Whilst I don't really see any issue with it I think it sets a bad president.
It implies something that may not be true, one of the ones blacklisted insisted they were removed as they had received a review they clearly found quite offensive, we did try and convince them to stay on but they clearly felt the offence outweighed the gain. And if we only publicise the ones that 'deserve' it then it turns into a threat or vigilantism of some form. The blacklisting is meant to just quietly get rid of people who are going to detriment the whole site ultimately.
I do think the stories behind them are amusing though, and also the fact that of 53,946 open pubs (32,156 of which have reviews) only 6 have been blacklisted.
Sorry that was an overly serious reply to what I take was a joking suggestion, no sense of humour me