Not to derail things further, but can you provide us more details about this astroturfing? How do you know who this person is? What is the background story here?
Unfortunately I can't give details to you without also giving them to astroturfers who would use them to make HN worse. Here are a couple of previous examples though:
I'm actually quite interested in what about this comment rates the label of astroturfing. Is "astroturfing" now like "gaslighting", that is a word that has lost whatever objective meaning it once had? Are all people with a financial stake in Google required to disclose that at the end of their remarks? If so, dang would have a field day banning accounts that post in Tesla threads.
As a person who is now on my 50th HN account, I find the moderation policies here capricious and arbitrary.
It's not about the content of any single post; the point of astroturfing is to make that indistinguishable. It's about patterns of behavior, some of which are publicly visible and some not. When someone is using HN to advance the interests of a particular corporation, that's not good-faith community membership, and it breaks the organizing principle of this site—intellectual curiosity—egregiously.
Re your accounts, I'm not sure what has felt capricious and arbitrary to you, but from my perspective it's simply a matter of following the site guidelines and using HN in the intended spirit. We discussed that at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22173082 (but also https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22359424). If there's some aspect of moderation that still isn't transparent to you (or anyone!) I'm happy to do my best to explain, and even happier to correct any mistakes. But it would be better to send those to hn@ycombinator.com.
"Astroturfing" is a political concept. It's about making a top-down initiative appear to be a bottom-up one instead. Fake "grassroots". AstroTurf, see?
What you're talking about, as best as I can tell, is called "fanboyism" -- individual devotion characterized by unusually strong vocality and blindness to contradictory evidence.
Fanboys are extremely common in tech, but usually associated with companies that make products with particularly elegant design (Apple, Tesla) or with a strong sociopolitical component to their identity.
It's a familiar distinction. You've expressed it particularly well. We don't have the real-world information about users that would be needed to make such calls with certainty (nor would we want it!), but based on what I've seen, I don't believe it's fanboyism in this case.
More importantly, it's a distinction without a difference in cases like this. When someone is using dozens of accounts to post corporate propaganda to HN over many years, they're abusing the site and we ban them.
The reason I’m on my zillionth account isn’t because of comments of mine, but because somehow my ex-wife’s IP is radioactive and if I happen to load HN on my mobile while on her wifi and waiting for my kids the account I’m logged into gets silently hell-banned. Dang has promised it won’t happen again.
My first HN account name was my full real name. I have a three-digit slashdot user number and that account also uses my real full name. I believe in communities online.
That's not quite consistent with my understanding of the situation. But yes, if you follow the site guidelines and stick to a consistent account, we won't ban you. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22176413
As a person literally just used as an example of moderation practices above, I think dang and sctb do a really good job here. There's a lot of weird lines they have to walk. For example, that while Googlers defending their company can be astroturfing, Googlers also know a lot about Google and can contribute original info and answers others can't.
The HN guidelines haven't changed significantly in a long time, and dang and sctb miss a lot because HN is huge and nobody can read every comment, but they do a pretty good job when they step in. If you're on your 50th account, perhaps you should see if you can modify your posting to stay afloat of the rules. (On your 51st account, presumably, since you just told one of the moderators you're an account evading a ban.) And if you have questions or concerns about moderation, or feel you were unfairly impacted, there's a contact email in the footer and they're actually really good dudes you can talk to.
It baffles me why someone banned 49 times would want to participate the 50th time. This is like being kicked out of someone's house and coming in a different disguise each time.
At some point I'd just conclude they don't want me there and walk away.
I don't know about any other similarities, but "astroturfing" and "gaslighting" are English words that share this in common: they both have a useful meanings that seems to be primarily used correctly and in context; however they also are bandied about in non-canonical ways by a much smaller number of people with high repetition.
Sounds interesting...