Post History

The ToS address this only very broadly, very generically, and with a heavy reliance on the policies of individual communities and the judgment of their members and moderators.

*"Creating an account just to post spam"* is somewhat hard to define, because this fact pattern depends on the creator's intention and someone acting to the detriment of the site may easily decide to refuse to discuss their own long term intentions, even after those intentions become demonstrated through their behavior, till they receive their first flags, warnings, suspensions, and/or terminations.  The current ToS text does not attempt to define the boundary between any legitimate use of each site, and "spam" (irrelevant or unsolicited content meant to reach search engine crawlers or a large number of users, for the purposes of advertising, phishing, spreading malware or other goals disconnected from the purpose of the site); this is partly because each site defines its own policy on what topics or content genres are considered "solicited".

The clearest cases of "creating an account just to post spam" may arguably be in violation of one or more of the following ToS rules:

> If you sign up for an account and it is terminated due to your misconduct or contravention of these Terms, you may no longer use the Service.

(Doesn't apply to any first time creators.)

> You agree not to use the Service to [...] violate the then-current Code of Conduct of the Service [...] .

The CoC itself is currently rather open ended, mostly just expanding on "Be nice; be respectful".  It also suggests that the key criteria ("nice" and "respectful") are not meant to be exhaustively defined within the CoC text itself:

> We're deliberately not setting out everything that is and isn't allowed - bring your common sense and apply the spirit of this Code.
> [...]
> If you see anything that appears to be a violation of this Code, flag or otherwise report it.

Any account "created just to post spam" (with zero respect for the purpose and policy of the site) is guaranted to attract a steady stream of flags.  It is up to the moderators to make sense of the patterns of flagging to see whether the flagging is substantiated and whether the problem is with only certain parts of the flagged posts, the entire posts, or the entire production of the account, and to take the necessary action.

The network also has a [policy for promotional content](https://meta.codidact.com/policy/spam).  The policy isn't directly referenced from the ToS and that may be affecting its visibility for first time offenders at the moment.

In the now deleted example I used for asking this question, another policy, [guidelines for referencing and quoting](https://meta.codidact.com/help/referencing), were also being violated throughout the entirety of the offending account's posting history.  These two policies are accessible from the help center.

(A yet harder-to-discover announcement which elaborates on AI use (and which partially overlaps with the above referenced guidelines for referencing and quoting) [can be found](https://meta.codidact.com/posts/288194) on the meta; this is the default position of the Codidact team and individual sites may adopt their own policies from it depending on their own needs and experience.)

None of the last three policies are currently referenced from the ToS or CoC, as far as I can see; so there may be even more potentially relevant policies that my ToS-centric research has missed.

To return to the title question: a "spam account" is an account which posts solely or predominantly irrelevant or unsolicited content.  Such conduct is strongly disrespectful and often also in violation of the guidelines on promotional content, other existing guidelines, or, in extreme cases (malware distribution, hate speech,...), of applicable laws.  The current ToS do not address this directly, though.