[dsissitka]

He wasn't banned for advertising.

  It wasn't his posts.  Yesterday, he sent a hostile, unsolicited private message to one of our moderators that was forwarded to me.  Among other things, in that message he brought up his attorney, and I have no patience for those who resort to what several moderators (myself included) interpreted as a legal threat (however veiled) as a bullying tactic.
  
  For that, it's at least a tentative ban for him.  And that's as much as I'll say about it, because we generally do not discuss bans publicly.

Jude @ http://www.head-fi.org/t/562736/what-causes-this-amp-related...

[cthalupa]

Ah, yep, you're right - it's been quite some time since everything happened, and I misremembered it slightly. Though, what ultimately set it in motion was the advertising.

  What he took exception to was my request that 
  (a) he remove the link to his blog from his signature, and 
  (b) that he refrain from linking to his blog frequently.

  When he was asked these things, he took great exception to
  the request; and, not surprisingly, even more so when the
  links were removed. What he doesn't post 
  (and what I have the messages to prove, as I'm sure does he) 
  is that I told him he was more than welcome to post his
   information here, instead of posting teasers here and
   then linking to his site to finish. I told him at some
   point he might be able to do that here; but, again, not
   before he had shown that one of his primary reasons for
   being here wasn't to redirect to his blog.