Are you aware that when the new policies about needing clearer disclosure on what you are using collected api keys for were created, the whole debate that sparked them was over a tool using public key information (eg. not that user's personal information). The old bazaar aggregator as it happens. And staff's stance at the time was that regardless of it being public information every particular usecase needed to be made very clear to the key owner.
When creating a script, userscript, sheet, extension, API service, bot, 3rd party website or any other API tool (collectively "service"), the end user must be aware of how will their API key be used.
This is their obligation. According to torn. You think the noobs they are requesting keys from are too dumb to read and understand? Then perhaps they shouldn't be using their keys. (But they clearly can read and understand, as you can see by them responding when someone acutally messaged them to let them know what their keys were being used for.)
Every f***ing legitimate tool out there has moved towards having better disclosure, even when their services are purely in the interest of the key owners, even when this extra bureaucracy can get annoying as hell, yet here you are being as sneaky as you possibly can get away with for something that even with proper disclosure would pretty much put you on the same level as scamming noobs for losses.
This kind of utter bullshit is exactly why the acceptable use guidelines were needed and created. I would be surprised if this thread is allowed to continue in its current format, but if it is, that pretty much means those guidelines are pointless, and have failed at the one useful thing they were designed to accomplish.
While we are on the topic, I would fully support someone making a suggestion that collecting api keys from users in exchange for benefits unrelated to what the keys are being used for, and/or using keys for purposes that don't directly or indirectly benefit the key owner, should simply not be allowed. (Yes, I'm aware that would also harm some benign and useful data collection projects, I think that's an acceptable tradeoff.)