Shoutbox

quote:

---

Ratings and written comments are generally posted within two to four business days in batch groups, not in real time. However, CNET reserves the right to remove or refuse to post any submission for any reason. You acknowledge that you, not CNET, are responsible for the contents of your submission.

---

I submitted a review too...., but it's not there yet..

quote:

---

Originally posted by Absorbation
I have added my own review now that noob at the begging made me mad

These are his reviews:

Patchou is a director of a company which distributes spyware.
It seems that Patchou is now one of the directors of Secure Software Inc, one of many business names used by the owners of Lop.com. C2 Media, which is the spyware bundled with Patchou's Plus program, is another one of Lop.com's business names, so it seems that Patchou's greed has clouded his vision and led him along the path of invasion of privacy. It's not hard to find any of this information, so it will only be a matter of time before he loses the respect and trust of the many 'loyal' followers, who he asked on his forums to post positive ratings.

Why allow this to return?
Cons: What happened to the new "zero-tolerance adware policy" on download.com? this software was removed from download.com because it is riddled with hard-to-remove spyware, yet it sneakily returns, just as the spyware contained in this software does to innocent, unsuspecting users.

---

WTF, now thats just plain stupid of him. Well gues he is just stupid.

Whats H.T.I. ? it links to the official site though...

Damn, if I had an download.com account i would write somthing, but i cant be bothered to sign up as i wont use it anyways

quote:

---

Originally posted by Absorbation
These are his reviews:

Patchou is a director of a company which distributes spyware.
It seems that Patchou is now one of the directors of Secure Software Inc, one of many business names used by the owners of Lop.com. C2 Media, which is the spyware bundled with Patchou's Plus program, is another one of Lop.com's business names, so it seems that Patchou's greed has clouded his vision and led him along the path of invasion of privacy. It's not hard to find any of this information, so it will only be a matter of time before he loses the respect and trust of the many 'loyal' followers, who he asked on his forums to post positive ratings.

---

That's a perfect example of how people throw things they read somewhere all together and add some other stuff which they think they know everything about and flavor it of with a twist of made up nonsense...

Let me explain:

=> "Patchou is a director of a company which distributes spyware."
Hello? Where did that come from? Since when is Patchou director of a spyware company? In other words, totally nonsense...

=> "It seems that Patchou is now one of the directors of Secure Software Inc,"
He is "now"? He is director of that company for a VERY long time.

=> "one of many business names used by the owners of Lop.com."
Where did he get that info? Let me guess, from one of the many anti-spyware forums where they do exactly what this person did: Linking unrelated things together and putting stuff in wrong contexts, etc... Secure Software Inc is the company, of which Patchou is director, which has a contract with C2Media, yes, that IS the sponsor contract, nothing more, nothing less...

=> "C2 Media, which is the spyware bundled with Patchou's Plus program, is another one of Lop.com's business names,"
C2Media IS the company name, not a name of a program. Lop.com is the name of the website... C2Media does not have shadow names and fake company names at all. They would be a legal bussiness if they did.

=> "so it seems that Patchou's greed"
That guy realy needs to read a dictionary and look up "greed" (and also "stupid n00b")

=> "and led him along the path of invasion of privacy."
There is nothing in Plus!, nor in the sponsor that is a invasion of privacy at all. Besides, the sponsor can only be installed if the user explicitly choose to, so IF there was any privacy invasion at all, the user agreed upon it...

=> "It's not hard to find any of this information"
ROFLOL... no, especially if it is all made up...
my answer to him: "yeah, but it seems you have a very hard time to find CORRECT information"

=> "so it will only be a matter of time before he loses the respect and trust of the many 'loyal' followers"
LOL, Patchou constantly gains more and more respect by more and more users...

=> "who he asked on his forums to post positive ratings."
Patchou didn't asked anything (yet)


-------

blah, such things can make me so wanna slap such people from corner to corner (in a hexagonal room)...

wtf? err.. for the info, I never re-submitted Plus! to Download.com. Something very fishy is going around here. I'll email download.com to ask about it. The setup file seems to be intact and valid, however, I don't know what HIT is and I have no idea why download.com would allow anyone to submit Plus! to the database again without checkign it.

Anyway... I'll keep you posted about that.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Patchou
wtf? err.. for the info, I never re-submitted Plus! to Download.com. Something very fishy is going around here. I'll email download.com to ask about it. The setup file seems to be intact and valid, however, I don't know what HIT is and I have no idea why download.com would allow anyone to submit Plus! to the database again without checkign it.

Anyway... I'll keep you posted about that.

---

So in other words someone else has payed for you?

And download.com accepted it although just been removed?

I felt dissapointed after I found out that Plus! had been removed, but with it being back, i'm happy. Plus! deserves the praise it needs and not stupid comments like the first comment that you've all seen.

I added my comment when Plus! was still at download.com, and also, Now that it's back, I have added a comment again.

Hmm that's really weird. Surely they would contact the owner to at least check everything's ok?

If they removed it then why is it back? Very weird.

To get back on this topic....

The reviews on Download.com even get worse....

quote:

---

Originally posted by FTQ
Pros: Display contacts on desktop is a redeeming feature, and if you are less than ethical in your work life you may find Boss Protection useful.

Cons: It seems that the "zero-tolerance adware policy" that download.com has instituted is not worth the paper it is written on.

The biggest con? The positive reviews from the msgplus.net cheer squad. Without them there's not much left.

---

lol...?

quote:

---

Originally posted by damages computers

Pros: Makes owner lots of money while wrecking computers.

Cons: Spyware galore. Feasts on what most don't know about user agreement fine print. Doesn't seem to matter if you opt out anyways. Also destroys computer while you try to opt out. Near impossible for most users to repair resulting in corrupted files and crashed computers.

The only people who say this is a good program, are the ones who receive financial or immoral gain. {As per thousands of other internet website reports.} Hopefully, laws will catch up to this charade soon

---

Wtf is his problem..... This dude has NO idea where he's talking about....

I was disappointed when it got removed, but I don't think that it should be back if Cnet wants to keep its credibility, after its massive zero-tolerance adware policy. Did they remopve the policy? Maybe so, but I never heard of it happening. Although optional, Messenger Plus! does contain adware.

Remember, Messenger Plus comes with optional adware, not spyware.

Adware vs Spyware

You know i think its probally best if it wasnt there....