OMG! *Tears well up* We are getting famous… for spamming Wikipedia.org! We are so grateful!
Thanks for publicizing! Either way, for good or bad, a URL being submitted for spamming is free publicity for us. Thanks to whoever the scammers!
And whats more, some editors cannot decide if our lottery scam sections are “relevant” examples of lottery scam, and they are editing the Wikipedia.org. And while we think that scam.com is a deserving site in any category, I doubt that our dedicated lottery scam section is anything lesser than a free forum.
Anyway, we are not interested to be listed there… its a website plagued with vandalism… It would be better off searching for authoritative information from authoritative websites that OWN the information, rather than websites that allow the OPEN community (including vandals ofcourse)]]> to edit and vandalize.
Heard of the “Two Edge Sword”?
We are not complaining about the “open community”, because we know that it is a “force” that demands respect. However, a system like wikipedia and dmoz run by such community is also open for criticism, esp. towards those individuals who isn’t doing a good job.
Don’t get us wrong. We know that there are many great editors out there, but a system as big as dmoz and wikipedia run by free volunteers will have bad eggs.
If a company run by paid employees has bad eggs, what can you expect from an open community of free volunteers?