<snip>
This is a good point and yes, it would help Web Rep develop by having it installed. But my concern would be, if WOT says a site is bad or good, and Web Rep says the opposite, I think this may cause more confusion for the average user than, "double protection" from both plug ins. However, this is just my opinion.
Note that it is still interesting to study statistical views of sites comparing how WOT and Web Rep evaluate them. David is correct that Web Rep needs a chance to mature with and within the Avast community.
It will be interesting to see how Avast will use virus lab data to correspond to Web Rep site ratings.
Well the WOT database has been there for a considerable time, but it is far from perfect either and it is for guidance rather than total abeyance.
So the same would have to be said of the webrep until it matures and is developed further with the inclusion of data from the virus labs.
The problem is that you reasonably can't compare the to as the avast database is statistically much smaller as to make comparison unreasonable.
The problem with WOT in relation to its rating for malware, etc. is that it is very historical data, once on there it is almost ancient history, were as when the virus labs data would be added, that would be on a more live time frame of current detections, etc.
