🚀 go-pugleaf

If I might reply - the above matter was a pretty prime example of crossing a line which gets harder to define the closer you are to it.

Perhaps there are two basic scenarios.

In the first, a question is asked which can best be answered by mentioning a complementary (add-on, plug-in, or the like), or even competitive product. Even Adobe wouldn't claim that their products have all the best of all possible features in each software sector.

In the second scenario, a product is mentioned in the first message of a discussion - in essence, the purpose of the post is to draw attention to the product, and in that situation it would normally a complementary product rather than a competitor (unless derogative to the competitor!). I'd examine such a post much more carefully to consider whether it crossed the line.

In either scenario, I think one has to examine the underlying intent of the post - is it bringing relevant information to the notice of other members, such that most members would probably be glad it has been posted? If the message is from someone who has a commercial interest in the product, have they made that completely clear? Is the person mentioning the product a contributing member of the forum or only there to push the product?

To some degree, mention of freeware programs can be examined in the same light, although it's less likely that the purpose of the mention is (by definition) for financial gain.

The forum rules which cover this matter are there to fall back on, but on top of that there's a straightforward issue of common courtesy (to Adobe who fund these forums), and it's also a matter of commonly-understood 'fair dealing'.