By Staff What is really going on in the Comodo threads?

[ForgottenSeer 123960]

It's not really Comodo fanboys/fangirls causing drama. Usually, the other side starts it. Some folks just hate Comodo and enjoy blaming its supporters. @Andy Ful's Comodo thread was doing well, then a moderator jumped in and said, "Why another Comodo thread?" It all went downhill from there; the other side started with their usual rant, and the Comodo side responded.

Comodo threads are just like any other security solution’s threads here. The curse of Comodo threads is gone, so everything should be fine now.

"When talking about the supreme security solution on the planet... it's no wonder Comodo discussions can turn into a heated debate!"

Posts of this nature tend to fuel drama by polarizing the discussion, pitting members against one another rather than encouraging a debate based on facts and evidence. A properly moderated, evidence-based discussion on this topic should not create such divisions. This is precisely why the moderator intervened and locked the previous thread, cautioning against creating another one fueled by similar triggering content.

 

[Pico]

If nobody is using it what is the point then ?

Please don't exaggerate, I've said almost nobody.
If Comodo software was properly maintained like most of other secuity vendors do much more people would use Comodo and possibly more users would pay for it (for the pro version) and there would be no need to have (flame/hot) Comodo discussions.

 

[Andy Ful]

For the record, the moderator post was #21, and everything worked well up to post #47. The posts showed different views without bloating the thread.
In the meantime, I asked the moderator to delete some posts that were too personal or violated the rules in the OP. Those posts were deleted, and this caused protests against the moderator's actions. The thread was temporarily closed but reopened at my request after some time. Afterwards, I decided to stop asking moderators to delete posts and only asked the posters to follow rule (2) from the OP, which was crucial for the thread.

It is interesting that afterwards, this worked as a standard thread without serious problems. However, the more off-topic or personal posts appeared, the less substantive the thread was. The good thing is that it did not end violently (so far).
In my opinion, the worst are personal posts. They usually start chains of many off-topic or personal posts.

 

[ForgottenSeer 114717]

@Bazang and @Divergent,

What do you think about the subforum for hot topics with slightly more restrictive rules accepted by MT staff?
I noticed that you did not like the last thread about Comodo.

I am completely against more restrictions. More rules, more moderation. Those just result in one thing - more censorship. Now the moderator will state "I did not do it to censor," and while that may be true, the end result is still censorship.

On platforms such as Reddit, BlueSky, Kolektiva.social, etc - the moderators enforce rules to "ensure decorum." What I observe are moderators pushing their ideologies and likes/dislikes of specific posters through the mechanisms of moderation. The Reddit downvote capability is nothing more than a censorship tool that subreddit hive-minded mobs use to censor those that they disagree with (brigading the downvote button on Reddit results in the OP's content being hidden and they can't make additional posts except on an absurdly restricted basis).

There is already excessive moderation at MT, in my opinion. We don't need more. We need less. And the current level of moderation needs to be dialed way back.

 

[ForgottenSeer 114717]

there would be no need to have (flame/hot) Comodo discussions.

There is no need for any flame/hot Comodo discussions in the first place. You people that keep complaining about Comodo's quality is ridiculous. It is a freeware software and there is no quality requirement for it other than what the owner is satisfied with. If Melih wants to give the world free pig slop, then that's perfectly OK because nobody is paying for it.

When millions of people start paying $50 per year for Comodo, then maybe - just maybe - the quality would improve, but I doubt it because Melih is 100% against charging people for Comodo. "Free security software with all its warts" is the entire ideology and reason that Melih created the software and released it to the world. So it will never be any better than it is at this moment.

This is NEVER, EVER going to change! Why can't people understand these facts? A 5 year old child can understand them, shrug their shoulders, turnaround, and go play in the sandbox and forget about Comodo.

 

[russ0408]

I just find it so hard to believe that a software that barley updates, and never puts itself out there can start up so much controversy.

 

[Pico]

There is no need for any flame/hot Comodo discussions in the first place. You people that keep complaining about Comodo's quality is ridiculous. It is a freeware software and there is no quality requirement for it other than what the owner is satisfied with. If Melih wants to give the world free pig slop, then that's perfectly OK because nobody is paying for it.

When millions of people start paying $50 per year for Comodo, then maybe - just maybe - the quality would improve, but I doubt it because Melih is 100% against charging people for Comodo. "Free security software with all its warts" is the entire ideology and reason that Melih created the software and released it to the world. So it will never be any better than it is at this moment.

This is NEVER, EVER going to change! Why can't people understand these facts? A 5 year old child can understand them, shrug their shoulders, turnaround, and go play in the sandbox and forget about Comodo.

Then no restrictive censored threads have to be created here on MT because nothing regarding software quality will ever change on Comodo end.
Those who are paying for the pro version (which is same software as the freeware version) could spend their money in better ways.

 

[rashmi]

For the record, the moderator post was #21, and everything worked well up to post #47.

No, the moderator's post is indeed #21, and it derailed the topic. It was unnecessary, especially when the thread was exclusive with strict rules. Once he made his post, replies and quotes appeared with the usual Comodo rants and jokes. Now, those posts are gone. I'm not blaming the moderator, but the post was unnecessary and affected the thread.

 

[Andy Ful]

No, the moderator's post is indeed #21, and it derailed the topic.

There is nothing in the #21 post that could encourage members to make off-topic posts. I think that any correlation is accidental.
I do not believe that posters wanted to pollute the thread.

 

[Andy Ful]

I compared posts about CIS on MalwareTips and Wilders Security forums.
Due to a high number of posts, mainly negative and often with extreme opinions, the MT forum looks like sick from "Comodo allergy".
There is much less interest in Comodo on Wilders Security, and posts are mainly positive or neutral about CIS 2025.
Another difference is that on Wilders Security, posters often use CIS (or CF). On MT, most of the extreme critics do not use CIS.
It seems that the Comodo problem is an internal matter for the MT forum.
That is why we are here in this thread.

 

[rashmi]

There is nothing in the #21 post that could encourage members to make off-topic posts. I think that any correlation is accidental.
I do not believe that posters wanted to pollute the thread.

I didn't suggest that the moderator intended to disrupt the thread. I felt the post was unnecessary because the thread was thriving and was a unique discussion with strict rules. With the "Why another Comodo thread?" question, some users saw an opportunity to add their usual rants about Comodo. The post was unnecessary for the reasons mentioned, and there were no signs that the thread would follow the same pattern as previous Comodo threads.

 

[Andy Ful]

I felt the post was unnecessary because the thread was thriving and was a unique discussion with strict rules.

I am not sure if it was necessary or not. However, it cannot be used as a cause for anything that happened in that thread. In this way, one could use any post that happened there.

 

[Trident]

I didn't suggest that the moderator intended to disrupt the thread. I felt the post was unnecessary because the thread was thriving and was a unique discussion with strict rules. With the "Why another Comodo thread?" question, some users saw an opportunity to add their usual rants about Comodo. The post was unnecessary for the reasons mentioned, and there were no signs that the thread would follow the same pattern as previous Comodo threads.

You need to understand the moderators as well.

The Comodo subjects grow exponentially, currently there are only 2 moderators active daily, and the Comodo subject for them is a hell. There are 5-6 pages generated over night (along with all other discussions) and this is extreme overhead.
Thread after thread, it is the same discussion, same posts, same product, same quality, same people.

Asking the moderation team to serve as babysitters (through additional rules and clauses) is unrealistic, unnecessary and ungrateful.

Every reader understands that this is a public community, they should do their research and understand the subject.

 

[Andy Ful]

That is right. That experimental thread was a challenge to MT moderators (especially in the beginning). However, we hoped that clear rules would encourage the users to behave nicely. The thread is still open, so it was probably not more challenging than other "hot threads". Furthermore, some topics were cleared out, and there is hope that another Comodo hot thread will not happen soon.

 

[ForgottenSeer 123960]

The discussion remained notably civil because the key contributors were largely in agreement. This respectful dynamic precluded the infighting that usually encourages other users to divide into opposing camps, a recurring theme in similar threads.

 

[ForgottenSeer 114717]

Those who are paying for the pro version (which is same software as the freeware version) could spend their money in better ways.

Paying for Comodo is paying for only the support and a "guarantee" that is, quite useless.

Paying for Comodo is not paying for bug and security fixes. Software improvements are not included in the Pro subscription. They never have been.

Read the Pro subscription EULA and Terms of Service/Agreement.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I have no skin in the Comodo game. I could care less if the software destroys the Earth because it is software of such terrible quality.

I am only interested in what Comodo is legally required to do. And providing bug and security fixes is not required except under the ridiculous EU regulation that is going to drive many software developers out of that market - or more likely - they are just going to raise prices 50% and pass those price increases onto buyers.

Someone will eventually complain to the EU regulator about Comodo, and the only thing that will happen is Melih will not make it available to any EU nation's citizens. I know Melih well enough to know that he will never allow the EU to dictate what he must do with his software.

 

[Pico]

Paying for Comodo is paying for only the support and a "guarantee" that is, quite useless.

Paying for Comodo is not paying for bug and security fixes. Software improvements are not included in the Pro subscription. They never have been.

Read the Pro subscription EULA and Terms of Service/Agreement.

Yes very true, that's why I've said that spending money on the pro version is a waste of money. It's better to spend it on other things which gives much more joy and happiness.

it is software of such terrible quality.

We agree on that CIS software quality is poor and written like spaghetti which very likely leads to more (known and unknown) vulnerabilities / bugs with each new release. The very very low rate of bug/vulnerability fixing is really far below the normal software development standards, same bugs still happen after 10 or more years.

I am only interested in what Comodo is legally required to do. And providing bug and security fixes is not required except under the ridiculous EU regulation that is going to drive many software developers out of that market - or more likely - they are just going to raise prices 50% and pass those price increases onto buyers.

Someone will eventually complain to the EU regulator about Comodo, and the only thing that will happen is Melih will not make it available to any EU nation's citizens. I know Melih well enough to know that he will never allow the EU to dictate what he must do with his software.

Who will be using EU regulations to make CIS quality better? One must be nuts.

 

[Andy Ful]

We agree on that CIS software quality is poor and written like spaghetti which very likely leads to more (known and unknown) vulnerabilities / bugs with each new release. The very very low rate of bug/vulnerability fixing is really far below the normal software development standards, same bugs still happen after 10 or more years.

Comodo is very unpopular; your posts will not make it more unpopular. Posting too much about Comodo is counterproductive - the more your posts, the more interest in Comodo. For example, the last thread about Comodo would not have been created by me without your great input.
People who have never heard about Comodo, read your posts and those of others who disagree with you. Then they can also read about happy Comodo users like here:

Comodo Internet Security 2025 Beta / Final / Infos Thread

Hi all In this Link can you forund some Infos for CIS 2025 from Melih or see the pictures Comodo Internet Security 2024 v12.3.2.8124 BETA - Comodo...

www.wilderssecurity.com

Finally, some of them can try Comodo, which would never have happened without your posts.

 

[cruelsister]

Finally, some of them can try Comodo, which would never have happened without your posts

I doubt that anyone new that reads the bulk of the comments on these threads will be swayed one way or another as the discussion parallels those that on can find on BigFoot- some will go on forever about the diet, vocalizations, and diverse other habits of the creature without ever providing one scrap of evidence that can be independently confirmed by a skeptical audience proving that such a thing exists.

Things may be a bit more meaningful with the presentation of a single SHA-256 demonstrating compromise; but until then these threads cohabitate the same realm as the large hairy fella'.

 

[Andy Ful]

@cruelsister,

The large hairy fella' is not a good example. I like more the example of UFO (not necessarily evidence of aliens). Many people (happy Comodo users) claim that they saw UFO.
The extreme critics say that it is impossible because everybody knows that UFO does not exist. I say that the critics should not blindly reject the evidence that does not fit their theory, even if that theory is well accepted. The problem of UFO should be researched to gather more evidence.

Shortly:

1. Strong/extreme opinions require strong evidence, which is absent in the case of rejecting UFO (and happy Comodo users).
2. The more we say about UFO, the more people will probably believe that something can be true about it (this is true in my case).