| Type |
Site |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Reply
1
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
Only when the video shows scars or other signs of abuse does it become a turn-off.
|
04-16-13 06:24am
|
Reply
2
|
Real Peachez
(2)
|
Reply of
Marcie's Comment
I feel a little bad for mentioning here, I checked out this website a couple weeks back and there is no update schedule, and the updates that do come in sporadically are often ones that were previously published on the site in years past. A very large percentage (more than half) of the pics and videos that were once available on the site are no longer available. Several of the listed videos, click on them and the video files do not exist on the server. Of the videos present, they are lesser quality than was available previously, and many encoded in the wrong aspect ratio.
|
12-02-12 05:11pm
|
Reply
3
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Cybertoad's Poll
Other.
I inquire to what the director became sick from.
|
11-27-12 07:33pm
|
Reply
4
|
DDF Network
(4)
|
Reply of
PinkPanther's Comment
There are other ways that malware can screw things up.
For example, DDF has a bar at the top with interactions with google plus, facebook, & twitter, it is possible to have malware on your own computer that is redirecting DNS lookups on those popular domains to alternate sites.
Part of my daily job is cleaning viruses off computers, no anti-virus software is perfect. I clean up nasty virus that get on computers that are running Norton Anti-Virus, McAfee, Microsoft Security Essentials, Kaspersky, NOD32, Avast, AVG, the list goes on.
No anti-virus software is perfect, especially when it comes to rootkits which can be very nasty and very evasive. Rootkits often cause very strange things to happen while browsing the web.
In other words, be cautious browsing the web, but also make sure to inspect your own computer thoroughly when anything shows up.
And often double-check your Adobe flash & reader software, and java software, are updated to the current versions. Java especially has been where I've seen most recent malware get in.
|
10-28-12 07:00pm
|
Reply
5
|
N/A
|
Reply of
RustyJ's Poll
No, seriously, if someone scores a site a 90, while stating in the review that at the time of the review there were, say for example, 40 scenes available - why would ANYONE have a problem with that review? Someone please give me a reason for why you would have a problem with such a review.
If you have reason to believe the review was a false or fake review, then by all means go after it. But you cannot challenge a review because the other person values different things than you do.
And if one of you sees someone score a new site higher than you believe it should be scored, then you subscribe to the website yourself and write your own competing review.
Every single website began as a new site, and all the top sites grew because there were people willing to give them a chance early on.
And full disclosure, the one thing that does irk me, are those who believe a website subscription entitles them to uninterrupted 24/7 full speed data streaming. Though I haven't ranted on that in a long while. If this were the widespread attitude of porn subscribers, simply put there would be little to no porn produced anymore. Ask any porn website operator how he really feels about users who use their bandwidth to the maximum.
|
02-12-12 10:47pm
|
Reply
6
|
N/A
|
Reply of
RustyJ's Poll
And as a follow-up, in particular to the third option - once you review a site, unless that site removes content, why would you ever change your score, change your review?
All reviews are based on the content that is available at the time of subscribing.
As the site grows, or doesn't grow, in the future, the content that was the entire basis of the review still exists in full for every successive subscriber.
"Live" sites, sites that focus on cam shows, model interactions, chats, etc., where the value of the content is dependent on interaction on the other end, then yes these sites would have their value changed over time. But the traditional sites which post static photoset and video updates?
|
02-12-12 09:54pm
|
Reply
7
|
N/A
|
Reply of
RustyJ's Poll
Does no one else recognize the inherent problem with the question? Scores are subjective opinions, and unique to the individual. No one should dictate what another person values in a site.
I don't view sites as a "did I get a month full of entertainment" as one here says, I view it as "did I get $xx.xx worth of entertainment" and new, small sites absolutely can deliver.
Some people value quantity more than others. If you do, then pay attention to reviews that value quantity. If not, then pay attention to reviews that value quality.
|
02-12-12 09:44pm
|
Reply
8
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
I see pregnant porn anything, and for some strange reason, I wonder what will be for that child growing up when everyone around finds out he/she was in a porno.
I think that sums up my feelings on this subject very clearly.
|
01-06-12 09:28pm
|
Reply
9
|
Bound Gangbangs
(3)
|
Reply of
elephant's Comment
You mean, the part at the end of the scene where she is given the choice to say she enjoyed the scene or not receive her paycheck?
|
01-06-12 09:24pm
|
Reply
10
|
ATK Premium
(2)
|
Reply of
Capn's Reply
I don't know the details of the cam shows.
The forum I believe is open to anyone with any ATK subscription.
The actual content is just glammed up. In Premium she may start with an evening dress, where in Galleria she is starting with a t-shirt and jean shorts.
|
12-29-11 11:31pm
|
Reply
11
|
ATK Premium
(2)
|
Reply of
Capn's Comment
Not sure what you mean by "quite a fe periphery bells, whistles & add-ons."
It's exactly like ATK Galleria, made for a glamour look, instead of the amateur look.
|
12-29-11 11:42am
|
Reply
12
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
If the site has something I want, why would I choose not to join the site?
No matter what the website is, whether it is still updating or not, I join based on the material that is currently on the site, not the material that will be added to the site.
|
12-23-11 07:10pm
|
Reply
13
|
FTV Girls
(2)
|
Reply of
RLane's Comment
Their oldest stuff is 1090px on the long side. Their newest stuff is 1600px.
Then they have some "big sized" sets that are either 3000px or 4000px but they are more random than anything else, not even close to their complete collection, and only include a sampling of images from a given set.
Assume you're getting 1600px on their new material.
|
12-11-11 05:02pm
|
Reply
14
|
Joy Bear
(0)
|
Reply of
messmer's Comment
All you have to do is subscribe to the website and write your own review.
It's as simple as that.
Seriously, what is the point of your comment?
|
12-08-11 08:31am
|
Reply
15
|
VideosZ
(5)
|
Reply of
jd1961's Reply
For a site with as much traffic as videoz, they are making use of cloud computing, having their site spread amongst many data centers. Most services don't advertise prices, Amazon's cloud services do:
http://aws.amazon.com/ec2/pricing/
Do the math with their numbers. And question if other services are going to give cheaper or more expensive rates to porn sites? All you have proven is that Action Jav has other subscribers who are not maxing out the bandwidth 24/7 for the full month.
|
11-20-11 10:31pm
|
Reply
16
|
21Sextury.com
(11)
|
Reply of
littlejoe's Comment
You can cancel at any time without paying for any additional months. It's just saying that if you keep that subscription active for more than 4 months, the price for every additional month drops.
|
10-21-11 08:19pm
|
Reply
17
|
VideosZ
(5)
|
Reply of
sir noddy's Comment
A 20mbit connection running 24/7 for a full month racks up about $300 in hosting charges. Of course it varies depending on provider and amount of traffic amongst all users.
I'm not joking about hosting costs in that price range.
When they charge $18 for a 1 month subscription, with half of that price eaten up in referral fees, and another 15% in billing processing - there is a reason why you don't get full speed all the time.
To answer your question of when these "dinosaur sites" will drag themselves into the 21st century, it will be when you offer to pay $300/month for a subscription. Until then, it's best to find a way to be happy with what they do provide for you.
|
10-20-11 11:03pm
|
Reply
18
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Capn's Poll
I think that first option was supposed to have the "less than" symbol. (and I can't create the symbol in this textbox)
|
10-19-11 08:17am
|
Reply
19
|
DDF Network
(4)
|
Reply of
monty4321's Comment
It's a great site, but they do pack on the makeup thick.
|
10-17-11 05:00pm
|
Reply
20
|
Reality Kings
(10)
|
Reply of
Vegas Ken's Comment
Good deal!
(fyi, Monday is the 17th)
Anyone reading, I suggest clicking their button "Try The Backup Processor" on their join page to use Epoch to subscribe. Probably all cool, but no reason to chance an in-house billing site, when Epoch is there at the same price.
|
10-15-11 01:39am
|
Reply
21
|
Karup's PC
(1)
|
Reply of
Wittyguy's Reply
Yes, you're right, used to be more exclusive in the past, not quite as exclusive anymore.
|
10-13-11 09:53pm
|
Reply
22
|
Karup's PC
(1)
|
Reply of
selphy's Comment
I'd estimate 90+% of the material is exclusive. But it is not 100% exclusive.
|
10-12-11 12:39pm
|
Reply
23
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Cybertoad's Poll
Being accepted by others. Having those you surround yourself with every day always inspecting your body for even the slightest hint of imperfection. Never knowing if the job you have today is the last job you will ever have in the business. Needing to question the motives of everyone around you...
|
10-09-11 08:38am
|
Reply
24
|
Nubiles
(7)
|
Reply of
messmer's Comment
They also give a small discounted price to pornusers.com's referral link.
If you went straight to nubiles.net without any affiliate link, the price is $30. And with that email offer, nubiles plus met-art is $30.
There is nothing wrong with email offers. Just delete the email if you don't want it.
|
09-10-11 01:27pm
|
Reply
25
|
DDF Network
(4)
|
Reply of
BadMrFrosty's Comment
It's an archive site of itself. What do you mean? DDF first operated the site years ago, now it's lumped in with the new ddf network subscriptions.
|
09-06-11 10:28am
|
