00000f01

REPLYTO: 1:396/3 UUCP

REPLYADDR: me@privacy.invalid
From: Diesel 

Jax  news:XnsA442C7F8AA884JAX@
127.0.0.1 Sun, 15 Feb 2015 19:39:28 GMT in alt.politics.scorched-
earth, wrote:

> The ratings to speak for themselves...... 

Sort of.

> You got under 3 stars out of 5 on two file hosting sites. 

Considering the cnet site only shows four votes and two reviews; it's 
easy to see how it didn't get 4 or 5 stars. That's how averages work. 
The first person to leave a review clearly demonstrated they shouldn't 
be using BugHunter. It's too complex. The second and last remaining 
review on cnet clearly shows a poster who was succesful using the 
program, and gave it a nice 5 star rank. Averages, thanks to posters 
having difficultly unzipping and running it, not so many votes.

> That's a fact. It's not impressive. Think about it.

That's averages for you. Think about the comments on cnet. One poster 
couldn't get it running, despite the simplicity of unzipping into an 
empty folder and double clicking BUGHUNT.EXE. The other poster 
obviously can follow directions and was able to get it running. And, 
it lived upto it's claims. He even identified it's strong points. No 
installer, runs in DOS, Can be used outside of windows to clean a 
machine that's been loaded with malware known to it. The malware has 
no place to hide in those conditions.
 
Completelyfreesoftware's review team actually has tech savvy personal. 
They actually examined BugHunter. The review wasn't some canned reply. 
They had no trouble using it, and gave it the best award they could. 
Not *all* apps get five stars, btw.

BugHunter is a "must have" for all PC users.

Grab a copy now!

:) Nuff said.


-- 
My truck does not leak. It's just marking its territory! 
--- NewsGate v1.0 gamma 2