Welcome GUEST!      CREATE ACCOUNT - Forgot Password?

Create an account to share your experiences and more!

E-MAIL   PASS  

Auto Log-in Future Sessions (on this computer).
User Forum Our new user message board where users talk porn!
Porn Users Forum » User Ranks » User Post History

Post History: asmith12 (124)

Filtering Options Select Option
Keyword Search
     Find within...  
View Options All Posts (79)  |   Threads Started (5)

1-50 of 79 Posts Page 1 2 Next Page >

04-28-11  09:28pm - 1270 days Beta testing of Downloadable Blu-ray ISOs (16 Posts) - #15
asmith12 (124)
Active User

Posts: 79
Registered: Oct 17, '07
See my report in FuckingGamble comments. While there is a room for improvement, it IMHO is a very decent first attempt at downloadable adult Blu-rays, I'd certainly like other sites to follow the suit. Motto: "All niches except for boring one!"

04-28-11  12:22am - 1271 days Beta testing of Downloadable Blu-ray ISOs (16 Posts) - #9
asmith12 (124)
Active User

Posts: 79
Registered: Oct 17, '07
Still downloading, will share experience later. If it works as I expect it - it will be one of the greatest things I've seen technology-wise in adult video scene in years. Motto: "All niches except for boring one!"

04-27-11  11:36pm - 1271 days Regional Pricing! (48 Posts) - #36
asmith12 (124)
Active User

Posts: 79
Registered: Oct 17, '07
It is not that Europeans are richer, it is that we (en masse) are ready to pay more for the very same thing .

Switzerland and McDonalds IMHO isn't the best example (Switzerland is damn expensive place, and McDonalds isn't that mainstream in Europe as in US), but why the very same car which costs about $20K in US, should cost like EUR25K in Europe?? Why I've met a professional photographer who's flying from UK to US to buy cameras and so on and saves money even after counting in tickets??? Why download of the very same Adobe Photoshop should cost almost TWICE more if downloading it from UK, then downloading it from US????

It is a crazy world, and it weren't adult sites which has started it being crazy . Motto: "All niches except for boring one!"

04-13-11  09:07am - 1285 days Disgusting! (30 Posts) - #24
asmith12 (124)
Active User

Posts: 79
Registered: Oct 17, '07
If there are many webmasters here who agree that this is disgusting - they could help. If there will be a few dozens of similar sites, claiming REAL names but filled with COMPLETE GARBAGE (with public/invented names and addresses of government offices to avoid hurting anybody) - it should limit the damage greatly (if on 2 out of 3 such sites you'll see that it was Margaret Thatcher who performed in AssLickers 2, credibility of such sites will go down greatly, and so will damage). Motto: "All niches except for boring one!"

04-13-11  08:55am - 1285 days Download speed - general (20 Posts) - #13
asmith12 (124)
Active User

Posts: 79
Registered: Oct 17, '07
I was somewhat inactive with downloads recently, but some time ago the answer in such cases was "get download accelerator and enjoy it on those sites which support it". IDM is the one which I'm still using and quite happy with it.

Take a look at your favorite site in TBP review - they usually show download speeds they've observed without download accelerator and with accelerator - the difference can be HUGE. Motto: "All niches except for boring one!"

07-23-10  08:13am - 1549 days Looking for sites with recent updates (8 Posts) - #7
asmith12 (124)
Active User

Posts: 79
Registered: Oct 17, '07
Thanks a lot, guys. One more proof that TBP/PU beats all other review sites hands down. Motto: "All niches except for boring one!"

07-21-10  06:15am - 1551 days Is "Free Porn" stealing...or......? (19 Posts) - #11
asmith12 (124)
Active User

Posts: 79
Registered: Oct 17, '07
I think we're talking about different things. You seem to mean TGPs and Tubes, and when you (as a webmaster) want to publish some stuff of on TGP (MGP, Tube) it is your choice and when somebody comes there, there is no stealing. (it can be indeed unfair to smaller guys but this is different story).

What I am talking about is not TGPs, but torrents, stolen password sites and so on. Whenever somebody uses stuff which was not intended there, it is not only stealing, but IMHO it is stealing from ME (as I need to pay for myself and for the other guy who stole content). Motto: "All niches except for boring one!"

07-21-10  05:14am - 1551 days Is "Free Porn" stealing...or......? (19 Posts) - #9
asmith12 (124)
Active User

Posts: 79
Registered: Oct 17, '07
Yeah, if it is using content without permission, it is stealing. And to make it worse, it is not stealing from "big fat company" (regardless if it is Sony or some porn website), but it is stealing from other users of the same company, so if somebody steals from porn website, he's in effect stealing from ME .

My reasoning for this rather harsh conclusion is the following: what would happen if EVERYBODY would enjoy stolen porn (or stolen movies)? Answer is obvious to me: there won't be any new porn (or movies) AT ALL, as nobody is going to pay for shootings. And what will happen if 50% of the people will steal? Again, quite obvious to me: prices for the REST of the people (those who don't steal) should go TWICE UP to cover expenses.

So when somebody is stealing (not ALL free porn is "stealing": I don't apply this term to TGPs and other promotional stuff which is released for free by owners), he's stealing from HONEST guys who decided to pay, like myself. Motto: "All niches except for boring one!"

07-21-10  05:05am - 1551 days Looking for sites with recent updates (8 Posts) - Original Post - #1
asmith12 (124)
Active User

Posts: 79
Registered: Oct 17, '07
Looking for sites with recent updates

That poll above on the sites no longer updated has lead me to a question to TBP owners: guys, would it be too difficult to add another search criteria to "Advanced Search", named "Update last time TBP has checked was within ", and drop-down of "3 days", "7 days", "15 days", "30 days"?

TBP already has this information in your database: for example, for UltimateSurrender you write in Site Facts "Last Content Update: 06-07-10 (as of 06-07-10)", it would make this "Update last time TBP has checked was within " equal to 0 days for this site. For FuckingGamble you write "Last Content Update: 05-22-10 (as of 05-24-10)", it would make this parameter equal to 2 days for FuckingGamble. For TheTrainingOfO you write "Last Content Update:
06-04-10 (as of 06-11-10)", making it equal to 7 days for TheTrainingOfO.

I hope such addition would be relatively easy to implement, and it would help those of us who (like myself) are looking for sites which were last updated not at some point in prehistoric age, but a little bit later. Motto: "All niches except for boring one!"

02-08-10  06:07am - 1714 days Any ideas how to filter out sites which are no longer updated? (8 Posts) - Original Post - #1
asmith12 (124)
Active User

Posts: 79
Registered: Oct 17, '07
Any ideas how to filter out sites which are no longer updated?

As (I think) most of PU'ers, from time to time I'm trying to make a TBP-wide search, and recently I've found myself running into the problem that more and more sites in my search results becoming essentially static sites without any updates :-(( (one of more well-known sites which recently stopped updating is asstraffic, but there are LOTS more).

Eventually I've found some way to filter outdated sites out (setting Min. Bit-Rate to "5000k+" greatly reduces amount of "old" sites in results), but this way is still far from perfect, and I'm wondering if anybody knows a better way of doing it.

And while we're on the subject ;-), a question to TBP guys: is there any chance of getting "Last updated" column in "Site facts" on TBP, and "Last updated at most XX days ago" search parameter in "Advanced Search"? I realize it's lots of work, but maybe it can be updated automatically with some sort of web crawler? Motto: "All niches except for boring one!"

12-03-09  05:44am - 1781 days TBP Cash Flow versus Site Scores? (11 Posts) - #9
asmith12 (124)
Active User

Posts: 79
Registered: Oct 17, '07
I tend to believe that you guys do not make any kind of conscious "ratings-for-cash" stuff, but there is also subconscious side of it.

If reviewer knows how important the site s/he reviews is for cash flow (and therefore for his/her own pocket), then it will be VERY DIFFICULT for him/her to avoid taking it into account when reviewing and rating the site (even if they try REALLY HARD). So I would be much more comfortable if I'd know that reviewers (unlike Ken) do NOT even know about cash flows of specific site (and I don't see clear business reason for them to know it, so why should they?). If you guys can assure me that (at least normally) reviewers don't even know how much this or that site generates for TBP, I would sleep a bit better tonight :-).

Oh, BTW (if it is not too much to ask for :-)): what was the reason for Ken to make such an advertisement for OTCash; is there some money involved in this kind of stuff (which I personally wouldn't mind at all as long as reviews are not affected)? Motto: "All niches except for boring one!"

09-18-09  01:30am - 1858 days Striptease - A Poorly Catered for Niche. (260 Posts) - #29
asmith12 (124)
Active User

Posts: 79
Registered: Oct 17, '07
+1 to almost everybody who posted in this thread :-).

I like striptease, slow and nice, both in club and on video, but it looks that at least on video this art is lost :-(. A pity, as for me the sight of the skirt moving around while the girl is dancing, and you know that there are no panties beneath the skirt, is one of the things to die for :-). Motto: "All niches except for boring one!"

09-11-09  07:30am - 1864 days Panties on or off? (8 Posts) - #9
asmith12 (124)
Active User

Posts: 79
Registered: Oct 17, '07
Personally I prefer the girl undressing, with panties going off BEFORE the skirt (which for me can stay on until the very end BTW :-)). Girl dancing around the pole with her panties off but skirt still on is a MAJOR turn-on for me, though unfortunately it happens way too rarely :-((. Motto: "All niches except for boring one!"

08-22-09  02:00am - 1885 days The first batch of review 2.0's launched at TBP! (48 Posts) - #48
asmith12 (124)
Active User

Posts: 79
Registered: Oct 17, '07
Originally Posted by Rick:


What do you guys think of a grade simply called "Content", which would cover the following:

-Exclusivity (as best we can tell)
-Originality (does it stand out from the rest)
-Entertaining (overall, how interesting it is)

Obviously, if this is the only thing we can get for subjective content grade, it would be SO MUCH better then nothing :-). On the plus side, as this is the only purely subjective grade, it might be said (though it's not necessary) that this grade includes everything which made it into the subjective score, but didn't make it into the other (objective) grades.

Originally Posted by Rick:


Just curious, where would you guys grade the following popular sites for this score?

1. Videobox
2. Naughty America
3. abbywinters
4. BangBus
5. Rachel Aziani

Thanks again for your feedback.

As I understand, you've asked for one "Content" rating, so here goes (IMHO):
Videobox: C+ (representing exactly average state of things across the adult DVD industry, which is IMHO just a tiny bit better then an average adult site out there; all other advantages of VideoBox are because of quantity and technicalities, so they don't belong into "Content" grade)
Naughty America: A- or B+ (not sure, never been a member)
Abby Winters: B
BangBus: A- or B+ (while they were the first, now there are too many sites exploiting the same idea, which IMHO reduces 'originality')
Rachel Aziani: B- (not sure, never been a member)

These are among the best sites out there, and on the other end of the spectrum there would be sites like:
Russian Teens Club: D- (bordering 'F')
Digamour: D- (bordering 'F')
Sex Vids On Pod: D+
etc. Motto: "All niches except for boring one!"

08-21-09  01:10am - 1886 days The first batch of review 2.0's launched at TBP! (48 Posts) - #43
asmith12 (124)
Active User

Posts: 79
Registered: Oct 17, '07
Originally Posted by Rick:


"Originality" means so many things. Does it mean innovative site features? Which I reserve for "Interface". Does it mean original models? Does it mean exclusive content? I guess the latter could apply, but again really tough to judge. Even when the site screams they have exclusive content, a lot of times later we learn that it's not. Exclusive is usually a yes or no answer also. So with all that in mind, we moved that to the "Site Details" section, under "Exclusive".

I think I can define "Content Originality"; I'd define it as "How different the site feels from the rest of the industry?" While obviously subjective, personally I'd not have much difficulty in grading sites according to this criteria (for example, sites whose complete content can be found for free on PornTube, would get an "F", and sites, which are not only 100% exclusive, but represent an original idea which can't be found ANYWHERE ELSE - such as UltimateSurrender or NakedNews - would get an "A" or "A+").

And another content-related grade I'd like to see (instead of "Entertain", which is indeed difficult to define), is "Content Variety", meaning "How different are scenes within the site?". Again, personally I would not have much difficulty grading sites according to it (for example, if the site has 2 black guys+1 latino girl doing oral, anal and then DP in the very same room, it probably would be a "C-" or "D", even if models are different every time, and site which has different settings, different M/F combinations, and different actions all the time, would be an "A+"). Sure, not everybody is looking for variety, but that alone shouldn't prevent from having such a grade (I don't look for D/L Speeds, but I don't mind having such a grade). Motto: "All niches except for boring one!"

08-21-09  12:57am - 1886 days The first batch of review 2.0's launched at TBP! (48 Posts) - #42
asmith12 (124)
Active User

Posts: 79
Registered: Oct 17, '07
Originally Posted by badandy400:


If you are looking to join a specific site than it is not a big deal to read the review.

Sure, but what if I'm looking just for SOME site (within a niche) to join? Reading a few dozens reviews in detail is a pain in the ...ahem... neck, it is so much easier to make a quick look at the site rating and then at the site grades. BTW, from you other comments I don't think we have any significant disagreement here :-).

Originally Posted by badandy400:


Giving them a little room for their opinions can be beneficial to us. After all, reviewing sites is what they do.

I don't have ANY objections over giving them some room for reviews :-). My only significant problem with current system that (as I think) current set of grades does NOT give reviewers enough room to express their feelings about CONTENT. Granted, it should make it into overall score, but if they would have grade like "Entertain", or "Content", it would be MUCH easier to filter out what I really need; I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one who doesn't care that much about DL speeds, DL limits, encodings etc. (as long as they're within reason :-)), preferring original CONTENT and it's VARIETY over all the technicalities. While I know that some people are obsessed with technicalities (and I don't blame them - we just have our different "cups of tea"), I think it's kind of unfair to dedicate ALL the grades to technical issues, ignoring original CONTENT. Motto: "All niches except for boring one!"

08-20-09  11:58pm - 1886 days The first batch of review 2.0's launched at TBP! (48 Posts) - #40
asmith12 (124)
Active User

Posts: 79
Registered: Oct 17, '07
Originally Posted by badandy400:


Besides, no one ever said we had to judge a site solely on the final grade. If we find we do not agree with scores than simply read the reviews themselves and make the decision that way.

I still think that scores and grades are VERY important, just because at least personally I don't have time to go through ALL the hundreds of various reviews looking for what I'm interested in (in other words, I prefer to spend time watching porn, not going through porn reviews one by one). Motto: "All niches except for boring one!"

08-20-09  11:51pm - 1886 days The first batch of review 2.0's launched at TBP! (48 Posts) - #39
asmith12 (124)
Active User

Posts: 79
Registered: Oct 17, '07
Originally Posted by Rick:


"Entertain" is so tough to put a grade on, it comes down to personal preference. It also usually requires hours and hours of watching video, which the editors just don't have time for. Fact is a lot of these sites that the reviewers are judging aren't even to their personal taste.

I see your point, but on the other hand:
I think it's a BAD THING (at least for me) if I come to the review page, see all the grades as "A+" and then see that the site is not exclusive and is utterly boring. It is even worse as this grade list as it's currently implemented, is the most eye-catching item in the whole review, so if this list appears to be misleading (in a sense that site with all "A+" isn't too good), it will significantly undermine the value of reviews and site in general. I know it's a challenging task to evaluate "Entertain" value, but on the other hand, in other areas review sites do sometimes manage to evaluate it; for example, old-days GameSpot had a category named "gameplay", which for me was FAR more important for making decision then any other category or overall rating; sure, it was subjective, but it
still was EXTREMELY useful.

I think it's a pity that otherwise EXTREMELY good idea has the appearance of going the way of the other review sites, towards easy-to-judge technicalities, and away from content issues. As it's just the appearance and reviews themselves DO mention content-related issues, it's not too bad for me, but I think it could be even better by adding a few content-related categories. Motto: "All niches except for boring one!"

08-20-09  10:27am - 1886 days The first batch of review 2.0's launched at TBP! (48 Posts) - #33
asmith12 (124)
Active User

Posts: 79
Registered: Oct 17, '07
Originally Posted by Khan:


If I'm understanding your remark correctly, Rick's touched on this in post #25 (above)

"BTW, I'm also going to be releasing the grade criteria by tomorrow (the link right now goes to the old sub-score criteria). It will explain in some detail how we judge the grades. "

... perhaps you missed it.

Yes, I've missed it, but also it would be great not only to explain "how we judge the grades", but also to have an explanation that "final score is pretty much fully up to the editor's discretion"; currently it's completely unclear (and also is VERY different from other review sites, which
makes it even less clear).

Also about "a few more content-related grades" - do you think it's possible? Motto: "All niches except for boring one!"

08-20-09  09:57am - 1886 days The first batch of review 2.0's launched at TBP! (48 Posts) - #31
asmith12 (124)
Active User

Posts: 79
Registered: Oct 17, '07
Originally Posted by Rick:


The final score is pretty much fully up to the editor's discretion (much like the reviews here at PU). The editor takes everything into consideration, but has full control over the final score. This is completely by design.

The problem with the sub-scores was that it somewhat crippled the editor's ability to improvise. As we know, it's the overall package that counts. Our old sub-scores were like training wheels. A good guide to prevent a fall, but prevents the freedom to fully ride as intended. The editors are big boys and girls now. :)

I see, thanks for explanation. Now I'd like to make two suggestions (essentially quite minor):
a) to explain this policy (replacing link from "Grade criteria", which currently leads to "Scoring criteria", which are completely obsolete by now if I understand what you've said correctly)
b) to add a few more "grades" so "grades" won't be only about technicalities, but also reflect how good the content itself is. Would it be too much to ask for 2 new grades (which BTW were present in original review criteria): "Entertain" and "Originality" (which should include "Exclusivity")? Site with the very best "D/L Speed, Downloads, Streaming, ..., Vid Quality" won't be worth a dime (at least for me) if it's utterly boring; also for at least some of us "Originality" is a key factor in decision too. Also (though it's not about content), "Updates" could also deserve their own grade. Motto: "All niches except for boring one!"

08-20-09  09:14am - 1886 days Where is the porn recession? (62 Posts) - #23
asmith12 (124)
Active User

Posts: 79
Registered: Oct 17, '07
Wittyguy: Where is the porn recession?
asmith12: Here it is: http://www.pornusers.com/review/teachmyass/ , today's comment "why no updates?".

You want better pricing for porn? Not going to happen, especially as you can already get "mainstream porn" FOR FREE. What is going to happen is more and more sites essentially going down (staying online, but without updates); I just hope that it will hit ONLY mainstream sites, and that it will NOT hit really innovative and original guys (you probably know at least one company which I mean but I won't mention them here to avoid further accusations of being affiliated with them). Motto: "All niches except for boring one!"

08-20-09  12:15am - 1887 days The first batch of review 2.0's launched at TBP! (48 Posts) - #26
asmith12 (124)
Active User

Posts: 79
Registered: Oct 17, '07
Amount of information is impressing, and with (phew) enough attention to the content (as probably everybody knows, I'm kinda crazy for comments about content, opposed to technicalities :-)).

Unfortunately, currently (for the v2.0 reviews) it became completely unclear how the site rating is calculated. If it's just some function of Grades (D/L Speed, Downloads, Streaming, Interface, Vid Count, Vid Quality), it would be a REAL pity (it would be like game review site throwing away "playability", leaving only very formal criteria like resolution, supported OS etc.). Motto: "All niches except for boring one!"

06-25-09  10:51pm - 1942 days Abbywinters office raided.... (Austrailia HeraldSun) (30 Posts) - #20
asmith12 (124)
Active User

Posts: 79
Registered: Oct 17, '07
Originally Posted by jd1961:


Your own radio station. Nope.

What about ham Radio? It's not exactly CNN, but Internet blog isn't exactly cnn.com either.

Originally Posted by jd1961:


Why will the internet be different.

Two reasons: 1. it's not technically feasible without affecting interest of HUGE monsters like AOL/MS/Google/Apple/whoever else (BTW, Canadian attempt to do it will die from similar cause, or will be reduced from proposed massive wiretapping to on-demand wiretapping which already exists for phone calls). 2. if I remember correctly, this question has already been raised in US Supreme Court with a comment like "radio and TV are indeed different because they use limited set of frequencies".

Originally Posted by jd1961:


They will use porn, fueled by child porn hysteria, as the excuse. As it is now, Australia has a SECRET censored site list. Secret.

You're right, they will try to use it, BUT I don't think there is any immediate danger for free Internet at least in US, given that even Patriot Act right after 9/11 didn't try to do it, and anti-terrorism concerns were (and are) MUCH MUCH MUCH stronger then child porn concerns. If somebody wants to attack free Internet in US, they should play anti-terrorist card, not child porn card. Motto: "All niches except for boring one!"

06-01-09  06:01am - 1966 days no downloads as an option? (43 Posts) - #38
asmith12 (124)
Active User

Posts: 79
Registered: Oct 17, '07
BTW, just to clarify my own understanding of this and similar situations:
- it is their site, and they are free to do anything they want about the rules on their site, AS LONG AS IT'S CLEARLY STATED ON THE SITE BEFORE JOINING IN.
- if they clearly state it, I won't have any problems with them, and definitely won't tell that they're frauds; (I can think they're stupid, but that's a different story ;-))
- if some site will say that they have only streams, I won't complain, I will just walk away (BTW, if they won't tell it upfront, then I can become angry enough to initiate dispute about credit card charge). Motto: "All niches except for boring one!"

06-01-09  05:55am - 1966 days no downloads as an option? (43 Posts) - #37
asmith12 (124)
Active User

Posts: 79
Registered: Oct 17, '07
Originally Posted by badandy400:


And the paying members are not ripping them off.

+1 Motto: "All niches except for boring one!"

05-30-09  01:59am - 1969 days no downloads as an option? (43 Posts) - #34
asmith12 (124)
Active User

Posts: 79
Registered: Oct 17, '07
Originally Posted by badandy400:


Now if the major sites go to this supposed stream only deal

I don't think it will happen; are they all stupid or something? With current customer attitudes it will kill their business MUCH MUCH more than any Tube. As I've said above, I'll start worrying when I see kink.com dropping downloads, not earlier. Motto: "All niches except for boring one!"

05-30-09  01:54am - 1969 days busted by SO...gift card for secrecy? (19 Posts) - #17
asmith12 (124)
Active User

Posts: 79
Registered: Oct 17, '07
Originally Posted by turboshaft:


Couldn't the "Many spend hours a day chasing after these things" argument be applied to religion as well?

Right, but I prefer to look at it from a bit different angle. What about establishing (or to be exact, reviving millenia-old, see for example cult of Dionysus, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dionysus) cult of genitalia? With it officially recognized as a religion, people would have much less trouble viewing porn. Unfortunately, these days trying to pray to those gods openly requires about as much courage as it was required to pray Christ in Roman Empire; ironic, isn't it? Motto: "All niches except for boring one!"

05-29-09  04:50am - 1969 days busted by SO...gift card for secrecy? (19 Posts) - #15
asmith12 (124)
Active User

Posts: 79
Registered: Oct 17, '07
Originally Posted by lk2fireone:


That would be a weapon that could be used against you.

Ironically, anti-porn websites provide some defense against such accusations. Anti-porn site here: http://www.provenmen.org/ says on it's very home page: "Nearly one-half of all men struggle with pornography and lust. Many spend hours a day chasing after these things. " . But well, if it's "nearly one-half of all men", doesn't it mean that it's normal for men (another argument would be that 50% of all the men are deviants, but I hope it won't fly)?

On the other hand, in a divorce case, there is no such thing as somebody being right, in divorce case there are just 3 things: bad lawyers, good lawyers and prenuptial agreements. (BTW, when somebody "high-profile" doesn't write prenuptial agreement, later he gets exactly what he asked for).

Bottom line: I still prefer my SO to know about my habits; it's still better than trying to hide it (won't work in the long run anyway); and BTW argument that she knew about it from the very beginning AND didn't object, can probably be used in divorce case too (obviously depends on your lawyer being a good one :-)). Motto: "All niches except for boring one!"

05-29-09  03:05am - 1970 days no downloads as an option? (43 Posts) - #28
asmith12 (124)
Active User

Posts: 79
Registered: Oct 17, '07
Frankly, I don't think it's a real indicator of anything real brewing in the industry. When kink.com will drop downloads, I will start worrying, until then it's just an example of one-off silly decision (and even sillier excuse).

BTW, I think referring to Tubes as a reason to downfall is just a silly excuse of webmasters who cannot produce anything original and creative. There were times when just ANY adult website was profitable, so lots of mediocre sites jumped this wagon. Which inevitably lead to market saturation and drops in profits; a few years ago they thought that they're saved by going into niches, but the very same process happened with niches, and they were saturated too (even REALLY disgusting ones). Ok, so now a webmaster has only 2 options: 1. to be creative; 2. to go out of business. And BTW, that's perfectly fine with me (maybe even percentage of mediocre sites will go down). Motto: "All niches except for boring one!"

05-21-09  10:09pm - 1977 days What should a PU review include? (82 Posts) - #72
asmith12 (124)
Active User

Posts: 79
Registered: Oct 17, '07
Originally Posted by Wittyguy:


Obviously, this review is worthless. If this user had found this thread and relied upon it then at least everyone who read the review will get a ton of info about the site if not much individual perspective.

And that's exactly what scares me. Facts I can easily get by the dozen everywhere else (especially about sites like VideoBox), so while review according to cheatsheet will indeed have tons of info, IT WILL STILL BE WORTHLESS (at least for me, but I suspect that also for many other people). Moreover, it will likely prevent somebody who otherwise would write something more informative, from providing information people are really looking for here on PU (for example, that 90% of DVDs on VideoBox are the very same that DVDs on VideosZ - THIS kind of info you won't find ANYWHERE else, but on PU).

I'm REALLY afraid that if EVERY newbie will start their reviews from reading those cheat sheets, it can mean premature end of PU as a place to get UNIQUE information about the adult sites. Motto: "All niches except for boring one!"

05-21-09  09:52am - 1977 days What should a PU review include? (82 Posts) - #70
asmith12 (124)
Active User

Posts: 79
Registered: Oct 17, '07
Originally Posted by Khan:


Users are referred to this THREAD, not the cheat sheet specifically.

I still don't think that it's such a good idea. People are usually VERY reluctant to read long pages of instructions (and even more discussions they're not really interested in), so most will just look for a quick recipe "how to improve my review". And the first thing which catches the eye in this thread will be original Wittiguy's post (with nice bullet points "A", "B" and "C"), and the next eye-catching thing is Toadsith's "cheat sheet". And as I've said, IMHO both of them (as ANY other formalized list) represent REAL danger of the new reviewer to go into the routine "video resolution - check, video bitrate - check, ..., end of list - phew, I'm done, press 'submit'", and this still REALLY scares me. Motto: "All niches except for boring one!"

05-21-09  08:50am - 1977 days What should a PU review include? (82 Posts) - #68
asmith12 (124)
Active User

Posts: 79
Registered: Oct 17, '07
I knew that we don't have significant disagreement about how to write reviews :-), but I still think that referring newbies to this "cheat sheet" is WAY TOO DANGEROUS, as it can easily cause them to misunderstand what you've really meant, and use it as an EXHAUSTIVE list of requirements for a good review. I think it is THAT dangerous that it's better not to have it at all, rather encouraging newbies to "take a look at recent reviews of top 5 users". At least for new site members who's writing their very first review, I think it will be much more useful and much less dangerous than referring them ANY kind of formal "cheat sheet".

GOOD REVIEWS, LIKE GOOD COOKING, ALWAYS COME FROM THE HEART, AND LET'S LEAVE THEM THIS WAY. Motto: "All niches except for boring one!"

05-21-09  08:19am - 1977 days What should a PU review include? (82 Posts) - #66
asmith12 (124)
Active User

Posts: 79
Registered: Oct 17, '07
Originally Posted by Toadsith:


The basic point is that you can have both opinions and technical specs in the same review.

You can (though I disagree that only technical specs should go into pros and cons); but my point is that if some newbie will read this "cheat sheet", he/she will likely to include ONLY this technical stuff in the review, leaving out all the information about the content, and this I would REALLY REALLY hate.

BTW, your signature is "I'm not a number, I'm a free man", and IMHO the very same should apply to sites - they shouldn't be treated as just a bunch of numbers, they (at least good ones) are much more than this :-).

GOOD REVIEWS, LIKE GOOD COOKING, ALWAYS COME FROM THE HEART, AND LET'S LEAVE THEM THIS WAY. Motto: "All niches except for boring one!"

05-21-09  12:22am - 1978 days What should a PU review include? (82 Posts) - #62
asmith12 (124)
Active User

Posts: 79
Registered: Oct 17, '07
Originally Posted by Wittyguy:


Like I said before, not even my reviews cover all these bases.

And even more importantly, your reviews cover MUCH MORE than these bases (and that's why I like them). But imagine what will happen if a complete newbie reads this cheat sheet of yours - I'm sure there is an EXTREMELY HIGH risk that he will see it as an EXHAUSTIVE guide of "how to write reviews", and will make writing review a mechanical process with an attitude of "video resolution - check, number of picture sets - check, ...". As I've said before, this REALLY scares me.

Originally Posted by Wittyguy:


However, I think the more cheat sheet content that appears in reviews the better off we all are.

I'm sure it is NOT the case; going this way (and ESPECIALLY publishing such "cheat sheets" as a guide for newbie reviewers) we're risking to stimulate hiding of the forest (overall subjective opinions and feelings) behind the trees (technicalities like video bitstream rates and picture sizes).

GOOD REVIEWS, LIKE GOOD COOKING, ALWAYS COME FROM THE HEART, AND LET'S LEAVE IT AS SUCH. Motto: "All niches except for boring one!"

05-20-09  09:52pm - 1978 days What should a PU review include? (82 Posts) - #60
asmith12 (124)
Active User

Posts: 79
Registered: Oct 17, '07
Originally Posted by ramscrota:


One vital point about reviews is they must include comments about the QUALITY of the material. By this, I don't just mean the lighting, etc, but whether the photoraphers / videographers have got a genuine sense of the erotic, or whether they seem to be following repetitive standard formulas. For example, I prefer pubis hair, but the real problem is thst most photographers seems to know jackshit about how to photograph a pussy, shaved or not.


Exactly. For me this information is worth MUCH MORE than information that their video clips have great 5MBit/s quality; what's the use in 5MBit/s if it's not worth looking at in the first place? Besides, I'm collecting things to WATCH them, not to be proud of the size of my... ahem... hard drive. Motto: "All niches except for boring one!"

05-20-09  09:45pm - 1978 days What should a PU review include? (82 Posts) - #59
asmith12 (124)
Active User

Posts: 79
Registered: Oct 17, '07
Originally Posted by Wittyguy:


VIDEO CONTENT
...
PHOTO CONTENT
...
MODELS / CONTENT
...
EXTRAS
...


Double ouch! Are you sure that you REALLY want that ALL reviews on PU will look as this? Frankly, I will be outta here in a few minutes (come on, this kind of information can be easily found on several dozens of different sites). Motto: "All niches except for boring one!"

05-20-09  09:41pm - 1978 days What should a PU review include? (82 Posts) - #58
asmith12 (124)
Active User

Posts: 79
Registered: Oct 17, '07
Ouch!

Personally, I would be REALLY REALLY disappointed if PU becomes just yet another site with formal review criteria and formal heartless statistics like that one which can be found on TBP. There is very easy to write such reviews, and there is very difficult to get something useful from them. I'm coming to PU to read what users FEEL about the sites, not to get yet another edition of TBP or RabbitsReviews. And BTW, ANY formal system can be EASILY circumvented; it will be very easy to create a completely B/S site which will get perfect marks in every category, but will be still utter B/S :-(. No formal criteria will ever tell me how ugly or beautiful the girls are, how good is "chemistry" in the scenes, and so on; and it is THIS what makes or breaks the site, at least for me. Besides, sites with formal criteria I can easily find by the dozen.

For those who thinks there is a value in keeping facts up to date: yes, there is some value in it, but it is nothing compared to the value of informal description of FEELINGS which reviewer has got when he/she got to the site. Motto: "All niches except for boring one!"

10-30-08  01:37pm - 2180 days Disturbing Videos (17 Posts) - #2
asmith12 (124)
Active User

Posts: 79
Registered: Oct 17, '07
Originally Posted by badandy400:


The simple fact is that porn is meant to be about pleasure. We get pleasure out of seeing and fantasizing about pleasure. There is no damn way this stuff is about pleasure, so I would urge that this is not porn and should not fall under the general umbrella of what is considered porn.

I would say it a bit differently: "Sex should be fun for ALL people involved". So while I adore sites like sexandsubmission (which are Safe, Sane and Consensual BDSM), I definitely don't like torture or rape sites, and even much more mild things which are still abusive in nature, like spitting.

And while I'm also VERY cautious about ANY kind of censorship, I see some reason behind "Extreme pornography" ban in UK (it's obviously ridiculous to make POSSESSION illegal, but that's another story). For those who didn't know - this law resulted from murder of Jane Longhurst by Graham Coutts http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graham_Coutts . Motto: "All niches except for boring one!"

10-23-08  01:23pm - 2187 days Why do you think about porn and wearing.... (68 Posts) - #54
asmith12 (124)
Active User

Posts: 79
Registered: Oct 17, '07
Originally Posted by Cybertoad:


There is no right or wrong, just a subjective view of the wearer.

Exactly my point. Motto: "All niches except for boring one!"

10-23-08  06:40am - 2187 days Why do you think about porn and wearing.... (68 Posts) - #52
asmith12 (124)
Active User

Posts: 79
Registered: Oct 17, '07
Originally Posted by Wittyguy:


My view is that you really have is a breakdown in applied language here. While the person's choice may conflict with religious doctrine, the person still believes in the general concepts of the faith by displaying the jewelry. That person believes they are still functioning within the guidelines of their faith in general which apparently is good enough for them. The chuch says "bad" while the porn star says "good" because they are professing their faith. Which one is correct? To me it seems that they are crossing paths in the dark by making value statments that may be both correct in their overall religious context. Concrete definitions of "belief" or "religion" (or for that matter, "internal" and "external") are not going to necessarily solve the issue because they overlap in this instance.

Lastly, let's say that wearing the jewelry in this case is a "mortal sin" in the religion punishable by excommunication. In this case, the "external" church says that that the sinner is no longer a believer. The sinner says I still believe and profess my faith. Which one is right?

Both :-). That was my point starting from the moment when I've mentioned difference between "belief" and "religion"; now you name it "faith" and "church", but it is still the same thing under different names (maybe I wasn't clear enough, but this is what I've meant). Please see also my LOOONG post in this thread on terminology and reasoning behind "no single authoritative definition", which IMHO implies "free will" in choosing "internal" definition, making it a bit more than just superposition of external inputs. Motto: "All niches except for boring one!" Edited on Oct 23, 2008, 06:45am

10-23-08  06:32am - 2187 days Why do you think about porn and wearing.... (68 Posts) - #51
asmith12 (124)
Active User

Posts: 79
Registered: Oct 17, '07
Originally Posted by Toadsith:


Merriam Webster tends to be a great choice for describing how the populace currently defines a specific "term" as you put it. I would contend that they are generally regarded as a rather authoritative source for definitions of various terminologies. If you would prefer, I have a copy of the unabridged version near me, though the definitions provided by that book can become a bit cumbersome quickly. Still, since you profess dissatisfaction with the source material, please feel free to provide alternatives.

Ok, you've asked for it :-). Let's start with terminology. Here go several different definitions of religion which HUGE groups of people consider as more or less authoritative:

1. "Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people."
- Karl Marx, Preface to: A Contribution to the Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right

2. "Religion, broadly speaking, means the voluntary subjection of oneself to God. It exists in its highest perfection in heaven, where the angels and saints love, praise, and adore God, and live in absolute conformity to His holy will. It does not exist at all in hell, where the subordination of rational creatures to their Creator is one not of free will, but of physical necessity. On earth it is practically coextensive with the human race, though, where it has not been elevated to the supernatural plane through Divine revelation, it labours under serious defects." - from "Catholic Encyclopedia"

3. about.com: they mention that "Some argue that religion doesn't really exist -- there is only culture.", but then give several different definitions, including the following:
" * Belief in something sacred (for example, gods or other supernatural beings).
* A distinction between sacred and profane objects.
* Ritual acts focused on sacred objects.
* A moral code believed to have a sacred or supernatural basis.
* Characteristically religious feelings (awe, sense of mystery, sense of guilt, adoration), which tend to be aroused in the presence of sacred objects and during the practice of ritual.
* Prayer and other forms of communication with the supernatural.
* A world view, or a general picture of the world as a whole and the place of the individual therein. This picture contains some specification of an over-all purpose or point of the world and an indication of how the individual fits into it.
* A more or less total organization of one's life based on the world view.
* A social group bound together by the above.
"
So now we have FOUR definitions (including Merriam-Webster one) which are obviously quite different (anyone wants to argue?). Moreover, as I have said, each of them has LOTS of followers. I think it perfectly illustrates my point that there is NO ONE SINGLE AUTHORITATIVE DEFINITION of religion (as well as any other not so trivial definition, BTW, but this is beyond the scope now).

But that's not all. The same thing illustrates another my point - that as there is NO ONE SINGLE AUTHORITATIVE DEFINITION, and most of people still have some definition in their minds, it is THEIR choice of definition, ergo it is not completely external, but has elements of internal choice (unless the world is considered completely deterministic); and as definitions are THAT different (compare Karl Marx with Catholic Encyclopedia), this choice is not a nominal one, but is an ESSENTIAL one.

So, my logic is the following:
1. Here go 4 examples of defining "religion"; they are substantially different.
2. Each of them is more or less accepted by rather wide population.
3. (1)+(2) means that there is no one single universally accepted definition;
4. most people have some definition of "religion" in their minds
5. (3)+(4) means that they at least have made their choice between available definitions (unless devised their own)
6. as the difference between definitions is substantial (1), it means that this choice makes difference in understanding of word "religion".
7. if we assume that the world is not completely deterministic (which is the thing modern science, most of modern philosophies and most of modern religions surprisingly agree - see for example "free will" in Christianity and "Heisenberg uncertainty principle" in science), (6) means that this choice involves "something" which is not entirely determined by external input, including historical one.
At this point I didn't include further arguments about multitude of choices (which is obviously MUCH wider than these 4 examples), or about inevitability of differences due to interpretations of such vague definitions. I didn't include these (and other) arguments just because at this point I don't feel I need them, but I reserve the right to invoke them if necessary :-).

So, guys, let's first try to discuss this fairly simple reasoning; if you will find a logical flaw in it - let's discuss, if not - let's accept it as a working hypothesis and go on from here. Motto: "All niches except for boring one!"

10-22-08  04:25pm - 2188 days Why do you think about porn and wearing.... (68 Posts) - #42
asmith12 (124)
Active User

Posts: 79
Registered: Oct 17, '07
Originally Posted by Toadsith:


By locating official definitions of the word "belief" I was attempting to clarify the meaning of the word so no more notions of "mixing up" would occur. There may be many definitions of "belief" - I was simply choosing an authoritative source as a place to start.

Merriam-Webster as an "authoritative source", especially on religious or philosophical issues? Gimme a break. See also my reply to Wittyguy - as I know how pointless any discussion about terminology is (especially in this field - I've referred to angels on the head of a pin on purpose), there I've described CONCEPTS opposed to TERMS, and as long we agree on CONCEPTS, I don't care much about TERMS (and yes, your mix-up was about CONCEPTS).

Originally Posted by Toadsith:


Talking to individuals from a small congregation will quickly illustrate how similar beliefs can be.

Only if you're not going to dig deep enough, only in this case. Sure, if you will ask people in church "Do you believe in Jesus?" the answer will likely be the same, but even on question of abortions you're likely to find some difference, and the deeper you will get, the deeper the differences you will find.

Originally Posted by Toadsith:


The beliefs formed by an individual may be an internalized state, but attributing at as "ONLY to 'something' within" ignores so much of the origins of that belief. As belief is an idea, a state of the mind, a way of thinking, it isn't a finite and tangible object that can be examined by itself. Its history, its origins are as much a part of it as a description of its current state is. Its origins are generally, in all ways, external - sometimes one source but usually many sources. What makes humans change may be how we each assemble ideas slightly differently, but assembled they are.

Unconvincing :-). Even if we accept that origins are external (which is BTW also disputable in most of religions), even in this case it doesn't provide any argument that "something" (as an example, decision to choose one religion over the other) is an internal one (unless you're going to say that all the world is completely deterministic, but it would be quite difficult even from completely materialistic positions). Motto: "All niches except for boring one!"

10-22-08  04:11pm - 2188 days Why do you think about porn and wearing.... (68 Posts) - #40
asmith12 (124)
Active User

Posts: 79
Registered: Oct 17, '07
Originally Posted by Wittyguy:


Actually, religion is more of subset of a belief system(s). Neither one are truly internal as we form our beliefs through cultural and personal interactions.

Definitions, definitions... What shall we use to decide on them - Merriam-Webster, Wikipedia or answers.org? Anyway, what's rather obvious (at least to me) is that there are two DIFFERENT things - one is "external" (whatever the name is, I prefer "religion"), another is "internal", which is indeed usually influenced by "external", but it is still usually at least somewhat different for various reasons (and for this one I prefer the term "belief"); as long as we agree there are these two SEPARATE things, I don't care how to name them :-).

Originally Posted by Wittyguy:


I think it's a matter of perception whether or not pornstars wearing articles showing religious faith are committing blasphemy, making a "fashion statement", or are professing their religious beliefs in a sincere way.

I don't think so. I think that in every case it's different and depends on THEIR thoughts and motives (at least to distinguish "fashion statement" and "sincere way"). And what will be the official position of the official church, I couldn't care less (it's my own personal belief, you know :-) ). Motto: "All niches except for boring one!"

10-22-08  03:50pm - 2188 days Why do you think about porn and wearing.... (68 Posts) - #38
asmith12 (124)
Active User

Posts: 79
Registered: Oct 17, '07
Originally Posted by Toadsith:


what examples are there of inaction being useful as a tool for change of a social paradigm?

Wait, where I told anything about "change of social paradigm"? I could check Merriam-Webster for definition of word "useful", but for some reason I doubt it necessarily implies "social paradigm" :-). In specific situations inaction is definitely useful for specific people or groups of people, that's good enough. Motto: "All niches except for boring one!"

10-22-08  03:44pm - 2188 days Why do you think about porn and wearing.... (68 Posts) - #37
asmith12 (124)
Active User

Posts: 79
Registered: Oct 17, '07
Originally Posted by Toadsith:


you were talking more specifically of religious belief, which falls more along the lines of the secondary definition of belief:

Don't you think that this discussion has already went past the point of discussing how many angels can dance on the head of a pin? I can easily find several dozens of different definitions (on beliefs it's really easy, believe me :-) ), but what will it change?

Originally Posted by Toadsith:


vast bulk of beliefs, religious or not, from the extreme to the mundane, are passed from human to human by various methods.

So? It doesn't contradict in any way to my point that it is a PERSON him/herself who makes a decision to believe, NOT somebody else. Sure, nobody can live in a vacuum, but from exactly the same input different people make completely different beliefs, and this difference can be attributed ONLY to "something" within. Motto: "All niches except for boring one!"

10-22-08  09:42am - 2188 days Why do you think about porn and wearing.... (68 Posts) - #29
asmith12 (124)
Active User

Posts: 79
Registered: Oct 17, '07
Originally Posted by Toadsith:


while the action that was chosen may not have helped the situation, it doesn't dispute the point that tolerance is inaction

Right.

Originally Posted by Toadsith:


and as I said before, rather useless.

Wrong :-). I will argue that inaction can be useful (VERY often when compared to certain actions which are worse than doing nothing, and sometimes even when comparing to ALL possible actions). Motto: "All niches except for boring one!"

10-22-08  09:40am - 2188 days Why do you think about porn and wearing.... (68 Posts) - #28
asmith12 (124)
Active User

Posts: 79
Registered: Oct 17, '07
Originally Posted by Toadsith:


I also have found very little evidence that any of the regular contributors think of the models as "second class" citizens - most of us are big fans and would go "oh! oh! Isn't that so-and-so?" if we saw them on the street.

While I would like to think that you're right, I'm not really sure so. I'm really sure that OUTSIDE of PU it's VERY common to think of models as of "second class" people; here it was definitely milder but I'm still not convinced that all (or even most) PU members share your point of view. I will think if I can come up with a poll to figure it out.

Originally Posted by Toadsith:


Still, people like to say belief is about what is inside us, but in general it is relying on instructions outside of us to live our life by.

I think you're making a mistake of mixing up "religion" with "belief" here (first is indeed external, but the second one is essentially a kind of thought or feeling, which are internal by definition), but I doubt it's the right forum to discuss this kind of things :-). Motto: "All niches except for boring one!" Edited on Oct 22, 2008, 09:43am

10-21-08  02:12pm - 2189 days Why do you think about porn and wearing.... (68 Posts) - #20
asmith12 (124)
Active User

Posts: 79
Registered: Oct 17, '07
Originally Posted by Toadsith:


In some regards, at least intolerance is action - and action sparks reaction.

IF there is somebody left to react. Also I don't think that Huguenots in 1572 would share your opinion - at that point they didn't want reaction, all that they needed was a bit of tolerance to let them live and pray the way they preferred. Motto: "All niches except for boring one!"

10-21-08  01:32pm - 2189 days Why do you think about porn and wearing.... (68 Posts) - #18
asmith12 (124)
Active User

Posts: 79
Registered: Oct 17, '07
Honestly, I don't really understand the reason for such a question in PU forum; IMHO it would look ok in a forum of religious zealots, but here...

Why everybody (even porn users) implies that adult models cannot honestly believe in something? Why a cross on an adult model is considered something "strange", but nobody will question a cross on a medieval executioner or Enron CEO? Why adult models always considered as "second-class" people even by those who enjoys them a lot (like people on PU)?

Granted, most of them don't really believe, but so as millions of the other people wearing cross, so what's the big difference? Or the difference lies only in the position of official churches? But isn't belief is about something inside us, NOT about something mechanically accepted from the outside? Weren't there already WAY TOO MANY cases when mechanically accepted beliefs have lead to massacres of the people with different ones?

Personally I'm trying to respect (referring to Toadsith - it's a bit more than just "tolerate") any belief, as long as it's person's own and not just "because somebody told me so" (even if it is Pope); this equally covers beliefs "porn is wrong" and adult models consciously wearing cross. Motto: "All niches except for boring one!" Edited on Oct 21, 2008, 01:38pm

10-21-08  01:06pm - 2189 days Why do you think about porn and wearing.... (68 Posts) - #17
asmith12 (124)
Active User

Posts: 79
Registered: Oct 17, '07
Originally Posted by Toadsith:


Tolerance is never a useful behavior

IMHO depends on what you're comparing it to. If choosing between tolerance and intolerance (such as in 1572), I definitely prefer tolerance. Motto: "All niches except for boring one!"

1-50 of 79 Posts Page 1 2 Next Page >


Home - Sites - Users - Reviews - Comments - Categories - Forum

Contact Us - Announcements - FAQ's - Terms & Rules - Porn Review - Webmasters

Protecting Minors
We are strong supporters of RTA and ICRA, two of the most recognized self labeling organizations. Our site is properly labeled to assist in the protection of minors accessing inappopriate content. For information about filtering tools, check this site.

DISCLAIMER: ALL MODELS APPEARING ON THIS WEBSITE ARE 18 YEARS OR OLDER.

To report child pornography, go directly to ASACP!  We're proud to be a corporate sponsor.
Have concerns or questions about porn addiction?  We recommend this helpful resource.

Copyright © 2007 Ranks.com, Inc. and its licensors. All Rights Reserved.


Loaded in 0.2 seconds.