblance of sanity about this topic has long since disappeared. The board has given way to the snowflakes.
Whatever you want to call it, this woman appreciates that the mods have been trying make the place more comfortable for us. I’ve noticed a difference. Wish we had a thumbs up smiley.
Well, here’s a thread where women specifically said “I’m saying character appearance is relevant in a discussion of a tv show. Full stop”
Thread: Post
Sure, but show biz is about appearance. That doesnt mean guys get to say things like “Nice rack, I’d love to play motorboat with those!” but just a general comment on looking “nice” is not sexist or misogynist or out of place.
You started another thread on those “Manifest” comments in ATMB? I don’t think I even knew that 
Is Ellis Dee a woman/women? I don’t recall seeing that. I may have missed it though.
What are you babbling about?
And after this comment, I’m not really sure why this is still being discussed.
If a mod has come in and left a note that appearance comments are inappropriate, then of course a second one, even if normally okay, is going to get some moderation. It’s gonna look like you’re just poking the bear.
I mean, could you not see the ATMB thread where someone asked “Why was it okay to comment on a man’s appearance but not a woman’s?” If I were a mod, I suspect that was the purpose. Especially if the poster didn’t have a history of making such comments about men.
That said, since other things have come up, I will address one other thing in this thread: a screen test doesn’t mean they’re being checked for how sexually attractive they are. It just means they’re checked for how well they play on screen. Are they confident? Do they look presentable? Are they well dressed? Would people root for them? Do they speak clearly?
I see no sign that Jeopardy adds “and are they conventionally sexually attractive?” to the list.
This thread has gone off into the broader area that doesn’t seem worth discussing. If there had been no previous modding the post referred to in the OP would have been fine IMHO. But since there was a previous modding of a less innocuous comment there’s no point in focusing on this one. We just need to avoid a zero tolerance policy that paints with too broad a brush.
I’m not babbling. Just didn’t know that thread existed. Nothing wrong with it.
And you think that has been avoided? 
No one suggested they had.
If suggesting that one minor reason to continue tuning into Jeopardy is because you find one of the contestants pleasing to look at isn’t allowed, can we talk about the thread in IMHO that is 236 replies long about how attractive a man’s wealth is? Or maybe we can all just calm the fuck down and realize that there’s a reason Jeopardy isn’t broadcast on the radio?