I disagree that the post was spam. It was poorly written, enough so it smells like spam on a quick read. But he was complaining about a website that added additional content to his clipboard. You can read all about it at Daring Fireball. I'll select some of my favorite pieces from Gruber's article:
All of this nonsense — the attribution appended to copied text, the inline search results popovers — is from a company named Tynt, which bills itself as “The copy/paste company”.
It’s a bunch of user-hostile SEO bullshit.
Everyone knows how copy and paste works. You select text. You copy. When you paste, what you get is exactly what you selected. The core product of the “copy/paste company” is a service that breaks copy and paste.
Gruber's article cannot be mistaken for spam but if it were posted here, it surely would have fallen prey to the FAQ entry what not to post: it is a rant disguised as a question: “____ sucks, am I right?”
If this were up for a vote, I'd vote to give Patrick back his lost 100 due to the spam flags and take away the 16 for writing a bad question. :)