It's been clear for a while that he/she is posting solely for the purpose of trolling, so instead of just a suspension, why not delete the account altogether?
Too long for comment...
vgv8 has all the hallmarks of someone completely self-taught, and proud of it. Unfortunately for him, his knowledge is full of holes and misunderstandings and he doesn't have the personality to weather the process of having those hammered out of him without some indignation on his part. Okay, a lot of indignation.
In another life I have had to deal with people going through the unlearn/relearn process. It is hard, and when people who have ego invested in the fact that they know their stuff get told that they don't know jack they get defensive. When told they don't know jack in a way they perceive as demeaning, they get very defensive; very defensive people either clam up until they stop getting yelled at or return fire. Vgv8 chose to return fire rather than clam up.
I've dealt with that kind of person before, just not in a technical learning context. What I've found to work best is to take them aside and have a long talk. If you seem like you're actually coming to hear their side rather than the Official Voice Of Orthodoxy to Smite The Unbeliever, they'll vent like a volcano about the injustice they've experienced. This is likely to include unkind language. Once you've gotten through that process and they've calmed down a bit, you can start working on the core of the problem: they don't know that they don't know jack.
Start with a single concept and dig into it. Find out how they think it works and how they came to that conclusion. Then explain how it really works, and why that's the case. There may be defensiveness. You may have to gently invalidate their sources, or explain how their deductive methodology was fundamentally flawed. Repeat for a few more concepts and you stand a good chance of convincing them that they really don't know jack, and that sticking around is actually a good idea if they want to change that.
This is an intensive one on one process that involves a very deep understanding of the topic at hand on the part of the person doing the taking-aside.
The entire StackExchange framework is designed around breaking the very process that can reform users like vgv8. Intensive one-on-one interactivity is exactly the kind of thing that StackExchange is NOT. It is Q/AAAA, not Q/AAA/Q/AA/Q/A/Q/AA.
The taking-aside process is something that can only be done by full up Moderators, and vgv8 is already convinced that the mods are biased against him. The one thing I know of that can cause true behavioral change can not be done because of how the site works. All we are left with is to ban him into the corner until he learns that shutting up in the face of injustice is wiser than railing against it. This is, shall we say, very unlikely with his kind of personality and we're much more likely to get one of two outcomes:
The environment where I faced this kind of thing before did not employ community-sourcing for its administration, which actually made it easier to handle. Here any 3K user can vote to close, and practically everyone can downvote or flag-for-attention, which means that if 'the mods' decide to attempt to reintegrate him into the community the community can vote to have none of it.
Which they seem to have done. When October 13th rolls around some of the userbase heat may have waned, but it will take very little effort on his part to rekindle anti-vgv8 sentiment and he'll get banned again.
Time has passed, a ban has been experienced, and now there is evidence that he has fallen into the second response possibility I lined out above. Once the sock-puppets start arriving, it's time to ban his IP if possible. Good riddance.
I don't believe vgv8 is a troll, merely an uneducated person playing in a field he/she is unfamiliar with, to say nothing about unqualified. Elsewhere vgv8 claims to have 25 years of IT experience, yet every utterance contradicts that claim. This person may possibly be a developer at some level but is certainly not a sysadmin.
The fact that this one individual has created such an outcry and is the only one I've seen suggested for complete removal must be a bit of a clue. While I have little doubt that vgv8 will return under some new name I still feel that in this instance the damage being done is sufficient to warrant a ban, together with a deletion of all his/her posts.
I'm with Farseeker, while also respectful of Ward and Warren's statements. One thing I like a lot about the network is that everyone gets multiple chances to prove that they're beneficial to the community before even getting binned. (Yes, others would argue this, especially on MSO).
I also don't necessarily agree that vgv8 is trolling but it was apparent to me that as much as he thought he was trying to help the level of aptitude just wasn't there. That coupled with a certain level of arrogance when being corrected became degrading to the quality of the site. Answers were just plain wrong and conversations with OP's were completely misleading. It's easy for new people to spot trolls who are intentionally degrading the quality of the site. I think incompetence is much more detrimental, especially to someone who's new to the site or new to the topic they are posting about.
He's been binned here, on SO, on MSO (at one point I believe) and now on SF. I don't agree that this needs to be a permanent thing, though. I'm an advocate for second (and third) chances. That said, however, I don't mind the binning durations getting exponentially greater as Jeff has already stated in other venues.
vgv8 is a conundrum to me. I'm honestly not convinced that they're a troll - primarily because I've seen them make valid contributions in the past.
Sure, they don't understand how the system works and they get a bit emotional about it but that's not a reason for a life-long ban.
Also, vgv8 does come to Meta, so I suggest that you be prepared to have this dicussion with them face-to-face (as it were).
They're a bit like Evan Carrol from m/so.
I'm convinced that vgv8 is not a troll; in the traditional sense (though the question does not accuse him of this; other answers have specifically addressed it as though the question did). He is however very misinformed, unprofessional, verbally abusive, and deconstructive of social norms (see most of his posts for examples).
I am not in favor of a lifetime ban; people do change over time and nothing he has done yet specifically warrants such extreme measures.
I am in favor of continuing to ban him any/every time he gets out of line (and possibly for longer durations each time). This puts additional responsibilities on moderators to inform him why he's been banned (again); but that is the penalty we pay for being publicly accessible (and I very much prefer that we do stay open to the public).
I thought I would add my own answer, partially to collect my thoughts from various comments, and partly to summarize what's been said.
Having re-read some of the previous posts and the recent posts and comments (vgv8 is currently posting as pizdets), I still think they are mostly trolling: I think the intent is mostly to get a reaction, not to have a discussion and gain an understanding.
I understand and appreciate the "no, don't ban permanently" answers, and since vgv8's recent posts as pizdets are mostly reasonable, perhaps the people with more faith that this is mostly a misunderstanding will turn out to be right.
OTOH, the lucidity of some of the pizdet posts makes me think that unfamiliarity with the english language was not an issue in some of the complaints (as has been supposed). Another thing that occurs to me is that someone who loudly proclaims "this place sucks, you guys all suck, I'm leaving!" and then keeps coming back isn't being consistent.