But, I didn't criticize you for responding; I criticized you for calling our behavior 'annoying' and 'double annoying.' I would never criticize your choice to respond to a post.
I am not criticizing the bumping for merely responding, but for contributing to the generation of more spam while being boring and unfunny. It's no different from what you are doing, you are criticizing the nature of my posts, not the mere fact that I'm posting. Likewise, it's the nature and content of the posts that I criticize. It's a cost/benefit thing. If the additional work came at the expense of interesting posts I'd really not mind. But it really doesn't seem worth it (to me, of course) just to call these guys a Russian name every single day.
If you don't like these posts, you could simply delete them, whether they have a link or not; it would be less risky than hoping people don't respond to them, and there would be less overall annoyance on your part. It would also decrease the spam spreadage through syndication.
Without the links it would be political censorship to do so. I am expressing my opinion that this is annoying, but I'm not willing to engage in censorship over it unless it objectively violates our rules (which don't forbid being annoying to Robert). As you said, you enjoy these posts and I'm not going to let my preferences override yours that easily.
I prefer instead to appeal to the folk who are helping them to consider doing things differently. Not all of them are as stubborn and combative as you are, and some of them will be nice enough to help. It's not my style to impose my will, I'd rather argue for it and let others decide what they want to do (even if it ends up being more frustrating it's more fair).
You may note that I was responding to osso, who doesn't seem to like them, but thought tags were helpful. I am explaining why they aren't, and not trying to convince folk like you to be considerate. I know an exercise in futility when I see one.