[Hysterica]

As honest as the text appears, I usually associate websites which look similar to this as outdated and untrustworthy. It's the type of website you often see for old freeware, which is why it doesn't seem so great to a potential user as they'll assume the website style may reflect on the service they're about to receive.

I would take a bootstrap style over this. Maybe that's just me.

[kcbanner]

Interesting. I prefer an older looking site like this. To me the feeling is that it has been created by more mature developers that would rather present all the necessary information simply, instead of muddling it with a bunch of unnecessary styles (or some inane scrolling page).

[userbinator]

I think your expectations are outdated; it's extremely easy these days to create a generic templated site that looks like every other Bootstrap one out there.

On the other hand this looks like handwritten HTML so I get the idea that the creators put a little more effort into it. Someone looking to scam or create clickbait content-farms is unlikely to do such a thing, but rather use one of the various site-generators out there instead.

[cnst]

It's funny how you're saying this on Hacker News, which, thankfully, still pretty much fully works even with JavaScript disabled, unlike pretty much every single web2.0 site nowadays, even HN clones or competitors.