Please, then, don't be selective: ban the site. You ban lots of other sites. Venues that "pwn" HN shouldn't be allowed space on the front page. If they write something uncharacteristically excellent, someone is sure to blog it, and that person can collect the pageviews.
Also, Venturebeat is far from the worst offender. At least they (ostensibly) have reporters.
It generally takes multiple offenses before we do something like that. From a comment you made elsewhere on this thread it sounds like you've noticed multiple instances of VB baiting HN, but this is the first I can remember.
How about instead of us unproductively arguing about this, you make your point by telling us about some of the popular sites you have banned for baiting HN. I'd be particularly interested in the existence proof of any site that regularly writes positive things about startups that you've squelched.
That'll give us an idea of what the standard is.
Edit: I accidentally wrote that first sentence more combatively than I meant to.
The "bad" at Venturebeat (and Torrentfreak and Techdirt) outweighs the good, even before you consider that a bad story is more harmful to HN than a good story is helpful.
On those occasions where Venturebeat gets it right, someone will inevitably blog it. The blog posts won't get banned. People will find out about the article. Meanwhile, Venturebeat has that much less incentive to directly troll HN.
I have zero illusions that Venturebeat is going to get banned. The incentives are wrong for Paul Graham. Venturebeat writes more positive stuff about YC companies than negative stuff. But if Graham is serious about Venturebeat trolling the site --- which it clearly does, all the time --- he shouldn't be choosy about pushing back on it.
Also, Venturebeat is far from the worst offender. At least they (ostensibly) have reporters.