Thought you lot may be interested in this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...62643718#Google

You can take some credit for what was in my comment, my old attitude of "screw em, they were disruptive they pay the price" attitude has been changed a lot by the arguments I have seen on here, and the opinions of those people who do not want their name associated with a banned template in the top 10 of the google search results - regardless of whether the ban was justified or not. I realised that this was just idiotic kangaroo court justice seeking behaviour on my part and so changed my opinion. This is why this site can offer a lot to wikipedia as legitimate criticism.

Welcome back to the reality based community Viridae. I appreciate your efforts to drag Wikipedians out of the primordial soup they currently inhabit, though the fact that this needs to be raised at all is evidence of the bad attitude that pervades the place.

This site has long been presenting legitimate criticism in the face of Wikipedia's wanton irresponsibility. Probably the most consistent and effective criticism WP has received in fact. Of course, this has taken place in between slices of humour, blasts of random obnoxiousness and bouts of occasional insanity.

These robot.txt demands were mooted long ago. So only when we see tangible results should we start giving people any serious credit.

The robots.txt file is massive. That might be why something was missed.