I agree with what these people are saying to a degree, however, without such 'options' you would open yourself up to all kinds of nasties.
Remember these are based on User Ratings and not comments as some have argued. For a site to be classed as bad across the net in WOT there has to be a xxxx? Number of bad user ratings the comments are merely optional and have little to do with the rating system.
I do agree that it is an extortionate amount of money to get your site 'unlocked', but the amount of sites out there that try deliberately to Spy, Hack, d/l Virus to a users computer is phenomenal and WOT is just one tool to protect a the average user.
Some of the people that complained that they're site was flagged never provided a link to their site to test and either way there are free and simple methods to counteract such ratings, sometimes you just wonder about certain users abilities to understand the real meaning behind protective 'implementations' (am referring entirely to complaints made against WOT on scam lists).
I could post a link to a site that when it started to get implemented would show a question mark as it was/is virtually unheard of, however I set the rating to RED ever since no matter what computer I'm on it will show as RED and not a question mark. (And rightfully so).