well he should have control as far as it goes whether he allows them or denies them to put the add
but lets face it anybody who falls for that nowadays should be spammed but i haven't seen that one either
If SiteAdvisor marks Lunarpages as untrustworthy then that lowers the value of SA in my opinion. Lunarpages is the best webhost I've seen to date in terms of reliability, customer service, and nice people and ideas all around...
Now this is only some people. It is not the majority and it certianly should not give the site a bad rep cause some people say the site is bad. Some people have come here and said this ia bad site and flamed Guru and myself. Yet this site isnt bad. Just goes to show that some people can ruin a rep for all.
I will say that Mahmoud must have adjusted the Ads cause my urlfilter isnt blocking them anymore. I might update it. But the Ads dont bother me much. I have even clicked a few now.
SiteAdvisor well mark sites as bad if they have been tested and are linked to bad sites or have no downloads that have been tested, but the site itself may be fine. SiteAdvisor is a good product, it is just important to keep in mind that it is based off user reports and site testing of the most popular sites. Ultimately, it is up to the user to make the decision as to what is safe. SiteAdvisor is just there to make browsing the web safer.
They can be. It is always nice to be able to check search results beforehand to know if the sites I'm visiting could be potentially harmful. SA well display little Xs, checkmarks, or exclamations next to the restults you pull up on most major search engines. There are free and paid versions of SA if you're interested and they work in IE and Firefox. The free well simply advise like the name implies while the paid can actually prevent you from loading a harmful webpage.