I've read dozens of these survey methodologies, and the reputable ones always tell you who they recruited to do the survey and what sampling method was used (if only in broad strokes). Given that this one does neither, we have to assume the laziest approach possible.

If they wanted us to take their survey seriously they'd have a real methodology section.

Sure, they could be lazy in a lot of ways in how they execute this survey leading to unreliable results -- indeed, fielding it through something like qualtrics could be said to be "lazier" than attempting to solicit and engage readers of your own individual site. It would be pretty hard and expensive to get enough responses yourself for even a lazy, low-quality result, vs. the at-scale offerings of a vendor.