|
|
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| − | Catnose.com is R-Rated, but it is most definitely not hard porn. Please re-check.
| |
| | | | |
| − | == Help rectifying MASS mis-rating. ==
| |
| − |
| |
| − | http://www.mywot.com/en/scorecard/idahopotato.com links to
| |
| − | http://www.mywot.com/en/forum/5034-be-sure-to-take-a-really-blaklist
| |
| − | and it seems that the damage STILL hasn't been fixed, 2 years later. WTF?
| |
| − | I don't get how one user's ratings (it indicates the user Phung is responsible) would cause such a massive mis-rating. Did a bunch of mass rating tool users act like lemmings? Anyone? --[[User:MrElvey|MrElvey]] 23:25, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | == http://www.picsdrive.com/john-currin/1 ==
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Your retarded ROBOT marked an artist web site with every kind of red flag, 'because porn'. Just because some moron with a stick up his arse the size of a phone pole, and less emotional maturity than Beavis and Butthead decided to add something to a 'black list', somewhere, doesn't mean that your ROBOT should give infinite downvotes to sites based on that list.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Yeah, 'child safety' maybe should get a lower rating, but EVERYTHING ELSE???
| |
| − |
| |
| − | In fact, anything your BOT (or any identified BOT) rates should be given a 'BOT' rating flags, and separate scores with/without the bots, so people can ignore the ratings given by that bot/those bots, BY DEFAULT. Because your crawler has got some obvious problems.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Not that I expect anyone will ever read this.
| |
