This is an ongoing debate and I think phpfail has some valid points, but people who argue otherwise (myself included), also have valid points.
Clearly you're not implying that just because a public forum is prohibiting certain content for the sake of their hosting and viability, doesn't mean that that policy standard lends itself as a definition to "blackhat" activity. That would be a bit narrow in scope, you must admit.
BHW's public discourse definitely does not set the standard for everything that is and is not blackhat. It's a valuable resource with a lot of brilliant people that come together to share their knowledge, but of course for the sake of actually remaining online, some stuff just can't be discussed.
I know many members that do stuff that isn't allowed to be brought up here, does that mean they're blackhat hackers or that they're something other than blackhat since BHW excludes illegal activity from the forum? Of course not, some of them wouldn't know the first thing about hacking (nor would they want to), and just because BHW doesn't allow this type of talk doesn't mean that everything that isn't allowed isn't blackhat.
So that lays point #1 to rest pretty handily.
Blackhat SEO and Blackhat Hacking are not mutually exclusively. Yes, some stuff might be "blackhat" to you, but then what do you call hacking involved with SEO? Super Blackhat? No. Blackhat is based on a spectrum of activity, ranging from 100% legit (white) to 100% illegal (black). In this sense, then, wouldn't it be the most logical position to consider illegal activity true blackhat, and everything outside the realm of illegality as advancing into the realm of grey and white?
