I will first say that I understand the reasoning for posts that include the names of pornographic sites being deleted and I do delete such posts based on the established procedures, but there are two issues here that I think are the main cause for confusion.
The first is that the Offensive rule itself does not actually say that naming pornographic sites is not allowed. The rule itself, verbatim, states the following: "Posting offensive content is not permitted on GameFAQs. This includes linking to or posting content containing sexually explicit material, promoting the sexualization of minors, explicitly promoting terrorism or hate speech, and images or video of real-world violence." Posting the name of a pornographic site is not actually linking to it, so then the question is whether or not it fits under the "posting content containing sexually explicit material." I personally agree with deleting posts that include the names of pornographic sites using the latter part that prohibits posting such content, but admittedly I find it hard to justify that as against this rule as it is written since I prefer to take more of a literal approach based on the actual written text of the rules.
The second issue, which is what was being discussed in that topic and in this one, is that there does not appear to be any consistency with the approach to deleting content that is deemed offensive. It really doesn't make sense to me to say that you cannot name a pornographic site but you can pull up Current Events at any given time and find a multitude of topics dedicated to posting pictures of people's butts and other body parts, along with other topics naming porn stars and posts that contain sexually explicit terms that are not deleted. It seems logical to say that none of these things should be allowed if naming a pornographic site isn't allowed, but I digress.
I realize that this probably isn't going to be very helpful or give anyone a concrete answer. I am just trying to share my perspective and say that I understand why there is confusion about the rule, and I think the inconsistencies that have been pointed out are totally fair criticisms. In short, my point probably boils down to this: I understand your confusion as the procedure also confuses me given that other sexually explicit content seems to be allowed that appears to also be in violation of the Offensive rule if using the same standard that disallows stating the name of a pornographic site.