[Avamander]

At the same time given the already terrible reputation of such vanity TLDs, being this hard on abuse might be the only survivable way.

That's not me saying there shouldn't be a warning and a recourse, but the time-to-profit for domain abuse is really short so anti-abuse actions have to be quick.

[NewJazz]

This isn't being hard on abuse though, this is being lazy and incompetent.

[Avamander]

I'm fairly sure that Safe Browsing's false-positive rate is extremely low otherwise it'd be unusable in Chrome. Which also means that acting on positive results is very likely a correct approach.