In a practical sense, we don't really support pirated software anywhere. Yes, Hackintoshes *are* a specific and very visible example, but its no different from someone using "Windows 10 pirate edition"

I'd readily admit, its a rule that got put in place by an ex mod, and it feels vaguely 'by fiat' but its in line with the [Stack Exchange TOS][1] in my opinion

 >  Subscriber represents, warrants and agrees that it will not contribute any Subscriber Content that (a) infringes, violates or otherwise interferes with any copyright or trademark of another party, (b) reveals any trade secret, unless Subscriber owns the trade secret or has the owner’s permission to post it, (c) infringes any intellectual property right of another or the privacy or publicity rights of another....

*Even* with a "vanilla" copy of OS X with some suitable tool that does nothing more than bypass the hardware checks, its no different from running windows with a hardware crack.

So, unless someone from SE corporate says "Yeah, its fine", publicly, and tells us our interpretation of the TOS is wrong - I'm *disinclined* to think it is acceptable. 


In addition, while Allquixotic has made most of the point I wanted to make for me, outside of a small range of hardware - the *secondary* argument I make against pirated variants of commercial OSes - that its impossible to know what has been added or removed, making it difficult to pinpoint an error is worth considering. 

  [1]: http://stackexchange.com/legal