These people love Richards-Realm a lot!

[Greenguy]

So you bought a site, threw it online & never bothered to check what was in the html coding. Not too fucking bright if you ask me.

BTW - you still have "netverifier" in your metas - wanna explain how that slipped thru?

[AdultMasterCash]

Originally Posted by Greenguy

So you bought a site, threw it online & never bothered to check what was in the html coding. Not too fucking bright if you ask me.

You have reviewers you are sure competent enough to complete relatively simple work. Do you think it would be wise to follow each of them and check everything they do?
It was simple tech procedure to include the site. We have used all the necessary standard procedures to ensure everything is fine. We didn't have any reasons to check if page contains words like worldsex or richards-realm - as this had never happen before.
And our tech specialists of course have not been supposed to detect this bug because it was not of technical nature.

It is just an accident. Unpleasant accident of course but we just had no way to foresee it - because it is absurdical to make such things. Just like you would not ever check
words Queen of England on free sites submitted to you (for example).

Originally Posted by Greenguy

BTW - you still have "netverifier" in your metas - wanna explain how that slipped thru?

Grrrrmmm. I'll kill this guy who have edited the site. He seems to remove only
words, mentioned in the thread as wrong. I am going to make him switch his brain on now.
I'm really sorry about him. It is really nasty mistake after all

[Jaden]

Originally Posted by AdultMasterCash

You have reviewers you are sure competent enough to complete relatively simple work. Do you think it would be wise to follow each of them and check everything they do?

Ummmm yeah...I have to say I do think it would be wise. Especially if you are putting your name and reputation behind it....

Originally Posted by AdultMasterCash

Just like you would not ever check
words Queen of England on free sites submitted to you (for example)

And you think that LL's don't??????? How do you think so much of this stuff gets found in the first place.


Jaden

[AdultMasterCash]

Originally Posted by Jaden

Ummmm yeah...I have to say I do think it would be wise. Especially if you are putting your name and reputation behind it....

Oh, really? Duplicating the work of every single reviewer actually eliminates the need in reviewers themselve. Employees are needed to free your time for more important things. Of course we are responsible for them - but we have to trust them in reasonable tasks in exchange.

Originally Posted by Jaden

And you think that LL's don't??????? How do you think so much of this stuff gets found in the first place.

Jaden

I think you do. You check every thing you are aware of. But you CAN'T check it before it happened first time (you can suppose things people can do but if you do not think anyone will do it - you won't check for it before it happens). That's all I tried to explain - we did not checked for this words in metategs just because we could not think anyone will use them this way. We look stupid here - and if you ask me I would prefer to look unfair than stupid (many programs feel great looking unfair because webmasters still make big money with them) - but it is the fact and I can't evade it now.

I can lie and tell we did it and get this thread down - but I do not want to. I do not want to tell we did it while we didn't.
You are free to make own conclusions but I know the truth. And the truth is we were stupid although fair

[absix]

Originally Posted by Greenguy

So you bought a site, threw it online & never bothered to check what was in the html coding. Not too fucking bright if you ask me.

<!-- ImageReady Slices (index.psd) -->

also

<!-- <p>text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text </p> -->