I think it's worse to remove an old one. I don't know how many hours I've spent searching sites for that one favorite scene I accidentally deleted. Also is frustrating if you're a collector since a model doesn't always jump out at you as one you want to collect, but those are the ones I store in my brain for future reference. I eventually decide to collect the model, remember that Site X had several videos/photos of her, go back and they're gone.
I went with too many sites. I remember joining 5 straight sites that had Lil' Caprice as their featured model. I really liked her too, but it was overexposure. Every video she was in seemed the same and I joined 5 sites to see these different exclusive videos? And to think, I was a member of Eve Angel's first solo site for 3 straight years. It could have been that Caprice was brand new back then, but I've not even fooled with downloading her newer videos on any site.
I think when it comes to porn:
People don't want to risk their bank statement showing up with a charge to "Barely 18 Nymphs"
I've also heard of people downloading porn for free because a new scene of their favorite model just came out and they don't want to pay for a full subscription to get one scene.
Last on porn, I think there's a lot of sharers who probably aren't old enough to have their own credit card, bank card, etc...
I think when it comes to music:
It's mostly younger people who just don't have the money to buy all the music they want. Especially in the current generation of teenagers, those who are used to getting everything they want.
The other group in music sharers, I think, are people who people with problems centering around wanting everything by a single artist. For example, they go buy a new album by a band and really like it, but don't want to spend $100 on the band's other 10 albums, so they download them for free.
In that same boat as Drooler. I don't think the raffle started until 4-5 months or more after my first review. My own slowdown in contributions is more because I'm at the point of doing re-re-re-re-reviews of sites. I had checked it yesterday, but don't remember the exact number. It shows how my own contributions had been falling way off before the raffle ended.
Last 18 months, 18 reviews, 1 review per month average.
My first 18 months, 140+ reviews, 8 reviews per month.
I enjoyed the raffle and spending the money on things I normally wouldn't buy, but it never was a dealbreaker or maker for me.
I first thought this was about a porn site saying you would have a fate worse than death if you canceled your subscription. No joke. I really need to start paying more attention.
I've always heard this saying tied to actions/reactions. Things then happening as the reactions to your actions that cause suffering in you. If anyone is bored and can take the graphicness of it, youtube, "Immortal Technique - Dance With The Devil". Best if you get the lyric version. Song will really shake you up a bit emotionally. The main person in it, Billy, would be facing a fate worse than death. Not to give it away, but he does die in it, but I would think what causes him to seek death was the fate worse than death.
I don't know whether to laugh at this point or slap myself on the head for even wasting another reply. I can see now that English isn't your first language since most of what you're saying to me doesn't make much sense so I will give you a break there.
Where I won't give you a break is on your reasoning for not listing the technical numbers of the site. What if someone doesn't know there is a The Best Porn review for I Dream of Jo and just reads your review here on Porn Users? Think the numbers might be useful to them? It's not like it's time consuming to add those. Those also add credibility to your review. I can promise you, putting the numbers is more likely to help others want to join the site than saying, "Jo loves animals and when she plays with them, it´s wonderful".
And please spare me on telling me what Porn Users reviews are for. You've been a member here for 1 week and have 1 review. I've been a member here for 6.5 years and have 233 reviews. While it's true that the reviews should show each person's different perspective, it's also true that 90% of your pros could be things that no one else cares about. Which is why putting the numbers would help. Here's an example that should be able to get beyond our language barrier.
You're going to buy a new vehicle. You want cupholders, air conditioning, leather seats, cd player, power windows and automatic transmission.
You read user reviews on the exact car you're wanting. The first one says, "It's a great car!!! I love it!!! It has everything I need!!!" Did that review help you decide if you want the car?
It also should be noted that not all sites have updated facts from The Best Porn and those facts that you linked to will be somewhat out of date in 6 months. If someone writes a review for I Dream of Jo in 6 months should they too leave out the facts, even though they've changed?
Agree completely on all of this. I especially love her scenes with Eve. The only model I've seen with better chemistry with Eve was Sandra Shine. Jo also seems to become a bit more kinky with Eve than the other models.
Hey Pat, I'll probably give it a try since I too like Jo and especially if it has new Eve Angel content. The webmaster seems pretty genuine in what he's saying. The reviewers seem like nearly all other fly by night reviewers, looking for or getting a discount.
I did think that was funny about the November 2013 updates. Someone defended it somewhere on one of these as a "typo". Looking at my keyboard, I don't see how Nov could be a typo from May, maybe on the first letter since those are right beside each other, but the a-o keys are on separate sides. The future date bothered me mainly because Eveangel.com used a similar method when Eve left their site. They just mass removed the sets from 2004 and listed them as 2007 (which was the current year at the time). Maybe Khan at least gets a chuckle out of all this mess!
thaavi, I never said it's a rip off site. I was asking if the content had been used on Viv's other sites, then reused here. It's a common thing for sites to do. Since I have the majority of the content for Eve from Viv's sites, I wanted to know if I was going to sign-up for I Dream of Jo and end up with a bunch of scenes I already had.
Nick, on this reply, you're saying the point I was making. I honestly had never seen this I Dream of Jo site. And if Eve and Jo are only or mostly only shooting on it or Viv's other sites, then it would be hard for most of us not to question if it's new since they're hardly around on sites like 21 Sextury where Eve has roughly 200 scenes and DDF where Eve has nearly 300 scenes. I do apologize if I was wrong.
I do appreciate the offer of a review account, but one of the rules here has always been we aren't supposed to review a site unless we pay for it. I will still join it and review it since I do like both Eve and Jo a great deal and have huge collections of each. I would like to see new content of them.
I don't know if I'm crossing any lines by saying this, but we have a forum here on Porn Users and also an announcement section where you could have maybe talked to our admins here, Khan or Rick and offered a discounted reviewer price to get some fair reviews. I don't guarantee that though since it would be Khan and/or Rick's call.
Most of the negativity you're seeing here right now is based on several sites in the past giving members free memberships if they come here and score their site high. I've always thought our members here are a unique bunch of porn fans who try to help each other by reviewing sites so others will know what to expect.
No offense is meant to the reviewers who have posted over the last few days, but I really think those high 90s reviews will hurt more than they will help. It may be hard to believe, but I'm generally considered one of the more forgiving and optimistic reviewers here, but out of 200+ reviews, I've only had 8 that are rated 95 or higher. While there has been already 4 reviews of 95 or higher on Jo's site in less than a week.
A few examples of why these reviews are getting a lot of negativity.
There's no mention of picture size in any of them which is a key selling point.
There's no mention about whether the photo sets are zipped for download.
There's no mention of the video resolution. We have members here who won't join a site that doesn't have HD resolution.
There's no total picture sets count or no total video count. Or even more specific ones like, "There's X amount of solo videos, X amount of girl/girl videos.
These all can be a huge factor in creating believability since these all show that the member really is a member and not just someone paid to write a high scoring review.
thaavi, if I could offer some friendly advice. You're starting to sound like you work in the porn industry to know who Eve only works with these days. I do know she isn't with DDF though and made note of it in my review of DDF's Network since they are still listing her site as having new updates.
On the date one Nick, I didn't so much think it was meant to mislead as it is that I think it makes the site look poorly put together. I really couldn't even come up with a reason why a site would list an update that far ahead of time outside of sloppiness during the programming.
Glad to hear that about Jo. I hadn't seen new content of her anywhere.
Looks nearly identical to the vidcap of reunited on I Dream of Jo. As I told the other person, I'm one of the biggest collectors of Eve's content and was genuinely interested in knowing if it was just an old set that had been re-released/recycled. Not to get on Viv's regular site too much, but when they went to the new look and started putting more videos on the regular site, the dates did change a great deal. I used the example in the above reply of one scene that shows as released in 2003 on Viv's video site and shows as released in 2010 on his regular site.
It's also worth mentioning, as you all at Viv's sites probably know, Eve is one of the most recycled models in porn. Her first solo site recycled for nearly 3 years. DDF is still recycling her content on the Eve Angel Official site.
First thing to know is I have collected Eve content since 2003. I have an external with over 1 TB of Eve's content including the rarest of rare scenes like the gangbang scene, her interracial boy/girl scene, her Bubblegirls scenes and everything I've found from 21 Sextury to DDF to her first solo site eveangel.com to her last solo site eveangelofficial.com
Second thing to know is I'm a huge supporter and fan of Viv Thomas as can be seen by mid-90s score on his video site. I have no malicious reason to question if these scenes are recycled. If you need a link or proof of the scene I was talking about, see here at Viv's video site. http://www.vivthomasvideo.com/modelConte...pe=videos&page=6
Bottom left hand corner with Jo in a lightly colored bed, just like the scene on the front page of I Dream of Jo, in the updates. Eve nor Jo have changed that much and it's based simply on one small vidcap on the new one. I asked on that one based on curiosity since I do collect Eve content and if there's some I don't have, I would like to have it.
I have every reason and right to question if it's new content since his other sites have changed formats and as you can see, Bubblegum Babes 5 has a 7 year gap on when it was released between his video site and his regular site. As for when Eve and Jo did scenes together in the mid 2000s, I have at least 9.
I was suspicious because:
#1 In the new updates there is a scene with Eve Angel. I haven't seen a new solo or girl/girl Eve Angel set in quite a long time. The one's being posted on Eve Angel Official are scenes that are 3-4 years old.
#2 Each and every review I've found of this site rate it between 70-83. Three near perfect reviews pop up over a day or two period for a site that had never had a user review on here before.
#3 Because you just admitted the admin told you about the possibility of writing your opinion here. Now, if you really believe that the sites is a 95+, that's fine, it really is, but why isn't that admin who told you all of this possibility, defending against what I posted in my comment? You've made it clear he/she knows about this site. He/she has replied to one of your "great" reviews. Would seem like instead of replying to a 100 scored review, he/she would be replying and defending his site from recycling old content as new.
The #2 one shows why anyone would have a reason to be skeptical. The site has been listed on here since May 2011, so 0 reviews in roughly 2 years, then 3 (perfect and near perfect scores) reviews come in, in 2 days. That wouldn't make you skeptical?
In reply to the poll, I picked other because I think one option is missing in the answers.
A few of you know that my life situation has been changing over the last few years, went from the married ranks to divorced and now engaged.
I know this may sound crazy, but I wanted my future wife or girlfriend to be open to porn and sexual discussions. The girl I'm now engaged to was, then she wasn't, then she was, then she wasn't. I guess we sometimes forget it was men who often repressed women of their sexual feelings. My fiance for example, nearly all of her old pictures are with no make-up, very conservative clothes, now that she's also divorced, she has made a complete 180 degree turn.
So I think that's the other option. All of the options would be related to it, but just the overwhelming feeling of being judged. I think a lot of us these days think the judging days are over, but they still exist, especially in a woman's mind. My fiance seemed to need me to push her ahead a little, show her it was okay to talk about whatever, do whatever, before she would do it. I do see intimidation in the answers and that would be close, but maybe an option of "all the above" lol?
I do have an alternative plan to attract women members. Offer a few mixed drink vouchers. Seems once the drink is in them they'll talk about any and everything.
Just to be fair all-around.
Looks like the female member with the most posts in the forum and reviews is Heather Mckxxx, kittygirl is second. Heather has 10 reviews and 69 forum posts. Kittygirl has 6 reviews and 0 forum posts. There are 120 male members ahead of Heather in reviews. There are 200 ahead of kittygirl. Heather is in the top 100 in forum posts.
Just based on this, this would put female participation at less than 1%. So I don't think Graymane is assuming. On the other hand...
While it's true that one can't tell by name, the member's gender does show in their profile. If someone chooses to lie about their gender it makes Graymane's question even more relevant since it would show there is a reason for the female members to claim "male" as their gender. No reason to question him for "assuming" since all he can do is go by the information the member provides in their profile.
I've always liked the glasses look. Eva Angelina really comes to mind on the glasses look. Maybe it does something to my perception of the model? She's geeky, nerdy, no one probably hits on her...and she does THAT?
Very similar feelings on the feelings towards different partners. I remember when Anetta Keys did some hardcore scenes and nearly all were with her boyfriend who was also a pornstar. Same with Sandra Shine, I think the only two hardcore scenes I saw with her were with her husband.
The problem I had with Sex Art was they really pushed the whole "love" thing in the one on one hardcore scenes. I think Raging Buddhist and a few of our other cynical PU members have rubbed off on me since I was thinking, "Do these models love each other or the money they're making" which somehow in my mind then tells me their interest in money ruins it, even though I like plain old hardcore where you know it's just for the money. That could get confusing.
There's definitely some nonsense like the male and female fully body painted. I wouldn't steer you completely away from Sex Art though if the offers are good enough. I think mine was 2 months for $19.95. I kept a handful of videos and all the photo sets since I liked those, felt like looking at "dirty" versions of Met-Art.
Thanks CT, I appreciate it. I try to write reviews based on what I would want to read in reviews. Bad part, I do the same thing on Amazon reviews too, so I spend quite a bit of time and words reviewing items and sites.
I've always thought ALS seemed really protective of the Angels site. Never even thought that the Angels wouldn't exactly fit the theme/model build that Met usually has. Probably only makes sense that they wouldn't offer it. Brain is getting old.
Your ending line is probably the way I'm looking at it. Too hard to pass up for now, but may not return for awhile.
I wonder if Alex is still running ALS? He always seemed pretty obsessed with trying to get things right. Getting the hi pictures by changing the url reminds me of old days of finding samples and changing the number to see the rest of the samples that the TGP sites didn't show. Porn is making us smarter or more efficient one.
I also never thought I would see hardcore on either ALS site. The few times I talked to Alex he seemed deadset on girls only. I won't knock him too much for changing for the money.
Most of these problems sound like problems the old Euro sites used to have, especially the wrongly labeled size on zips, I remember learning to watch the size of the file to make sure I was getting the high quality zips.
Thanks for the helpful info, will probably give it a shot in a few months.
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.