I view these sorts of things as an opportunity. Theoretically, here's how the system should work:

1) Spammer shows up.

2) You, and everyone who thinks like you, identifies them as a spammer and gives them the ol' triple block

3) The spammer ends up without an audience

Theoretically, there's no moderation needed - and that's what "report spammer" means. There's no way to deal with "spam" without assuming some form of moderation.

The downside to this comes with tag taxonomy and new users. A new user looking for stuff about writing is likely going to subscribe to #writing... which is also the tag any spammer is going to find. A seasoned user looking for stuff about writing knows that it's in #writebetterdammit, which is something spammers won't find without a substantial commitment to the site.

I took over /r/realestate on Reddit when it was nothing but a honeypot for spammers. It still gets gobsmacking amounts of crap. We use automoderator like a rented mule, and we're merciless. As a result, it's a useful sub, but beating back the bullshit took a substantial investment of time. I can see that sort of thing happening to a tag as Hubski grows...

...which is why some sort of searchable/merge-able taxonomy so that tags can be parsed via a system other than "folklore" is perhaps the most important thing to make Hubski scalable towards a larger userbase.