Forum Moderators: open
Is this dangerous? you bet. When someone becomes the sole arbiter of what is acceptable and what should be exposed, there is always the potential for either innocent misunderstanding or down right harm.
You doubt this? Ok suppose I were to set up a site exposing what I considered violations of "best practices", then, those found violating my best practices get listed as "untrusted" businesses.
Do you know what would happen? Why that very page which describes investigating abuses of "best practices" would be listed on it. It uses CSS to alter the size of header tags, and contains not one, but two hidden forms, one of which is full of keywords (search engines). Now if I had such a site, I would rationalize in my zeal to clean the world of such abuses that this was done purely to influence search engine ranking, and I would list them as "untrusted", thereby harming their credability.
But you know what? They probably just forgot that code was there, or they decided to comment out the forms in case they need them later, but if they rank ahead of me then I want that stuff out of there.
Most of these self appointed "web police" types never gain any credibility whatsoever.
I guess you could one-up him and launch a "chief deputy director in charge of internet police" site and police him if you wanted to waste your time. :)
Don't lose sleep over that clown.
From what I've seen there ain't nothing to worry about.
THE LEGAL REPERCUSSIONS of branding this site or that site one way or another will rain havoc on this misguided parade.
