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).
Feedback History A detailed history of activity from this user in all different categories.
User : sullivan (32)  

Feedback:   All (45)  |   Reviews (20)  |   Comments (6)  |   Replies (19)

Other:   Replies Received (24)  |   Trust Ratings (21)

All Activity A summary of all the feedback from this user.
Shown : 26-45 of 45 Page :    < Previous Page

Type Site - Score Feedback / Review Date
Reply
26
Visit Teenage Dreams

Teenage Dreams
(0)
Reply of freesbee's Comment

If you don't get anywhere with customer service, you might try to cancel with your credit card company. What you do is call their help line and identify the charge and say you did not authorize it. They will start an investigation and send you a short document to sign. Return the document along with you complete email correspondence, and a letter explaining what happened. You have the right on your side, so you may get your money back.

07-12-07  08:48am

Reply
27
N/A Reply of Khan's Poll

Either the graphics on a Mac are superior to those on a PC, or I'm just used to them. Either way, I would hate to watch porn on anything but a Mac, because the colors and image quality just doesn't look right to me.

07-12-07  08:43am

Reply
28
N/A Reply of roseman's Poll

Tits grab your attention.

A nice ass makes you wanna grab hold.

Eyes are small part of the body but a large part of the soul.

Why does no one like hair? I always like to see it worn long, not tied up.

Why do so many eastern European girls have pigtails and barrettes?


07-03-07  07:14pm

Reply
29
Visit Danni.com

Danni.com
(0)
Reply of King's Reply

I know you can play .wmv in other players; in fact, I use QuickTime with a .wmv codec for all my .wmv movies.

My problem with Danni was this: there were three grades of movies - I think they were 300K, 700K, and 1000K. 300K was available in Windows and I think .mov format, but the other two were only available in Windows, and for some reason I couldn't play it, even with my QuickTime and codec. For two or three years they said they would fix the problem, but they never did. So I was stuck with either crappy 300K, or a streaming option (and I hate streaming).

Now I haven't been a member in over a year, so maybe this is no longer a problem. But I wanted to see what others' experience was.

Cheers.


07-02-07  02:09pm

Comment
30
Visit Busty Kerry Marie

Busty Kerry Marie
(0)

recommended

I haven't been a member for more than six months, so I won't give a review, but I can definitely recommend this site; it is one of the best of the solo models sites affiliated with the Score network, second only to Busty Merilyn, imho. They don't update very often, but when they do it's usually something good - a nice long hi-res movie. It's not a personal-touch solo site, but if you just want to feast your eyes on Kerry Marie's gorgeous body, you'll find a wealth and variety of material. (Unfortunately, nothing more hard-core than dildo masturbation.)

07-02-07  01:54pm

Replies (1)
Comment
31
Visit Danni.com

Danni.com
(0)

Mac users

Is there anyone here who has taken a recent subscription to Danni.com who has a Mac? I was wondering if it's now possible to download all the movies to Mac, including the hi-res material, or whether one is still treated like a second-class citizen, limited to downloading the poor-grade stuff. Thanks

07-02-07  01:44pm

Replies (2)
Reply
32
N/A Reply of PinkPanther's Poll

The test should be: can you actually tell that the pictures have been touched up? If you can, then it's annoying. You can tell, when a girl at hi-res is absolutely devoid of everything, including stray freckles or the tear ducts in the corners of her eyes (which Playboy used to shop out). You can also tell when there are movies that go with a set, and the girl has marks in the movies that aren't visible in the pics.

I understand that they want to make the models look more 'perfect', but to me it feels almost like censorship, or as if they were saying 'you can't HANDLE the truth!' No, it's just a freckle or a old zit; I'll be ok.


06-30-07  11:03am

Reply
33
N/A Reply of Khan's Reply

I see; you're lumping all the various criteria - qualitative, quantitative, or whatever - all together. That makes sense.

Looking over some of the trust ratings and accompanying discussion, I see that most people get upset when they receive a 'No' trust without any comment. I think it would improve the system if there was a way of insuring that no one could give a 'No' without also adding a comment or discussion or some kind of reason for it (a pop-up box that needed to have a minimum of twenty characters, say). The 'Yes' ratings help other users judge who is trustworthy, but the 'No' ratings ought to also give the reviewer some feedback - some sense of how they could improve. For if you look at the 'No's', only a few people are getting them because they are jerks or trolls; most people get them because there is something really lacking from one or more reviews. And they should be told what that is.

Cheers.


06-28-07  08:29pm

Reply
34
N/A Reply of djwolf's Poll

Hey, Khan - Yeah, 'trust' is a rather flexible term, especially when you're talking in the abstract, and dealing with something on the internet. I wasn't sure where the definition of 'trust' you're referring to was, so I looked at the FAQ, and this looks like the key passage. I'm going to be criticize this, but just to point out that the ambiguity I mentioned is present even here:

"In essence, the Trust Rating is simply a way to allow the community to judge for themselves who's remarks are trustworthy based on that user's activity."

This basically says that 'trust' = 'trustworthy'. Well, sure; but that doesn't clarify things very much.

"In other words, can the reviewer's remarks be trusted to be accurate to what others will find if they visit a site."

Now "accurate" here means "factually correct" - but what are the facts we're talking about: the other users' personal, qualitative experience with the site (how good, worthwhile, or erotic is it), or the actual, hard, quantitative data about the site (price, number of models, etc.)? And if "trust" means "accuracy," why not just call it "accuracy," or maybe "reliability"?

Anyway, just some food for thought. Is there a definitive discussion of the trust rating somewhere that I haven't found?

Keep up the good work.


06-28-07  06:47pm

Reply
35
N/A Reply of djwolf's Poll

I think the 'trust' rating is ambiguous - does it mean you don't think the reviewer is lying or making up facts? Does it mean that you have found his or her opinions square pretty well with your own? Or does it mean that in some hard to define way you like the reviews, even though you may disagree with them or find them less than totally reliable factually?

I've given 'trust' ratings for all three reasons.


06-28-07  11:46am

Reply
36
N/A Reply of nygiants03's Poll

Some honest, quality sites might be worried that they would lose money if they offered $3-4 full access trials. But if sites aren't willing to do a $3 full-access, trial, they should at least go for a $8 one, like Scoreland.com. It seems to me that the Score guys are out to squeeze every penny that they can out of their customers; which tells me that $8 for a trial is not a money-losing proposition, otherwise they wouldn't be so stupid as to continue it.

06-27-07  03:18pm

Reply
37
N/A Reply of nygiants03's Poll

I have one and tried it for a few months. For a while it was nice, but over time the rubbery material became less silky and more clingy, almost sticky, so that it required more lube. When I had to relube it every three minutes to prevent it from becoming painful, I said enough of this.

Clever invention, but not perfect.


06-24-07  08:23pm

Comment
38
Visit Big Naturals

Big Naturals
(0)

video quality

I recall being a member of Big Naturals about five years ago and thinking 'this site has the best video quality of any big breast site out there!'

I signed up again last fall for a month and was thinking 'Wow, the video quality is the same as it was five years ago - but now it's inferior to that of most major sites!'

One problem the cameramen at Big Naturals and sites like Big Tits Round Asses don't seem to notice is that when you film outside on a sunny day, you often get bad pixelation, and it can spoil an outdoor scene. Big Naturals seems to have this problem a lot.

06-24-07  06:17pm

Replies (2)
Comment
39
Visit Alexandra Moore

Alexandra Moore
(0)

agree

I think the guy who runs all those site - divinebreasts, alicia loren, alexandra moore, and now the new Sapphire site - should be sued for malpractice. He has exclusive access to like 40% of the world's most beautiful large-busted women, and he films them with the technical equivalent of a Super 8 movie camera, that has a huge black frame and often no sound. It's infuriating! I wish some guy from Score or elsewhere would offer him a million bucks to buy out all his sites, then run and film the models properly.

06-23-07  09:06am

Replies (1)
Reply
40
Visit DDF Busty

DDF Busty
(0)
Reply of roseman's Reply

That's what I thought too, because they don't feature bustyadventures.com on their homepage. But you know what? When I was a member of bangbros about two months ago, I suddenly had access to bustyadventures. Really! Maybe it was a glitch on their part, but I know I wasn't paying separately for bustyadventures! (I don't know how much to publicize this, in case it's a loophole in their system!)

06-22-07  06:06am

Reply
41
Visit DDF Busty

DDF Busty
(0)
Reply of roseman's Reply

Jessica is great, that's for sure. She has some awesome videos on bustyadventures.com(which you get if you subscribe to bangbros.com).

06-22-07  05:09am

Reply
42
Visit XL Girls

XL Girls
(0)
Reply of roseman's Reply

I see; that makes sense now, it was a special and limited-time offer. Cool.

06-22-07  05:05am

Reply
43
Visit XL Girls

XL Girls
(0)
Reply of roseman's Review

I'm confused by your information about the subscription price for XLGirls:
- the current advertised mo. price is 29.95, not "15 USD"
- there is no FREE 7 Days trial that I have seen anywhere

I hope you can offer evidence for these claims, because they don't match what I've paid in the past or what I can see now.


06-21-07  09:09am

Comment
44
Visit Nadine Jansen

Nadine Jansen
(1)

videos

I second Marianna's points about Nadine Jansen; I'd give the site the same score she did.

One slight comment/question: I haven't been a member of the site since last fall, but I do recall there being a large number of videos - at least 50, I think. Does that seem right? The site has been around for a very long time (in porn terms), so even if there are only like two movies a month, they've built up over time. They're not the best videos, but there seemed to be a lot.

06-20-07  09:46am

Replies (1)
Comment
45
Visit Score Videos

Score Videos
(1)

billing

Has anyone had trouble getting scorenet to cancel their accounts?

06-12-07  06:46pm

Replies (1)

Shown : 26-45 of 45 Page :    < Previous 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 0.67 seconds.