I wouldn't have banned him, but that is different moderation
   style His contributions outweigh his negative behaviors. He
   obviously has a 'problem'; I don't know what it is. But overall,
   his post and response quality is very high and he contributes to
   the overall health of the group.

   But, since we are here, and have the tools to simply remove the
   posts without further consequence, it allows people to get many
   chances to shape up and "get the hint".

   It's not much effort to delete inappropriate posts. That's why
   we have the tools.

   Banning, to me, is either to a: cut off somebody who is
   instantly a 100% problem or who becomes a 100% problem.

   But statistically, he's *mostly* not a problem. But again,
   different moderation styles. I don't mind repeatedly deleting
   inappropriate posts if most of the content they provide is
   healthy and good. There is: authoritarian moderation, which is a
   "3 strikes you're out" and then there is authoritative
   moderation, which is patience, long-suffering, and a willingness
   to walk with somebody as they go through whatever issues they're
   having until they decide to fly right on their own. But then
   again, I see most people as children, including myself, and
   treat them as such Moderation style = parenting style, even
   though I'm not a parent per se*