Return to Question

Related to

Defining the limits of self-promotion

The top two answers to this question were deleted:

There is any monitoring hosted solution?

The accepted answer's account has 19 of 20 answers deleted, all for promoting the same product, his product from his company. This user was subsequently suspended. While I don't disagree with this suspension based on the data, I think in the above specific question those answers are correct:

1. they answer the question

2. they disclose affiliation with the product

I have thus undeleted those particular answers only.

My beef with self-promotional folks isn't the promotion itself -- this is covered by the faq -- but that all they seem to do on Server Fault is promote their stuff.

If they had a more balanced mixture of genuine participation, and some REASONABLE, ON-TOPIC, DISCLOSED promotion, then I would not be opposed to it.

I have unsuspended the user in question because he has a number of valid questions at least and I strongly encouraged him to answer this post on meta.

Is there some way we can better educate folks about this before suspending them?

Related to

Defining the limits of self-promotion

The top two answers to this question were deleted:

There is any monitoring hosted solution?

The accepted answer's account has 19 of 20 answers deleted, all for promoting the same product, his product from his company. This user was subsequently suspended. While I don't disagree with this suspension based on the data, I think in the above specific question those answers are correct:

1. they answer the question

2. they disclose affiliation with the product

I have thus undeleted those particular answers only.

My beef with self-promotional folks isn't the promotion itself -- this is covered by the faq -- but that all they seem to do on Server Fault is promote their stuff.

If they had a more balanced mixture of genuine participation, and some REASONABLE, ON-TOPIC, DISCLOSED promotion, then I would not be opposed to it.

I have unsuspended the user in question because he has a number of valid questions at least and I strongly encouraged him to answer this post on meta.

Is there some way we can better educate folks about this before suspending them?

Related to

Defining the limits of self-promotion

The top two answers to this question were deleted:

There is any monitoring hosted solution?

The accepted answer's account has 19 of 20 answers deleted, all for promoting the same product, his product from his company. This user was subsequently suspended. While I don't disagree with this suspension based on the data, I think in the above specific question those answers are correct:

1. they answer the question

2. they disclose affiliation with the product

I have thus undeleted those particular answers only.

My beef with self-promotional folks isn't the promotion itself -- this is covered by the faq -- but that all they seem to do on Server Fault is promote their stuff.

If they had a more balanced mixture of genuine participation, and some REASONABLE, ON-TOPIC, DISCLOSED promotion, then I would not be opposed to it.

I have unsuspended the user in question because he has a number of valid questions at least and I strongly encouraged him to answer this post on meta.

Is there some way we can better educate folks about this before suspending them?

Related to

Defining the limits of self-promotion

The top two answers to this question were deleted:

There is any monitoring hosted solution?

The accepted answer's account has 19 of 20 answers deleted, all for promoting the same product, his product from his company. This user was subsequently suspended. While I don't disagree with this suspension based on the data, I think in the above specific question those answers are correct:

1. they answer the question

2. they disclose affiliation with the product

I have thus undeleted those particular answers only.

My beef with self-promotional folks isn't the promotion itself -- this is covered by the faq -- but that all they seem to do on Server Fault is promote their stuff.

If they had a more balanced mixture of genuine participation, and some REASONABLE, ON-TOPIC, DISCLOSED promotion, then I would not be opposed to it.

I have unsuspended the user in question because he has a number of valid questions at least and I strongly encouraged him to answer this post on meta.

Is there some way we can better educate folks about this before suspending them?

Related to

Defining the limits of self-promotion

The top two answers to this question were deleted:

There is any monitoring hosted solution?

The accepted answer's account has 19 of 20 answers deleted, all for promoting the same product, his product from his company. This user was subsequently suspended. While I don't disagree with this suspension based on the data, I think in the above specific question those answers are correct:

1. they answer the question

2. they disclose affiliation with the product

I have thus undeleted those particular answers only.

My beef with self-promotional folks isn't the promotion itself -- this is covered by the faq -- but that all they seem to do on Server Fault is promote their stuff.

If they had a more balanced mixture of genuine participation, and some REASONABLE, ON-TOPIC, DISCLOSED promotion, then I would not be opposed to it.

I have unsuspended the user in question because he has a number of valid questions at least and I strongly encouraged him to answer this post on meta.

Is there some way we can better educate folks about this before suspending them?

Related to

Defining the limits of self-promotion

The top two answers to this question were deleted:

There is any monitoring hosted solution?

The accepted answer's account has 19 of 20 answers deleted, all for promoting the same product, his product from his company. This user was subsequently suspended. While I don't disagree with this suspension based on the data, I think in the above specific question those answers are correct:

1. they answer the question

    

2. they disclose affiliation with the product

    

I have thus undeleted those particular answers only.

My beef with self-promotional folks isn't the promotion itself -- this is covered by the faq -- but that all they seem to do on Server Fault is promote their stuff.

If they had a more balanced mixture of genuine participation, and some REASONABLE, ON-TOPIC, DISCLOSED promotion, then I would not be opposed to it.

I have unsuspended the user in question because he has a number of valid questions at least and I strongly encouraged him to answer this post on meta.

Is there some way we can better educate folks about this before suspending them?