| Type |
Site |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Reply
1
|
Hey Little Dick
(1)
|
Reply of
pinkerton's Comment
from gaypornolover:
I think you're right!!
|
03-04-13 03:01pm
|
Reply
2
|
Explicite Art
(1)
|
Reply of
pinkerton's Comment from pinkerton:
Also tried the Epoch billing option and it's even pricier than CC Bill
|
10-31-12 05:32pm
|
Reply
3
|
Bangbros Network
(7)
|
Reply of
pinkerton's Comment
from pat362:
I don't know if they have implemented somekind of Regional pricing thing because I just tried it from Canada and it took me to the join page at the 14.95$ price.
|
10-11-12 01:08pm
|
Reply
4
|
Explicite Art
(1)
|
Reply of
pinkerton's Comment
from pat362:
I just tried it and it came up with the 24.95US price and I'm in canada. Mind you I think tangtub is right and it's just CCBill doing their old regional price gouging deal.
|
09-16-12 05:51pm
|
Reply
5
|
Explicite Art
(1)
|
Reply of
pinkerton's Comment
from tangub:
I think you'll find that's down to CCBill's rip off regional pricing. My guess is that anyone in the US would still see the $24.95 PU price.
|
09-16-12 02:08pm
|
Reply
6
|
Ben Dover
(1)
|
Reply of
pinkerton's Review
from gaypornolover:
Looked at the previews - looks like a typical British "cheeky", funny site - I enjoy that kind of porn! It's the sort of site even I would enjoy!
|
11-06-11 11:11am
|
Reply
7
|
Hands on Hardcore
(2)
|
REPLY TO
#3
from pat362:
(pinkerton's Reply)
I suspect that there is less content because that's what I noticed the last time I was a member. The reason why I no longer join ddf sites is because they play with their content by moving it from one site to the next and posting that as an update. I rarely see true new content except on 1byday.
|
09-26-11 11:43am
|
Reply
8
|
Harsh Handjobs
(1)
|
Reply of
pinkerton's Review
from gaypornolover:
Sounds an interesting site, there really is a site for almost every possible taste now isn't there! It sounds a little repetitive and focused on one theme for me, but it's certainly quite an interesting concept - might take a look. Thanks for the review, which is excellent.
|
09-22-11 11:20pm
|
Reply
9
|
Pure CFNM
(1)
|
Reply of
pinkerton's Review
from gaypornolover:
Hmmm thanks for such a detailed review, I've been looking at this site for a while but the high price put me off. It sounds a decent site, but seems less a "pure" CFNM site - to me if the women are removing their clothes and having full sex, you lose the "clothed" element, though I appreciate this doesn't happen in every scene.
|
09-22-11 11:18pm
|
Reply
10
|
Pure CFNM
(1)
|
Reply of
pinkerton's Review
from manholelover:
Thanks for the great review. Surprisingly there are quite a lot of these sites around. This seems like one of the better ones that's been reviewed.
|
09-19-11 09:53am
|
Reply
11
|
N/A
|
REPLY TO
#10
from otoh:
(pinkerton's Reply)
I just hope that SD himself isn't included in 'the guys'... although shaggy definitely would be :)
|
07-20-11 01:37am
|
Reply
12
|
Innocent High
(1)
|
REPLY TO
#1
from rearadmiral:
(pinkerton's Reply)
Thanks for the comments, pinkerton. This is definitely one of the better sites I've joined in a while.
|
06-24-11 12:31pm
|
Reply
13
|
Thai Chix
(1)
|
REPLY TO
#4
from tangub:
(pinkerton's Reply)
Thanks for the extra info.
|
03-18-11 02:56pm
|
Reply
14
|
Thai Chix
(1)
|
Reply of
pinkerton's Review
from mbaya:
You mention not many of the women are Thai. Are they at least mostly Asian?
|
03-18-11 05:59am
|
Reply
15
|
Thai Chix
(1)
|
Reply of
pinkerton's Review
from tangub:
Thanks for this review pinkerton. I'm thinking of joining an asian site next just to have a break from the skinny russian teens and this is one i have on my short list due to TPB discount which makes it a good deal. What is the average picture size here? I assume there's a decent amount of solo content which is my interest? Content wise i think i would probably prefer 88 Square but that's nearly double the price and price matters these days.
|
03-18-11 12:51am
|
Reply
16
|
N/A
|
REPLY TO
#9
from Magnifico:
(pinkerton's Reply)
What´s so fascinating about pissing in a girl´s mouth? Its also kind of strange for me. Maybe one reason for the people who like is to know that there a women out there who will be able to do that (even without getting paid). Girls you see on the streets who would enjoy that and imaging to do it like in a porno.
|
06-10-10 01:27pm
|
Reply
17
|
Oldje
(2)
|
REPLY TO
#7
from BabyGetReal:
(pinkerton's Reply)
Thanks for your reply, pinkerton. I think your tastes and mine simply differ, which is fine of course. I don't think I was unfair, since tastes and opinions do differ. Price was not the main reason I gave it a low score, but rather for the other reasons I stated. If you look at my profile and my other reviews, you'll see what I personally am looking for and did not find at oldje, despite its uniqueness and potential. Anyway, thanks for your reply!
|
06-07-10 06:29pm
|
Reply
18
|
VideoBox
(12)
|
Reply of
pinkerton's Review
from Cybertoad:
I always loved this site, but was so unorganized I seldom join now .
|
03-29-10 07:57am
|
Reply
19
|
VideoBox
(12)
|
Reply of
pinkerton's Review
from moonbyrd:
There is one thing I'd like clarified if anyone happens to know: the review states "The so-called DVD quality may only be 640x480". When I last had a subscription to Videobox (almost exacly a year ago), the DVD resolution was 720x480, which is identical to the source if they are ripping NTSC originals. Have they downgraded it in the meantime?
Also at the time the aspect ratio of the videos was wrong due to differences in the pixel aspect ratio, and I had to resort to a little trickery to correct it by hand. Is this still the case?
I tried to contact the VB customer service about the aspect ratio issue, but there was no reply.
At the time (last spring) I also looked into American Vice as an alternative. Then their video quality was definitely poorer, and I forgot about them. Now I find that in the meantime they have switched to a different video format (H.264) and their videos are now 720x480 pixels while showing the correct aspect ratio. Technically they may indeed have surpassed the quality of Videobox as it was last year, but there are two things that make me hesitate to reach for my credit card: their selection of studios is such that I can't seem to find many titles that I absolutely have to download, and they still have those offensive and vicious editorial commentaries which make me cringe each time I survey a scene. On the other hand, Videobox has added studios that I find interesting, but I would like to have some definite information about their current video quality. And then there is the pesky issue of regional pricing.
|
03-25-10 11:51am
|
Reply
20
|
VideoBox
(12)
|
Reply of
pinkerton's Review
from Denner:
Oh, that endless mess with the 'SEARCH' at VideoBox keeps on...:
All here at PU - or most at least know the star: Eve Angel.
Now she's got a 7ths name here at 'The Box':
'Katie'... (at the latest DVD) - and here she's british - at "British Sexfest #2"
LOL!
|
03-25-10 09:29am
|
Reply
21
|
Only Cuties
(0)
|
Reply of
pinkerton's Review
from MargulisAZ:
Good review, I especially agree that it's mostly just old content from the site being re-released as new updates now. I joined a few months ago and was very annoyed by this.
|
03-21-10 02:33pm
|
Reply
22
|
Only Cuties
(0)
|
Reply of
pinkerton's Review
from dracken:
I kept avoiding this site because it sounded much, much too softcore for me, but if they have at least some interesting content I might stop by. Thanks for pointing it out.
|
03-21-10 02:01pm
|
Reply
23
|
Only Cuties
(0)
|
Reply of
pinkerton's Review
from Capn:
I thought 'How odd?'' when I saw the 'Only' in the name & you went on to discuss hardcore.
When I looked into it, it isn't done by the 'Only' sites, so that would explain it.
It may cause some confusion though.
Cap'n. :0/
|
03-21-10 12:25pm
|
Reply
24
|
N/A
|
REPLY TO
#9
from Monahan:
(pinkerton's Reply)
Cumming on a belly or back was, in the earlier days of Porn, a contribution to the notion of avoiding pregnancy rather than the characteristic now known as "the money shot."
Back in the 70's it was not uncommon to hear the guy saying "I'm coming" followed by the babe pleading with the stud to "pull it out. I don't want a baby."
|
12-06-09 09:17pm
|
Reply
25
|
N/A
|
REPLY TO
#7
from lk2fireone:
(pinkerton's Reply)
pinkerton "The conclusion of porn sex back then in the early 80s was the guy cumming on the girl's body rather than in her mouth/face, usually on her chest or ass."
I think it's a lot classier cumming on the girl's body than on her face. It's degrading to cum on her face, but that's what today's audience seems to expect.
|
12-06-09 11:52am
|
