Page 3 of 4

RE: rpgcrossing.com

Posted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 2:51 pm
by Grassmonkey
Honestly, the fact that RPGCrossing has recieved a bad rating is sad. RPGCrossing is one of the if not the greatest Play-by-Post Roleplaying site on the web with a great staff and moderation team ran for an awesome community of people who gather every day for no other reason that to have a great time. It is a collection of professional and novice writers and artist who work together as a team to run great games and keep the site clean of spam, flaming, or any other problems that often accompany online forums.

For those having trouble understanding the response to the rating given by this site, the only explanation is that you have obviously never been a member of the RPGCrossing Community. There has, and never will be, any problems or major complaints about this site. In fact to date the only problem I have ever seen with the site is the rating that this site has given it that has no basis in actual fact whatsoever,

To say that RPGCrossing is a family friendly site is the understatement of the century. The members of RPGCrossing sign in everyday to a wonderful site to spend time with the many friends across the globe they have made since they too were fortunate enough to find this great community. We are not simply friends and aquantances, we are extended family. If you are surprised by the response that has been recieved until now, then you will be shocked when the rest of our great family is notified of the problem with the rating. Please do not be surprised when thousands of new accounts are made on this site simply to return the rating of RPGCrossing to that which it so justly deserves.

Very Respectfully,

Grassmonkey

RE: rpgcrossing.com

Posted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 4:36 pm
by NotBuyingIt
<quote user="grassmonkey"> If you are surprised by the response that has been recieved until now, then you will be shocked when the rest of our great family is notified of the problem with the rating. Please do not be surprised when thousands of new accounts are made on this site simply to return the rating of RPGCrossing to that which it so justly deserves.[/quote]

I think it reasonable to say that WOT and its community members would like ratings to be accurate. A site's subscribers and frequent visitors often are the best people to rate a site, so their contributions should be welcomed. Please understand, however, the WOT system values quality over quantity. New members, avid game-players though they be, should avoid [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaming_the_system t=_self]gaming the system[/url]. The webpages for new users and the guidelines in the [url=http://www.mywot.com/support t=_self]Support section[/url] of WOT await them. Impatience prolongs one's agony.

Many influential community members who might ordinarily volunteer to evaluate sites may be reluctant to visit a website while there is suspicion that its hosting web server has been hacked. Perhaps the OP might post some reassurances about that, passed along from SingleHop. Typically, nothing extremely technical or lengthy is needed.

RE: rpgcrossing.com

Posted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 4:58 pm
by jcamacho
I'm missing something. Where does the suspicion that their server has been hacked come from?

RE: rpgcrossing.com

Posted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 5:08 pm
by Grassmonkey
Also confused about that, there has been no mention of RPGCrossings host server having been hacked. For that matter this has nothing to do with trying to game the system. Simply about trying to correct an absurd mistake withing WoT's system. I have never and will never consider myself a user of WoT. The rating given to RPGCrossing has made that abundantly clear to me. I am a member or RPGCrossing, and if there was ever a website that did not diserve bad ratings anywhere on the internet. It is RPGCrossing.com

Once more, Very Respectfully,

Grassmonkey.

RE: rpgcrossing.com

Posted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 5:18 pm
by NotBuyingIt
<quote user="jcamacho">
I'm missing something. Where does the suspicion that their server has been hacked come from?
[/quote]
The discussion has been fragmented among threads, unfortunately. I chose the word suspicion intending to let interested readers decide for themselves whether or not the suspicions about the upstream SingleHop hosting servers (routers, whatever) are groundless and whether or not the issue is current or obsolete. In particular, I had in mind the comment at
http://www.mywot.com/forum/38334-spammers-are-hammering-a-legitimate-site-s-rating?comment=216596#comment-216596

The only response that I've read was
If there are individual IP addresses where there is evidence of problems, I believe they [SingleHop] would follow up and deal with it. "

RE: rpgcrossing.com

Posted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 5:36 pm
by RPGX
I don't think that there is a suspicion or evidence that our site in particular has been hacked. We monitor the state of our server and talk to members daily (well, constantly), and there has been no report of problems. See this post by GURBL, who made the 'spam' comment, for what we know of the grounds for the negative comment on our scorecard: http://www.mywot.com/en/forum/38334-spammers-are-hammering-a-legitimate-site-s-rating?comment=216596#comment-216596

GURBL's comment is based on the idea that because several (29) IP addresses on the same host as us (Singlehop, a large and respected host) had issues, and because 4 *years* ago (an eternity on the internet) IP addresses close to ours had problems, that our site is also suspicious. I don't think this is reasonable grounds for suspicion of problems, although I'm open to evidence to the contrary.

That said, if there *is* a problem with other sites at our host, please send me evidence (privately is good too) and I will definitely take it to the ticket system on Singlehop and ask that they deal with it immediately. I've had good interactions with the people there, and I'm pretty sure they'd like to hear about it if they are hosting spam/attack/hacked sites.

PS. What's the story with the frozen comments on our scorecard? Is that a normal part of the review process, or an automated response to a jump in the number of comments on a site, or is something else going on? (It's a good thing this happened on a Sunday, if volume is a problem -- we have more users during the week, and if they'd seen the notice I put up there would have been even more noise.)

RE: rpgcrossing.com

Posted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 5:57 pm
by NotBuyingIt
I don't think this is reasonable grounds for suspicion of problems, although I'm open to evidence to the contrary.

@RPGX
I was suggesting that you may wish to directly ask a technical representative of SingleHop about the issue if you haven't already. I'm certainly not in a position to push the point because both you GURBL presumably keep a much closer eye on your provider than I do. I don't expect that my small contribution — that I didn't find any evidence of spam — will be accepted as the definitive answer.

To all:
As the discussion gets past that issue, the evaluation should progress more smoothly. Hopefully.

By the way, the format of all WOT scorecards has changed. Two of the four ratings, "Privacy" and "Vendor Reliability" have been dropped.

RE: rpgcrossing.com

Posted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 6:09 pm
by NotBuyingIt
<quote user="rpgx">
PS. What's the story with the frozen comments on our scorecard? Is that a normal part of the review process, or an automated response to a jump in the number of comments on a site, or is something else going on? (It's a good thing this happened on a Sunday, if volume is a problem -- we have more users during the week, and if they'd seen the notice I put up there would have been even more noise.)
[/quote]

It's an automatic response. When "unusual activity" is detected with the thumbs-up/thumbs-down voting, the system temporarily disables voting on comments. While disabled, the default ordering of scorecard comments changes from "most thumbs up" being displayed first to "user with highest activity score" being displayed first. During episodes of unusual activity, the usual ordering of comments probably would be unrepresentative or misleading anyhow.

RE: rpgcrossing.com

Posted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 6:23 pm
by RPGX
<quote user="notbuyingit">
@RPGX
I was suggesting that you may wish to directly ask a technical representative of SingleHop about the issue if you haven't already. I'm certainly not in a position to push the point because both you GURBL presumably keep a much closer eye on your provider than I do.
[/quote]

I would talk to SingleHop if I had any evidence of a problem. Unfortunately, I can't reasonably expect them to do something about a report from "GURBL" (essentially anonymous) on WOT who says that " a flock of south african insurance spammers, sendsrv.com / mailblaze.com have infested this /24, snowshoeing across at *least* 198.143.137[.130-158]." His report that "The /19 was listed as HIJACKED back in September 2009, and blocked extensively. Yes, we are aware it is hosted on singlehop.com." is not even close to a current issue. The first one might be, but what evidence am I supposed to deliver to them? I think it makes a lot of sense to provide strong evidence to back up claims like this, and I doubt I'd be doing more than wasting my time and those of the SingleHop technicians if I opened a support thread without evidence to support my claims.

If there is an authoritative site where one can search for that IP address range and it detects the problem, please let me know the url and I'll do it. Mind you, doing something like that and sending the list to SingleHop (or the whatever the host in question is) might be a good thing to do as general practice if you are a spam fighter here.

EDIT: urlquery found no problems at 198.143.137.130 ; see https://urlquery.net/report.php?id=5046810
I also did a blacklist check (http://whatismyipaddress.com/blacklist-check) and found no problems with 198.143.137.130
I'm not even sure why I'm pursuing this except as a citizen of the internet -- these sites that GURBL apparently found problems with have nothing to do with mine.

RE: rpgcrossing.com

Posted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 8:10 pm
by Hadashi Blacksky
If WOT spams bad ratings en mass to good sites, it is utterly useless. And yes if you blast every single site hosted on a legitimate hosting company for a few rotten eggs you are spamming. I will keep this app only because, as we have seen, we really need to keep an eye on what rating it is giving to this site.

I'm hoping that the irony here isn't lost on WOT.