I don't think it's possible to apply a rigid standard. If there were, you could conceivably write software that could decide what to do with a post (or hire some folks who work for HMO's deciding whether they'll allow your doctor to prescribe what he/she thinks you need, but I digress....)

Part of what Randy wants us to do is use our judgment, not simply apply a strict set of criteria. This means that sometimes moderators would have taken different actions in different situations. But I believe most of those are borderline ones.

I tend to (in this order) a) ask people to edit their own posts; b) )But when time doesn't allow or the example is egregious, I'll edit it out and leave a "fingerprint." c) Delete entirely in very urgent situations or where, e.g., a & b have been repeatedly tried and they haven't worked to stop a pattern of posting

Again, all of this is not just science, but art: The response one might give to a brand new FT'er who makes a rookie mistake is different from that given to a long-timer perhaps, etc., etc.