The original poster goes by the user name Welchie25 and is apparentlyEmma Welcher, a "Social Media Specialist" for The Catholic Review, which is the official newspaper of the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Baltimore. Welchie25 only posts articles from that web site, and appears never to respond to her own articles or the comments people post about them.
However, she (assuming Welchie25 is really Emma Welcher, and assuming Emma is a woman - you can't be sure these days) does not simply post links to The Catholic Review website. Rather, she seems to post enough of the article to understand what it's conclusions are. Therefore, you only need to go to The Catholic Review's website if you want to read the whole article.
I'm not aware that this breaks any forum rules. If it does, then she should be suspended or banned, accordingly.
However, it DOES beg the question whether this is in the spirit of Free Republic. I guess the answer to this question can only really be given by Jim Robinson. What would be the reaction if a "Social Media Specialist" from The New York Times or The Washington Post or Time Magazine did the same - that is, if they posted the meat of the article directly on Free Republic and provided the link to the full article for those who were interested, and then never participated in the discussion. I'm not sure that would be an "acceptable use."
I don't think there is any hard and fast rule about such things, and my goal has never been to get anyone banned.
The fact is we've got a paid pimp here, using FR as a free advertising platform.
This Welchie pimp is NOT one of us, has no interest in Free Republic other than as a place to advertise.
Banned? No. Made to 'fess up, repent and act right? Hell yes.
Since we know that ain't gonna happen, then we are left with shunning and mockery.