@Sven Sure sounds like permission to me. Hell, given his last name, that even sounds like the way people who share his presumptive homeland tend to phrase requests, so I'd choose to interpret it as such.

@EEAA Unless they've updated it significantly, the serial d/v script won't catch this kind of retaliatory voting. Deleting the account would reverse the votes, though. :)

If you go back and check now, you'll see that the question and answer has been deleted (by the auto-cleanup scripts). If your answer had a positive score, that wouldn't have happened, and some community members (like myself) will use our votes with the SF Roomba in mind. As in "this answer is not useful because it's keeping the crappy question from being automatically deleted."

@AaronHall Only the person who asked the question can accept or unaccept an answer.

@MarkHenderson Yeah, right. And the moral of the story is: feel free to use SF as a platform for your viral spamming campaign, because you'll get a week's suspension, even if the community is 8:1 in favor of treating a spammer like a spammer.

@MarkHenderson Excluding the hoax question, he's got 11 posts with a combined net score of -2. His spam post got 190k views, and has a current score of +9. Sure sounds to me like his account's primary contribution is spam.

+1. He's a spammer. The fact that he has a handful of upvotes from a handful of other posts doesn't change that. We delete spammers' accounts all the time, and should dispose of this spammer in the same manner we dispose of other spammers.

@MarkHenderson Every mod and ex-mod on here has deleted multiple spammer accounts, so let's not pretend this is without precedent. He's made 11 other posts, only 3 of which have a positive score. Not exactly a pillar of the community, and not the first time a minor contributor decided to go spammer, and got deleted accordingly. A handful of upvotes haven't protected other spammers, and they shouldn't protect this one either. (To say nothing of the giant middle finger he gave us that run-of-the-mill spammers don't.)

@nwildner This isn't the first time we've seen "Halp, I deleted all my things, what do I do?!?!?", (or even the more specific Linux/rm -rf variant) and it won't be the last. So, next time, we can point to the question and say "nope, you're screwed, like this guy. And that guy. And that guy, and..." That's how it helps.

@MadHatter Just saying that the presence of incidental information doesn't give a question value, IMO. Not calling your position dumb or anything like that.

@MadHatter There's incidental information in most every question we get, even the crap ones. That doesn't give them value. For example, you can check in VM disk images to Git. That information does not impart the question with value, however, and despite the ♦-reopen-and-answer that went on there, that question is worthless and should be nuked with extreme prejudice, even though it contains information that is new to all of us.

@DeerHunter I'm a very talented guy. I can troll and trawl at the same time.

@kasperd That would be a ♦-only function. And even then, they can't rename tags, so much as create a new one with the desired name, and merge into it. And doing that has been blamed for at least one outbreak of acute drama in the not-so-distant past... so yeah, leaving it for a mod to do is as good as ensure it won't happen. (Not that I care either way, but, ... FYI.

@Tim is there any other kind? :)

@MichaelHampton However, they have good guidance on tag usage for both their history tag and their command-history tag. To make our history tag into... not a steaming pile of useless, we'd need to make the same distinction, and provide a good description/usage. And for SF, it's more than just "command history" that we might be concerned with, so I don't think it splits cleanly like on U&L, or that it would be easy to explain what a history tag should be used for on SF.