Yes, this is universal blacklist. Both MathOverflow and this site have had problems with this particular person. MathOverflow moderators have, at times, asked to have content blocked preemptively. (I'm not going to be too specific here to avoid making the blocks easier to avoid.) When I add a blacklist item over there, I tend to add it here as well. (Looking ...
Moderators are not everywhere. We are only aware of flags if you raise them.
(I've deleted the posts before you even finished composed your Meta posting here... your "this user" link is already dead.)
What you can do to help:
For obvious spam posts, instead of voting to close, or flagging as off-topic, you should just flag it as Spam.
I want to draw your attention to these two questions:
It seems that 4 users with the names MSc Roberto, Robert PhD, Monsieur_Bobert and Bachelor ...
The answer was flagged by several users as spam, and that caused the answer to be deleted as spam by Community♦.
These flags were of course incorrectly used, since the post is not spam according to the definition used here on Stack Exchange.
Since the spam flags were incorrectly cast, I have cleared them from the post. (It has been re-deleted by the votes ...
There never was an offensive revision of the question.
Some accounts have been used to cast frivolous spam flags to delete it. A CM has looked into things and took appropriate measures.
The question is undeleted again (with the answers of course).
When an account is created with the sole purpose of trolling, spamming, etc, we generally destroy the account. This (as well as deletions of posts by spam flags) feeds information into a system which makes it more difficult for such people to continue posting their drivel on the site. There is evidence that upwards of 80% of all spam attempted to be posted ...
The author of that question is in close proximity (network topology wise) to someone that had been posting spam suggested edits and answers across the network. This is (partly) why we don't automatically purge recent contributions from suspicious origins when they're rejected, there's a small chance that someone might get caught in the metaphorical cross ...
The definition of spam as should be adhered to in the flags is:
A post should be marked as spam ONLY when it contains an unsolicited advertisement.
Jeff Atwood also spoke rather directly about this:
And by "spam" I mean it in the strict traditional internet definition not as shorthand for "I don't like this post."
Linking to several previous ...
There was a user who flagged this as rude or abusive, this induced a downvote, and the account was self-deleted which cleared that flag as helpful and deleted the question.
I've cleared the flag, and the question is now undeleted. If the community so desires, closure and deletion can proceed as usual.
I've seen a couple of other instances of this, and MJD's post is starting to connect some dots.
In going through review queues I see occasionally a message that "the system has detected" that a post is possibly spam or offensive, and that I should review the item carefully (as if other posts should not be reviewed carefully?). In most cases the item is ...