(The quickest way to register)

Check out our new Mobile App


  1. User picture
    • Anonymous on Mon 13 Dec 2010
    • 09:30:00 PM UTC

    Bad user ratings for WOT on chip.de

    Has anyone seen the bad user ratings for WOT on chip.de?


    If there is no good reason for the bad ratings it would be great to support WOT on this site, because "chip.de" is a very important source for software in germany, and the actual ratings there may repel people from installing WOT.


  1. User picture
    • Sami on Mon 13 Dec 2010
    • 09:53:00 PM UTC

    Re: Bad user ratings for WOT on chip.de

    Perhaps they are from the same group of people who posted several pages of reviews to Mozilla Add-ons a while back claiming the add-on was malware...? I'm not quite sure where they came from that time, but they were from Germany.

    One should remember that our service makes a surprisingly large number of people who make money by scamming others online very unhappy. For example, I personally never knew how big the useless ebook business was in Germany until the angry email from the sellers started pouring in. Often these folks threaten to post lies about us all over the web if we don't remove the ratings or comments for their sites (and some go further in this than others...). Somehow I don't think they would be above manipulating the polls on the Chip website either. It seems the fairly simple Captcha is the only protection they have against abuse.

    • User picture
      • BobJam (not verified) on Tue 14 Dec 2010
      • 12:04:55 AM UTC


      @ Sami,

      As WOT becomes more widely recognized and valued, I suspect pissing off scammers is going to increase. So, I suspect the volume on your "angry emails" will increase and these "bad user ratings" on sites like chip.de will be much more prevalent. Probably stating the obvious here, but I Imagine we will see a similar increase in posts like the OP's, plus an increase in posts questioning the "integrity of WOT".

      Perhaps you should prepare a cut-and-paste response.

  2. User picture
    • Kraftwerk on Wed 15 Dec 2010
    • 03:54:57 PM UTC


    Im szre i´ve met those guys here. And im sure i can tell you the sites of most of those users!

    Blueberry Cake Level Member of the WOT Community

    • User picture
      • Agent Cooper (not verified) on Wed 22 Dec 2010
      • 09:49:44 PM UTC

      RE: Re:

      @Dein Untergang
      Yeah, I believe one of them is our stalker from last year on this website:

      He created a new account again: http://www.mywot.com/user/1867361

  3. User picture
    • TMDD743 on Wed 29 Dec 2010
    • 11:44:55 AM UTC

    RE: Bad user ratings for WOT on chip.de

    Sehr schade, WOT hat durch bestimmte User, die permanent falsche Bewertungen abgeben, seinen guten Ruf ,den es bis vor ca. zwei Jahren hatte, nach und nach eingebüßt.. Nicht nur bei Chip bekommt WOT schlechte Kritiken. Selbst langjährige WOT-User sind inzwischen dieser Meinung und tragen sich mit dem Gedanken, WOT zu verlassen.

    • User picture
      • Sami on Wed 29 Dec 2010
      • 12:13:00 PM UTC

      RE: Bad user ratings for WOT on chip.de

      In my experience, most complaints are from people who can't accept the fact that others don't find their sites trustworthy (see my post above), and these people are in the minority. You may want to read the FAQ too. But since you seem to disagree, how about telling us which sites are unfairly rated?

      Edit: Btw, the account TMDD743 belongs to the troll mentioned above.

  4. User picture
    • Anonymous on Wed 29 Dec 2010
    • 11:58:20 AM UTC

    @ TMDD743

    Nothing is 100% Correct.Anti Virus Scanners often make False Positives.Neither is anything 100% Perfect.But I have tried most Site Advisor Type Systems and WOT is still the Best IMHO.

    • User picture
      • BobJam (not verified) on Wed 29 Dec 2010
      • 12:25:23 PM UTC


      @ Conspiracy Theory,

      Churchill said it similarly: "Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time." (from a House of Commons speech on Nov. 11, 1947).

      I think that pretty much sums up what you are saying about "nothing being 100%" perfect.