A question about WOT

[learninmypc]

I'm very familiar with WOT & what it does so when a friend sent me this link http://jesus-is-savior.com/Evils in America/Abortion is Murder/number_of_abortions.htm
it lit my WOT up & I simply told my friend I wouldn't click it & my friend said it had a RER WOT circle due to content (abortion) . I replied & told my friend under no circumstances would I click it.
My question is am I being ridicules or ??? Thanks for your input.

 

[bobcat]

WOT indeed says, “Warning! This site has a poor reputation.” But it adds, “Users’ ratings on this site vary strongly. Leave your own rating for clarification.”

However, my other three web guards declare the site tested and OK. Believing them, I visited the site and nothing sinister happened to me. Consequently, in my view, your friend is right and it's the subject of the content that makes the site unacceptable to some, or to many.

I go on to say that WOT relies on people's opinions and hence errors, interests and motivations. For this reason, I prefer other, technically objective web guards and don’t use WOT.

 

[learninmypc]

WOT indeed says, “Warning! This site has a poor reputation.” But it adds, “Users’ ratings on this site vary strongly. Leave your own rating for clarification.”

However, my other three web guards declare the site tested and OK. Believing them, I visited the site and nothing sinister happened to me. Consequently, in my view, your friend is right and it's the subject of the content that makes the site unacceptable to some, or to many.

I go on to say that WOT relies on people's opinions and hence errors, interests and motivations. For this reason, I prefer other, technically objective web guards and don’t use WOT.

Thank you for your input.

 

[learninmypc]

WOT indeed says, “Warning! This site has a poor reputation.” But it adds, “Users’ ratings on this site vary strongly. Leave your own rating for clarification.”

However, my other three web guards declare the site tested and OK. Believing them, I visited the site and nothing sinister happened to me. Consequently, in my view, your friend is right and it's the subject of the content that makes the site unacceptable to some, or to many.

I go on to say that WOT relies on people's opinions and hence errors, interests and motivations. For this reason, I prefer other, technically objective web guards and don’t use WOT.

Bobcat, may I ask what you use instead of WOT? Hopefully its free.TIA(y)

 

[bobcat]

^ ^ ^
I use the free McAfee SiteAdvisor. Once you install it, it shows security ratings of sites in both IE and Firefox. And it updates automatically. But I believe it’s incompatible with WOT, so you’ll have to choose one of the two.

See here:
http://www.siteadvisor.com/download/windows.html

 

[learninmypc]

^ ^ ^
I use the free McAfee SiteAdvisor. Once you install it, it shows security ratings of sites in both IE and Firefox. And it updates automatically. But I believe it’s incompatible with WOT, so you’ll have to choose one of the two.

See here:
http://www.siteadvisor.com/download/windows.html

If I can find the free link on there, I'll give it a shot.

 

[bobcat]

^ ^ ^
It’s at the bottom of the page!

Or see here:
http://www.siteadvisor.com/

or here (on the right):
http://www.siteadvisor.com/howitworks/index.html

 

[learninmypc]

Thank you.