Post History

I don't think it should be called spam. Spam, in the strict sense, is large-volume, unwanted commercial advertisement. For example, if I go to every question tagged Python and reply "Click here to get 10% off my Python course" that would be proper spam. If I go to one question asking about the fastest database and recommend DynamoDB, that might be advertising, but I wouldn't call it spam - it's relevant and low volume.

For actual spam, it's probably best for full mods/admins to deal with it. Usually proper spam is not controversial, everybody can tell it's spam. And the best solution is to check the user's history and bulk delete the spam, not flag and review each post one by one.

Then there's spam in the informal sense which can mean a lot of things, like:

* The post recommends a product
* The post defends a company I don't like
* The post has too much of a pro-consumerist attitude
* The post is too low quality
* The post is too short
* I don't like the poster and I'm sick of seeing him

People are going to use it inconsistently because everybody has a different understanding of what "spam" is (unless you go by the strict sense).

I think for what you want, a better word might be "shill". If someone has reason to believe that a user is being disingenuous out of commercial interest, that seems useful to indicate, and a reaction/comment seems like the best way to do it. Then people can look at the argument and decide for themselves if they believe it.