Agreed, they should be banned. In an attempt to try to force the hand of moderators I placed a negative tag on a Stake signature spammer that either uses AI or employs others with less English grammatical understanding to write posts for him. The spammer started writing in perfect English complaining at every possible opportunity that he should not have received a negative tag (and was no longer wearing the Stake signature therefore it is safe to say he was kicked out as a result of my negative tag).

I eventually withdrew the negative tag as advised and replaced it with a neutral. The Stake signature campaign spammer immediately returned to the gambling board to spam there after he was wearing the Stake signature again (albeit he was celebrating that 3 members added me to their distrust list because I gave him a negative tag). 

If the Stake campaign manager was operating with a due-diligence policy then the discussion would never have happened. These spammers cannot get on to other campaigns therefore the Stake campaign manager has contributed to the problem by giving them a platform and paying them to spam with farmed accounts. Moderators to not ban signature spammers and that is also part of the problem.

Would other forums (that see themselves to some degree as competition against this forum) allow that to happen on their platforms as their traffic flow increases? I have not studied any of them long enough to know but if they view what is happening here they should at least try to emulate the good parts and dispose of the worst parts.