Google running a social credit system may have unintended consequences though.
'Gamed' as in people would block the most ad-infested pages which just so happened to be the ones which made Google the most money?
I can assure you that any solution you can think of that will improve web search will be used in the exact opposite way you imagine.
Seems the problem's not the blocking itself then, and the whole feature didn't need to be removed, just its use as a metric.
One wonders how much bullshit might have been solved through a .005% increase in Google's payroll...
For spammy websites, you don’t review every one individually. But you have an algorithm that e.g. downranks them, and you AB test it.
They probably already have this strategy now, just not deployed for one reason or another. (For example, it might be expensive and unreliable to scan every website.) But if Google loses enough traffic to a competitor, they’ll be forced to do something.