I think the comparison of GWF and MyFonts is a fair one. It would be reasonable to argue that the problem is not that GWF takes in junky stuff, but that users are likely to make the assumption that if it's in GWF it must be good or it is getting some kind of quality blessing from Google.
That is a reasonable user assumption because the collection is branded as “Google Web Fonts”; Google did not invent some other name for it. MyFonts has a distinct brand from its corporate ownership, so people are not associating it with Bitstream or Monotype so closely....
It is not an entirely bad thing to have a clearing-house service that has all the world’s free web fonts regardless of quality, the “Dafont” of web fonts. It is just unfortunate that it is Google-branded.
Comments
That is a reasonable user assumption because the collection is branded as “Google Web Fonts”; Google did not invent some other name for it. MyFonts has a distinct brand from its corporate ownership, so people are not associating it with Bitstream or Monotype so closely....
It is not an entirely bad thing to have a clearing-house service that has all the world’s free web fonts regardless of quality, the “Dafont” of web fonts. It is just unfortunate that it is Google-branded.