At televised sporting events, a prankster, usually drunk, will sometimes run onto the field to make a spectacle. Yet, the broadcast always cuts away, so as not to encourage the behavior even more in the future.

Perhaps we could consider a similar policy on submissions and upvotes about site-defacements? The hack will already get plenty of attention from the normal visitors of the affected site, and coverage in other 'gotcha' outlets. Maybe we should dampen, rather than multiply, the coverage.

(A post-incident report with details of the vulnerability and valid countermeasures would be interesting. And if the normally-trusted site was at any point subverting visitors with malware, that too would warrant a warning submission. But racing to report and upvote each graffiti incident almost seems to be cheering it on.)