TL;DR: No. This answer is bad and deserves the same treatment as all other bad answers, regardless of who posted it.
His answer probably would not have been deleted had the reviewers realized the answerer was also the question author.
I have no idea why you think this is the case.
I took what I think is appropriate action against that answer after reading the Meta post by the author. I didn't see it in a review queue, and I was fully aware of who posted it. In fact, I think the identity of the answerer is all quite irrelevant.
Answers should be evaluated on their own merits, not based on who posted them. This is just an extension of the more general rule that we evaluate content, not people.
I won't single out anyone here, but there are some individuals on Stack Overflow who have developed quite a powerful reputation for providing excellent answers to questions. But if they posted a one-sentence non-answer, I would downvote it, flag it as "not an answer", and vote to delete it. Period. Neither reputation score, nor being the author of the question, gives you an excuse to post poor quality content in the answer box. If you don't have an answer, leave a comment.
The only reason I could possibly imagine why you would grant the asker of the question more leeway in posting a low-quality, unhelpful answer is if you think the purpose of the site is to help the asker find the answer to their question. With this logic, anything that the asker posts as an answer is a priori "good enough" because they clearly found it helpful in answering their question. Unfortunately, that logic is wrong. The purpose of Stack Overflow is to build up a database of high-quality expert answers to a diverse array of programming problems. It is more important that the answer is useful to other people who may come across the question than it is that it narrowly satisfies the criteria of the asker.
This is reflected in the reputation system. You get 10 reputation points for each upvote, and votes are effectively unlimited. A good answer can easily fetch you 10 upvotes, which is a net reputation of 100. Contrast that with acceptance by the asker, which gets you only 15 reputation points and can only occur once. 15 is more than 10, because it is worth more to solve the asker's problem and get the checkmark than to simply post an answer meriting an upvote. But it is worth far more to post an answer valuable to large numbers of people than it is to post an answer that is merely considered useful by the asker.
Had the reviewers known it was the author, and recognizing the author posted a low quality answer, I suspect the reviewer(s) would have been more apt to place a comment requesting clarification / enhancement rather than flag it for low quality and/or deletion. As it stands, seeing a short answer with poor grammar from a low reputation user immediately kicks in the "flag for deletion" instinct. Knowing it is the question author creates a cause for pause during review.
I mean, I guess. I don't really know that it is our job to hold the hands of everyone who posts bad content to the site. Again, it is not relevant that the person has a low reputation score. The point is that the answer is not actually an answer. It is not useful, incomplete, and of generally poor quality.
Someone might have felt compelled to leave a comment encouraging the person to improve his/her answer, but they would have been equally justified in taking action to remove the answer. It does not meet our standards for an acceptable answer, and fits quite well with our reasons why some answers are deleted. This one in particular fits well:
- not even a partial answer to the actual question
It is not, of course. It doesn't even say what the heck "Listvars" is, much less how to use it, how it solves this problem, or anything else you would expect out of an answer.
If the person who posted the answer feels really strongly about it, they could always edit the answer to improve it, then flag it for undeletion. In the meantime, there is no reason to have noise like this cluttering up the site. The question has already received a quality answer; leaving this one just detracts from the useful information.
I believe the current use of identical highlight as the OP is insufficient, and the addition of a word or other identifier to the user summarization rectangle (Avatar, Name, Reputation, Badges, Timestamp) would help prevent mis-identification in the future.
I disagree. Like I said above, answers (and questions) should not be evaluated based wholly or in part on who posted them. They should stand on their own merits, and be evaluated independently.
There is a stronger argument to be made for removing all user-identifying information from review queues. Not adding more of it.