I kind of have to agree with syzo here. I will readily and openly admit to using both the #troll and #spam tags. I do not know if these are the tags in question, as I personally do not find those tags out of line, but if they are I apologize and from here on out will refrain from using them. As for de-anonymizing tags, I feel that it actually fits in Hubski's philosophy about people being transparent and forward.
But, see, I've seen your troll tags and they're helpful to me. I tend to take bait pretty consistently and the troll tag was a nice reminder for me. I'm not sure if that makes it any better, but it did offer some benefit. It's an interesting situation because there are times when I find some of the articles posted by a user to be interesting and times when they're not. When another user feels the same way those tags seem to work to my benefit. i think the short term, user controlled solution is to come up with a "neutral" tag that can be filtered, but I'm not enough of a word person to come up with something.
I hope you don't stop using the #troll tag, I find them incredibly useful. I tend to follow tags like #gender and #racism etc, so it's good to have a tag to let me know whether it's a good post on those topics or someone posting some weird strawman or bigoted view. It just adds more information and I can judge whether I want to get angry by reading ignorance at that point in time, or save it for later. I was actually getting a little frustrated with Hubski because I had to sort through a bunch of shitposts to find genuine topics, but the #troll tag did exactly what I was looking for.