JR> Thank you for your message.  However, you selectively
 JR> quoted my reply to another message.

Yes, John, I quoted the offending paragraph, to show you and others exactly
what the problem was; here it is again:

===
 JR> These are all reputable modem makers.  Diamond has a three
 JR> year warranty with no extra charges, (unlike some such as
 JR> Mike Bourne Electronics who advertises a 5 Year Warranty,
 JR> but after you buy and open the box you find that anything
 JR> over two years requires extra payments).  Diamond also has
 JR> a 14 day No Questions Asked money back guarantee for direct
 JR> sales.  Surely only a reputable company could offer these.
===

 JR> 1) I was NOT "touting for business".
 JR> 2) I was not "denergrating a competitor"

You were doing both.  From the Concise Oxford Dictionary:

"Tout v. & n.  1. v.i. Solicit custom, pester possible customers
with requests (for orders); [..]  2. v.t. Solicit custom of (person) or for
(thing) [..]"

"Denigr|ate v.t. Blacken (fig.), defame; hence ~ator, ~ation [..]"

The paragraph I've requoted above clearly seeks to put your company and its
products ahead of a competitor's; it clearly seeks to induce people to buy
your products rather than those of a competitor you've chosen to name. 
You've also made references to another competitor, regarding their Austel
approval status, in another series of messages.

This behaviour, I will _not_ repeat again, is forbidden to vendors here.

 JR> I was replying to a very rude and basically silly message
 JR> regarding Diamond modems and Taiwanese modems in general.

Vendors posting in here have very special responsibilities.  If people
can't discuss Diamonds or any other brands in here, including the service
they are likely to receive, without vendors or their representatives
interfering with that discussion to promote (or defend) their products,
then it's the vendors who'll have to go.  Most vendors, fortunately, know
this all too well.

 JR> I pointed out a fact about the supposed warranty on Mike
 JR> Bourne modems. Surely the buying public should be warned

It is not your place to do anything here but provide support on requests
from customers for configuration etc, to assist them to get modems they've
already paid for going properly.  That is the only basis on which vendors
may post to this conference, apart from general discussions on modem
technology in which they do NOT promote their own (or put down others')
products.  You've stepped over that line - it is NOT your place to 'warn'
anyone off your competitors.

 JR> Partly beacause I was warned about your "unreasonable
 JR> nature" especially regarding Diamond modems (Ben Kelly and
 JR> Ian from Loadstone told me) I am espessialy careful in this
 JR> echo to "go by the rules".  Please do not be unreasonable -

Ben Kelly - who lied shamelessly and more than once in this echo that he
was just a customer, yet who answered the phone when I rang the business he
was trying to induce people to patronise, admitting to being its
proprietor?

The same Ben Kelly who said, when challenged about lying to the
participants of this conference for his own commercial advantage, that
'everyone does it', conceding when pressed that by 'everyone' he was in
fact referring to you?

As for Ian McWhirter, he's already offered me his support, including denial
of access, if you're again found to be in breach of the rules of this
conference.

The next message you post here that demonstrates, to my satisfaction, that
you are unable or unwilling to follow this conference's guidelines - that
have the voting support of (I do believe) most of the participants here -
will occasion you having signed yourself out for a second term.  Your
choice, but just once.

I also believe that I have been more than reasonable, and so do some others
who've netmailed me over the last while.  If you have any further response
to make to this matter, make it only by NETMAIL; this subject is closed
here.

Ian (moderator)

--- MaltEd 1.0.b5