<p>Related to</p>

<p><a href="http://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/86717/defining-the-limits-of-self-promotion">http://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/86717/defining-the-limits-of-self-promotion</a></p>

<p>The top two answers to this question were deleted:</p>

<p><a href="http://serverfault.com/questions/100099/there-is-any-monitoring-hosted-solution/100122">There is any monitoring hosted solution?</a></p>

<p>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. <strong>While I don't disagree with this suspension based on the data</strong>, I think in the above specific question those answers are correct:</p>

<ol>
<li><p>they answer the question</p></li>
<li><p>they disclose affiliation with the product</p></li>
</ol>

<p>I have thus undeleted those particular answers only.</p>

<p>My beef with self-promotional folks isn't the promotion itself -- <a href="http://serverfault.com/faq#promotion">this is covered by the faq</a> -- <strong>but that <em>all</em> they seem to do on Server Fault is promote their stuff.</strong></p>

<p>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.</p>

<p>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.</p>

<p>Is there some way we can better educate folks about this before suspending them?</p>