The Mr Stone thread is a good example of the difficulty.
When he started he immediately received an infraction for link advertising and came under the spotlight to ensure that he did not overtly promote his services (of course it's there in the background as members know because of the badge) and that what he posted would be of interest to members about binaries.
As things progressed he was close but not over the line and it wasn't long before members themselves brought up his services by asking pertinent questions about FSA regulation and such posts as yours
http://www.trade2win.com/boards/first-steps/159794-mr-stone-binary-trading-4.html#post1991790 . At that stage it seemed right that Mr Stone should answer those questions and to have deleted the thread at that stage would have obviously have left them unanswered. From then on the thread became more about Mr Stone and his services as opposed to trading information about binaries.
So, is it now better to let the thread stand so that the criticism and doubt remains there for all to see, or is it better to delete it whereupon it becomes hidden and doubtless many the cry of "cover up" would follow?
In hindsight it should have perhaps been killed at the start, but that is a result of the policy of allowing vendors to post as long as they post things of interest to members (about trading, not their services) and do not overtly promote their product/services, although they may answer questions that members pose. That policy requires that a
thread is given a chance (not "proving himself" as you put it).
Whether that policy is sustainable in its present form we will soon find out.