Page 2 of 7
Posted: Sun Sep 05, 2010 5:45 pm
... we are faced with a rookie who has formed an opinion very qiuck that he has serious doubts about the system of WOT.
See activity score on his profile, nearly nil.
What site ? At least mention an URL !
@olyman : Still welcome to WOT, I hope you will soon learn how this works and enjoy it.
Posted: Sun Sep 05, 2010 6:07 pm
Rated and joined the comment of Issviews
It strikes me that olyman isn't responding at all.
That's nice : First you scream something and than you disappear !
kamagranow or kamagra now -
Posted: Sun Sep 05, 2010 11:03 pm
while rating - kamagranow.biz -provided by G7W I found this one coiro.biz.tc/kamagra with the name Kamagra now .
there are some other sites if you Google it or Bing it with different combinations of that name . I have gone to a few , and it is the same scheme .
Posted: Mon Sep 06, 2010 2:05 am
coiro.biz.tc has some surfing pictures
coiro.biz.tc/kamagra results with a 404 page not found error.
You need to remove your comment and delete your ratings
Always visit the site before rating it.
Two that I listed have no site, but I referenced them because the whois registration is the same entity
he could be fictional
Posted: Mon Sep 06, 2010 6:08 am
Dr. Kumar could be fictional, but it's not that unusual for doctors to not show up on Google, especially if they are not in the US and not on staff at a hospital. And doctors don't tend to use LinkedIn for much.
At least in the U.S., the doctors who got involved in signing prescriptions for online pharmacies tended to be doctors who didn't have any other active practice, due to their licenses already being restricted for disciplinary reasons or due to them being retired.
Re: visit before rating
Posted: Mon Sep 06, 2010 10:40 am
I suppose that there are quite a few members who just look at the forum posts and take the site ratings and recommendations as read. This effect is frequently seen when members rate sites that have no opportunity for visits because the link immediately redirects to another address, or the site no longer exists.
The effect of rating without visiting might, in the case of red-rated sites, occur because those members are fearful of risking attack or infection and think that it is safer just to rate on the scorecard. In this instance it would be incumbent on the more experienced members to rate accurately and give details, such as the 404 page not found error, rather than just giving the site link and rating colour.
Re: "just echo your way out my posts"
Posted: Mon Sep 06, 2010 12:08 pm
I refuse to be bullied by you, or anyone else.
Posted: Mon Sep 06, 2010 12:59 pm
You are free to ask, and I am free to ignore your request. This is a public forum, within the constraints of registered membership, and I will post wherever I have something to add regardless of your request to ignore you.
Posted: Mon Sep 06, 2010 1:19 pm
2 time I ask you to ignore me , as I have done with you ---------- thank you
Be respectful of others
Please do not post anything unlawful, defamatory, offensive, insulting, profane or vulgar. Posting of pornography, racist or otherwise discriminating remarks, threats to cause physical or mental harm or extreme offensive language is not allowed..
I have asked you to simply leave me alone , otherwise I would consider this attitude SPAM .
this is the last "conversation " I will have you .
Posted: Mon Sep 06, 2010 3:03 pm
I, at least, want to hear what BOTH of you have to contribute on the topic. Whatever started this disagreement is not apparent to other visitors arriving at this thread. That's a good reason to consider letting it die, or at least discussing it privately instead of in a forum thread.
What Jazzspeak said about rating domains one hasn't visited applies to all of us. I have made that error myself at times in my zeal to rate 200 identical sites sitting on the same hacked IP address, not noticing that some of them actually belong there. And I know people far more experienced than myself who ended up embarrassing themselves that way, too.