Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuga
That really sucks, but if your site was linking to a gallery with virus on it, what do you expect? Sure, it's not your fault, it's the guy who made that gallery and redirected, that's why cheaters are a pain in the ass, that's why we have to deal with them. The fact is your site was linking to a virus, so they blocked it. I'm sure you were very pissed, but now the block is off, think about it... they had a reason to block you. You linked to a virus.
Good luck moving to submit.
|
Its a good point and i asked myself that question, but here are the arguments against
1) Links - everyone links everyone - thats the internet - you cant blame the linker for the linkees actions.
2) No Warning - stopbadware made no attempt to warn or contact me... that is the worst part..
3) Its not algorithmic, its academic and subject - that is against googles methodology.
4) Inconsistency - the organisation is too manual and not consistency in its evaluations as i said before - check zango + kazaa, they dont have blocks, neither does AOL which they did a "big investigation" into.
5) Lack of reliable reports - I have had no access or chance to see what was reported, all I have been told by stopbadware is that they cant find the evidence anymore and are lifting the block - where are their frameshots? their logging + documentation?
i cant imagine 10 harvard students clicking links on pussy.org all day. I wonder if they enjoyed it.
JB