This is some pretty blatant whitewalling. I don't think we have a current policy for this sort of behavior in general, and it's looking like we need one, but it deserves some discussion because there are nuances to the situation. This is not any sort of fraud, Stuart checked and they're all unique IPs -- it's a genuine community brigade, not just someone pimping their own wares.
We want enthusiastic, contributive users just like these. They drive the site! We don't want to punish them and drive them away. Vote brigades become less problematic when the overall traffic goes up and the bumps they make start getting lost in the average, and meanwhile these users are getting involved with Slant. We really want to be courting them.
The thing we don't want, is a fat pile of "pros" that are just empty marketing copy, most of them saying exactly the same thing. Easy, simple, intuitive, everyone can! I'm actually not opposed to one entry like this on a given option, because sometimes it really does take hands-on experience to know why something just works, and the affirmation of upvotes is the only "source" available. But that's all it deserves: a big number. Not two pages of repetition. Every other option could make the exact same claims, and only the vote counts separate them. We aid users in comparing things; there's only one data point here relevant to that goal, and it's disingenuous to show it half a dozen times with different labels.
So, what we've got here is a PR issue. This needs heavy moderation. It needs all the redundant go-team-go stripped, and if possible it needs some pros and cons that actually help compare it to the other options in relevant ways. Chances are good this means deleting at least half the pros, and radically altering most of the rest. The question is how to do this while pissing off as few of those users as possible?
And remember, these are the sort of users who are willing to go on a spam crusade. Not pissing them off isn't just so we keep them -- it's also so they don't set a goal of driving people away from us, because they've demonstrated themselves to be the sort who might try. "Any publicity is good publicity" is an oversimplification -- good is still better!