I really feel that I got the short shrift on this question.
Honestly, it's not a very good question. I posted it because I was trying to post source code to a programming forum on CodePlex, it wasn't working, and the FAQs there weren't helpful. I figured I'd get a quick answer on SO. Another developer on CodePlex pointed me in the right direction, and I answered my own question in hopes of helping someone else.
The question was closed with a single vote instead of the usual 5, as the closer was a moderator. I don't agree with that. OK, I don't make the rules. I tried contacting the moderator (politely) through their web site (since there was no other contact information) and got no response. I tried posting a comment on the post. Another moderator suggested I post it on a beta site I had never heard of.
Finally I flagged the post for review. Initially I decided against posting on Meta, since there were a number of similar posts (and I didn't want another post closed as duplicate).
I came back to find that the same moderator who originally closed the question replied. Is it SOP for a moderator to review his or her own decisions?
Personally I found the tone of the moderator's response offensive, especially his final comment: "Also, I am the true Will."
I'd like to see more checks and balances on these individuals, as well as public faces to them. We have no idea of their real identity (mine's Bill Sorensen, BTW), no easy way to contact them to resolve disputes, and they appear to have little oversight.
Forget the post. This isn't about whether or not it was appropriate for SO. Close it, delete it, whatever. Forget the rep. This question is about preventing abuses of power.
(And as I was named William ten years before "Will" was born, I think I have as much right to the "True" designation as he does.)
EDIT: I deleted the original SO post after thinking over @devinb's answer.