18+
Сайт для лиц 18 лет и старше
18+

Безопасен ли conservapedia.com?

Это подозрительный сайт

1.6
starhalf-starempty-starempty-starempty-star
(621 отзывов)
Заявить права на сайт
Задать вопрос сообществу
Поделиться:
Поделитесь своим мнением...
starempty-star
Плохо
starempty-star
Нормально
starempty-star
Средне
starempty-star
Хорошо
starempty-star
Отлично
621 отзывов
Сортировать по:
Новые
Самая надежная онлайн-защита
9 февр. 2012 г.
starstarstarempty-starempty-star
Site is trustworthy and does not track information or link to malicious sites, but is filled with false information and hate speech. Not recommended for children.
Полезный
2
9 февр. 2012 г.
Contains lies, defamatory information, hate speech, delusions and clearly incorrect statements. Presents all this as "trustworthy", and uses a wiki-like presentation style that is intentionally misleading. Stay away!
Полезный
3
5 февр. 2012 г.
starstarstarstarstar
just a bunch of pissed off atheists bashing this site... there should be some way to regulate this crap.
Полезный
1 февр. 2012 г.
LOL...ALL of the spooky guy George Soros zombies are posting false accusations about this site. You know a web site is posting articles that are based on facts when these zombies come out in droves to try and scare people away. Anyway, this site is clean as a whistle@@ Nothing to see here that is bad for your PC's health but dead spooky guy George Soros zombies.
Полезный
27 янв. 2012 г.
This site functions as a place to read articles about conservative American political opinions, just as one would likely infer by the URL. No problems.
Полезный
2
24 янв. 2012 г.
starempty-starempty-starempty-starempty-star
Hate speech and false data
Полезный
2
24 янв. 2012 г.
starstarstarempty-starempty-star
While I disagree with most of the content on this site, I thimk it is a mistake tan s a discedit to WOT's principles to give it a bad rating.
Полезный
1
21 янв. 2012 г.
starstarstarstarstar
very useful
Полезный
14 янв. 2012 г.
starstarstarstarstar
Ignore all the haters' comments here. If their ire at bias was consistent, they'd be perpetually busy rating infinitely more sites that slant their content they way they apparently prefer.
Полезный
8 янв. 2012 г.
starstarstarstarstar
An encyclopedia from a conservative point of view. Those who rate this site as harmful are just silly liberals who hate others opinions.
Полезный
5 янв. 2012 г.
starempty-starempty-starempty-starempty-star
Hateful site oriented to the extreme right. They unfairly permanently lock popular articles so as to ensure the propagation of a certain POV.
Полезный
1
2 янв. 2012 г.
starstarstarhalf-starempty-star
Using WOT to censor viewpoint sucks. If I and other conservatives were to do this to liberal sites such as DailyKos.com, we'd be guilty of using WOT to enforce our viewpoint. There is nothing about this site that contains hate speech or "phishing" -- which is an attempt to drive traffic to a site presenting malware. Depending upon your political viewpoint, you might view the data presented as false, but I've seen far worse on some liberal sites. I remember when the libs tried to WOT out michellemalkin.com and her subsidiary site hotair.com -- it didn't work.
Полезный
30 дек. 2011 г.
starstarstarstarstar
The site accurately reflects the views of many conservatives. Obviously, liberals strongly disagree with these views, but it is unfair to call it a scram or hateful unless you also would say the same about sites like HuffPo and MoveOn.
Полезный
26 дек. 2011 г.
starstarstarstarstar
I notice no one gives bad ratings to the opposite versions of this like liberalpedia and rationalpedia. Seems like political and religious motivated and triggered responses.
Полезный
25 дек. 2011 г.
starstarstarstarstar
WOT needs to crack down on political spammers. This site is 100% safe and informative if opinionated. While I don't claim to agree with everything on this site and identify as a Moderate,It is definitely not the WiKKKi that people claim it is. The whole "Gays are good people and can ditch destructive behavior and be happier" articles hardly qualify as hate speech and the articles about Theology are actually pretty insightful. It's a Conservative Wiki. Don't like it form a Liberal Wiki or a Moderate Wiki. The whole spam thing and "Awareness Campaign" by the Far-Far Left just smacks of thought crime to me. When did it become okay to let Neo-Nazis hold rallies in Skokie but bad for people to gather together to discuss their sincerely held beliefs in a peaceful forum? Maybe you should try engaging in dialog with them and try to come together in a noble exchange of ideas... Never mind just call them idiot rednecks and whine about how Political discourse is so uncivil.
Полезный
13 дек. 2011 г.
starempty-starempty-starempty-starempty-star
Hateful content, what else is to say !
Полезный
2
8 дек. 2011 г.
I've only looked at a few articles, on unions and socialism, and found them to be generally accurate and helpful. I am not a conservative but feel that should not affect my judgment of the site. I am particularly concerned with the reviews that charge it with "phishing or other cams" -- I see no evidence of that at all. There may be more biased articles than the ones I saw, but this is not a simply ideological one-dimensional site.
Полезный
7 дек. 2011 г.
starstarstarstarstar
Website contains no malicious links or software, as far as I can find.
Полезный
7 дек. 2011 г.
starempty-starempty-starempty-starempty-star
Lies.
Полезный
2
5 дек. 2011 г.
False information.
Полезный
2
«
161718
...
32
»

О сайте

Благонадёжность
32
/100
безопасность для детей
35
/100
This site uses cookies for analytics and personalised content. By continuing to browse this site, you agree to our cookies policy
Accept