<p>So, based on the discussion, any of the 5 domains found guilty on the spam case?</p>
<p>powered by Android</p>
<p><blockquote type="cite">On Dec 22, 2011 2:58 PM, "Otto" <<a href="mailto:otto@ottodestruct.com">otto@ottodestruct.com</a>> wrote:<br><br><p><font color="#500050">On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 6:49 AM, Mario Peshev <<a href="mailto:mario@peshev.net">mario@peshev.net</a>> wrote:<br>
> To be completely honest, I...</font></p>I'm perfectly okay with calling spam when I see it, no matter whether<br>
others think it's "legit" or not.<br>
<br>
When I domain names that describe the content of the webpage, then I<br>
think it's one of four things:<br>
- Joke<br>
- Gimmick<br>
- Scam<br>
- Spam<br>
<br>
My favorite example is <a href="http://freecreditreport.com" target="_blank">freecreditreport.com</a>. All "free credit report"<br>
sites are scams (with the sole exception of <a href="http://annualcreditreport.com" target="_blank">annualcreditreport.com</a>,<br>
which is official).<br>
<br>
No real company would have a name of "freestuffherenow". It's a scam,<br>
or it's spam, or both. Either way, it's not linkworthy, *regardless of<br>
the content*.<br>
<br>
IMO, of course.<br>
<p><font color="#500050"><br>-Otto<br>_______________________________________________<br>theme-reviewers mailing list<br>theme-reviewers@...</font></p></blockquote></p>