What's our stance on relevant product recommendations? The paragraph in the FAQ is clearly not enough in this case.
As a recent example, a developer of an Outlook plug-in/addon started answering Outlook-related questions on this site. Nearly all of his answers recommend his own product, linking to a specific part of the product web page describing the relevant feature. After he was told he needed to disclose his affiliation, he promptly did so.
AFAICT, his answers are relevant, with almost half of them upvoted (none by me though). In most cases his software works around shortcomings of Outlook. It seems to me (as someone not using Outlook) that his answers are on-topic, useful, and adhere (after a reminder) to the rules. The link to the product page describes the particular feature answering how the product solves the problem.
Still, he was suspended for a week.
Maybe it's because of his one-sided focus on Outlook questions. But then again, you post about what you know, and as an Outlook addon developer, he knows it intimately. There's also one or two answers not about his product.
RelatedRelated, and it seems I'm only on meta for topics like these, but I don't see how the user violated the rules in these. Being flagged for spamming is possible or likely, but being suspended by a moderator is still something completely different.
I'd appreciate if someone could explain to me, how the user violated the rules, and which of them.
