WOT google group rated red?
-
- Posts: 915
- Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2008 10:31 pm
WOT google group rated red?
Hi there,
finally finding a way to sign up for the google group, I got to this page: http://www.mywot.com/de/scorecard/mywot.googlegroups.com
As you can see, it's yellow in 3 categories.
Furthermore, the reputation is inherited from googlegroups.com which is rated red in all 4 categories.
finally finding a way to sign up for the google group, I got to this page: http://www.mywot.com/de/scorecard/mywot.googlegroups.com
As you can see, it's yellow in 3 categories.
Furthermore, the reputation is inherited from googlegroups.com which is rated red in all 4 categories.
WOT Google
Yes I have just checked it out.I think its the google groups themselves that are rated and not WOT but it might put some folks of though.Its rated bad on a lot of categories.Trouble is if you rate it good are you rating wehaveitalls google group or google groups in general.
Inherited ???
I think Sami said that the sub domains inherit the parent's rating. I still don't think that this is right no matter what the stickies say . I believe that a site should be rated according to it's own content . Finjan and SiteAdvisor do the same thing. This is not right IMO. This will give a bad rap to a site that otherwise would be able to help or inform you . This is MY belief and if you can change my opinion on this matter i would be more than enchanted to hear your arguments.
Athlonite.
Your help is always needed.
Athlonite.
Your help is always needed.
Re: Inherited ???
sub domains inherit the parent's rating
Yes, they initially inherit the parent domain's reputation. When there are enough ratings for a subdomain, the parent's reputation no longer affects it.
I believe that a site should be rated according to it's own content
They are.
This will give a bad rap to a site that otherwise would be able to help or inform you
This will also help in cases where a someone buys a domain and uses random subdomains for criminal purposes.
In the googlegroups.com case, the reputation seems to be poor, because;
Yes, they initially inherit the parent domain's reputation. When there are enough ratings for a subdomain, the parent's reputation no longer affects it.
I believe that a site should be rated according to it's own content
They are.
This will give a bad rap to a site that otherwise would be able to help or inform you
This will also help in cases where a someone buys a domain and uses random subdomains for criminal purposes.
In the googlegroups.com case, the reputation seems to be poor, because;
- The service is frequently abused by scammers, which means there are tons of poorly rated subdomains.
- Few people rate the googlegroups.com domain, because it redirects visitors to groups.google.com.
My Point ...
Hey Sami !!
Thanks for restoring me! My point is , if you happen to surf to a site that inherits a bad rating and you see a RED warning sign , you're not going to stay there long enough to make sure that it is safe to explore , thus either , no rating or another bad rating because of the inheritance. This would be a very long process . It would take a Gray circle for us to rate it's own contents. This is how I see it and if you can offer a good counter argument , I would appreciate it. I don't want to change the way you do things but, this is like branding the son of a criminal as a criminal also.
What do you think ?
Athlonite.
Your help is always needed.
Thanks for restoring me! My point is , if you happen to surf to a site that inherits a bad rating and you see a RED warning sign , you're not going to stay there long enough to make sure that it is safe to explore , thus either , no rating or another bad rating because of the inheritance. This would be a very long process . It would take a Gray circle for us to rate it's own contents. This is how I see it and if you can offer a good counter argument , I would appreciate it. I don't want to change the way you do things but, this is like branding the son of a criminal as a criminal also.
What do you think ?
Athlonite.
Your help is always needed.
Re: My Point ...
you're not going to stay there long enough to make sure that it is safe to explore
On the other hand, if someone comes across an unrated subdomain owned by a phishing gang, they might just fall for the scam.
this is like branding the son of a criminal as a criminal also
No, it's like saying that people who hang out with criminals are most likely equally trustworthy unless proven otherwise. Or that the probability of getting mugged by a stranger depends on the neighborhood.
On the other hand, if someone comes across an unrated subdomain owned by a phishing gang, they might just fall for the scam.
this is like branding the son of a criminal as a criminal also
No, it's like saying that people who hang out with criminals are most likely equally trustworthy unless proven otherwise. Or that the probability of getting mugged by a stranger depends on the neighborhood.
I can see your....
I can see your point in the first explanation but , they fall prey anyways !
As for the second one , You are just repeating what I just said in a different sentence.
This is more like being found guilty before the trial. Not convincing. You're going to have to do better than that,
Athlonite.
Your help is always needed.
As for the second one , You are just repeating what I just said in a different sentence.
This is more like being found guilty before the trial. Not convincing. You're going to have to do better than that,
Athlonite.
Your help is always needed.
Re: I can see your....
they fall prey anyways
Then what's the point of ever warning them?
This is more like being found guilty before the trial
It's not, because the owner of the parent domain controls all the subdomains. If the parent domain is owned by a criminal, then so are all the subdomains.
In this case, if the owner of the parent domain lets scammers abuse the service, then the reputation of the whole domain suffers. And again, this still applies only to unknown sites.
Then what's the point of ever warning them?
This is more like being found guilty before the trial
It's not, because the owner of the parent domain controls all the subdomains. If the parent domain is owned by a criminal, then so are all the subdomains.
In this case, if the owner of the parent domain lets scammers abuse the service, then the reputation of the whole domain suffers. And again, this still applies only to unknown sites.
OK..
I guess my signature holds true.
"Then what's the point of ever warning them?"
In hopes that some will listen.
Then, the obvious question would be "Can they adequately regulate the sub domains?". My answer would be , they cannot , otherwise , sites like WOT would not be needed.
Thanks Sami.
Athlonite.
Your help is always needed.
"Then what's the point of ever warning them?"
In hopes that some will listen.
Then, the obvious question would be "Can they adequately regulate the sub domains?". My answer would be , they cannot , otherwise , sites like WOT would not be needed.
Thanks Sami.
Athlonite.
Your help is always needed.
-
- Posts: 1097
- Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2007 12:40 am
Back to green
Thanks for finding this flyaqua, the rating is now green.
A big thank you to all the WOT staff
A big thank you to all the WOT staff
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests