Sorry, but you seem to have a prejudice. I don't know a site for which the
administrators have made a conscious decision to block Tor. Take Wikipedia
for example. They block any open proxy they find out. That is their policy.
And, as both code and text are free, anybody is free to make an editable
mirror. If the end result is good, both text and policy can merge. Non free
sites do it for the same reasons, only they can't be replicated. But from
what I can figgure out from the top of my head, there are more sites posing
as free that block Tor than commercial ventures.
Tor is making, at least in theory, every user look the same. So there are no
good guys and bad guys. There is one omnipresent TOR USER. One Tor user, ten
thousand Tor users? What is the difference? It's something to be expected. As
Arma and the rest of the team puts it: it's very inefficient to run an atack
through Tor.
The administrators are not prejudiced. They learnt, some learnt the hard way,
the simple tools of the trade. Going from simple to advanced means a few
years of hard work and some philosophy books read slowly. Hardly something
for most people. So, as one billion people usually leave huge tracks, why not
go the easy way?
So you can either take upon yourself to educate the administators. Or just
avoid that service altogether. Thanks to free software there is usually not
one, but many alternatives to existing services.
