Like it or not, we have a big boy with enough self-importance thinking his ideas should be accepted by force such as the pagerank algorithm serves for qualifying web pages accurately. The California based Internet giant of today, Google, proposed far ago a simple dichotomy: if a web page is linked from other sources, it's a sign that the content is worthy. And then, the algorithm assigns a number from zero to ten as if we were talking about an exam of popularity.
No one should deny respecting the truth that in some situation this approach could serve as an indication. A link this way seems a map to your restaurant, so who gives them to other people is because your food is good. Nevertheless it also tries to assume that if nobody provides the map is due to the bad cooking. It's even worse when the map exists but nobody is ever going to read it.
Although is key that the algorithm only accepts a type of map, and rejects every other one that also makes people arrive. Furthermore, it marks it like a felony with an extremist penalization that hurts the restaurant who maybe nothing knows about what other people are doing. By the way, it's normal for a restaurant trying to promote the menu giving away maps, paying or not. Others do not like the competency...
Whom propose anything like this in the vast area of the Internet must accept that it's the first promoter of unethical, unfair activities. With a single company trying to execute something that finally believes as law enforcement activities but they aren't at all, it trains an entire myriad of agents and creates control systems trying to be at least one step behind the current activities, these always with creative ideas to fool the algorithm. While they aren't identified as a trick, let us repeat that the map tricks are counted as good. The history of this “no evil” people with the police costume and faith in the algorithm includes some pages of this, so once Google innocently gave them a high score it was damaging the free market.
In the true legislation coming from the government, the human rights are a reality so there are judges that decide what kind of actions could be sanctionable, specially when they try to interfere in the freedom of the citizen or other fundamental rights. You could think that everyone can write in the weekend a license agreement forcing people to assume their rules at this level but this is of course false. In fact the word “outdated” of the title is a euphemism in nature.
Anybody should remember too about the subject that now there are multiple new methods to promote restaurants without the use of the old-school map. An incredible number of users in social media or using messaging applications are perfectly enough to see restaurants with multiple visits and a "pagerank" of zero. Louder, and louder so, what a misleading and statistically inaccurate method that needs to assume such percentage of failure and its consequences; unilaterally qualifying, sometimes blocking access to pages and hiding them to the users, closing doors without explanations nor warnings and damaging respectable workers.
Perhaps it's time to modify the policies.