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.
Webmaster : Nick Spillum (13)

View Feedback:   Replies (22)         Other:   Site Feedback (72)   |   Replies Received (18)

Replies Received

Replies to your reviews or comments.
Shown : 1-18 of 18  

Type Site Feedback / Review Date
Reply
1
Visit I Dream Of Jo

I Dream Of Jo
(0)
REPLY TO #11 from exotics4me: (Nick Spillum's Reply)

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.


06-02-13  11:47pm

Reply
2
Visit I Dream Of Jo

I Dream Of Jo
(0)
REPLY TO #13 from exotics4me: (Nick Spillum's Reply)

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.

I linked to Viv's video site to show that I wasn't just being negative about the reunited set. I'll put the link here too so you can see why I questioned it as a mid-2000s set. Bottom left hand corner.
http://www.vivthomasvideo.com/modelConte...pe=videos&page=6

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.

I will reply to your other reply on the one.


06-02-13  11:21pm

Reply
3
Visit Viv Thomas

Viv Thomas
(1)
REPLY TO #1 from SexCliche: (Nick Spillum's Reply)

That does help actually, a great deal. Thanks for the reply. I am also glad to be proven wrong about your update frequency. My apologies for not researching more before posting.

08-21-12  05:37pm

Reply
4
Visit Viv Thomas

Viv Thomas
(1)
REPLY TO #9 from Loki: (Nick Spillum's Reply)

I still have not received your original response email as of this time. I did receive your latest email though. Chalk one up to the vaguaries of the internet. It has happened before (an email once took over a month to be delivered), and it was impossible for me to discern a delay in delivery for a lack of response. I apologize, and will certainly not hold you to your offer of a free month's membership, though I thank you.

As befits Murphy's Law, I will likely receive your original response any time now...


08-21-12  01:17am

Reply
5
Visit Viv Thomas

Viv Thomas
(1)
REPLY TO #7 from Loki: (Nick Spillum's Reply)

I did not believe it was a con. It was a technical problem. That was why I wrote the help center and submitted a ticket as it requests. But I never received a reply. Nothing. This is the first time I have been contacted by your site's help center. I appreciate the offer of a free month, and will take you up on it, but you would have made a multi-month customer of me had you just replied to my ticket in the two days before the offer expired. I am just disappointed by the whole experience.

08-20-12  10:38pm

Reply
6
Visit Viv Thomas

Viv Thomas
(1)
REPLY TO #13 from rearadmiral: (Nick Spillum's Reply)

Nick:

Thanks for providing this information. I've noticed the same thing on other sites so now I won't complain so much when I can't get wmvs in HD. I don't have much technical knowledge and hadn't thought of compression issues.


11-20-11  06:30am

Reply
7
Visit Viv Thomas

Viv Thomas
(1)
REPLY TO #12 from rearadmiral: (Nick Spillum's Reply)

Nick:

Thanks for taking the time to reply. I really enjoyed your site and I hope I made it clear in my review that of the few things I didn't like all but one was purely subjective. Even my issue with navigation probably isn't an issue for members who know the models. The fact is that I probably wouldn't have seen it as much of a concern if I knew the models. I hope that's clear to prospective members.

I must be confused about the Desire Moore thing... Middle-age is creeping in. That's my excuse and I apologize for the error.

As I said in my review though, one thing that I found amazing on your site were the 'banned' videos. Thanks for posting those. I like your site and would definitely recommend it (actually, I already did to a porn buddy who would really love your site) and for me those fisting videos alone were worth the membership fee!

You have a great site and thanks for offering the discount.


11-20-11  06:28am

Reply
8
Visit Viv Thomas

Viv Thomas
(1)
REPLY TO #11 from Denner: (Nick Spillum's Reply)

Great to get your input on this one, NS.
I really do not care that much if the HD-vids material is WMV, AVI or MP4 or whatever - as long as it is in great viewing quality and like 1280x720 (or even better).
You say:
"All newly shot scenes are available in MP4 HD."

From what date are "newly shot scenes" - and HOW many can we see at the site?
Thanks!


11-18-11  08:47am

Reply
9
Visit Viv Thomas

Viv Thomas
(1)
REPLY TO #4 from rearadmiral: (Nick Spillum's Reply)

Thanks for the information. I'll check back around Halloween.

10-24-11  04:09am

Reply
10
Visit Viv Thomas

Viv Thomas
(1)
REPLY TO #16 from otoh: (Nick Spillum's Reply)

Obviously I'm miles away! I missed the 'explore site' link on the homepage, which gets me there. Thanks!

09-21-11  03:06pm

Reply
11
Visit Viv Thomas

Viv Thomas
(1)
REPLY TO #13 from Cybertoad: (Nick Spillum's Reply)


In the review I said the navigation was ok, to define that, its about like most sites. Being it is the same as everywhere else. Is not unique, however that said is ok at getting the job done. No fault to the website. I just would like to see things changed in the way its done as this format has been around a very long time. So not bad, it was very satisfactory in helping me get where I needed.


09-21-11  01:21pm

Reply
12
Visit Viv Thomas

Viv Thomas
(1)
REPLY TO #12 from Cybertoad: (Nick Spillum's Reply)

Ooops : I updated the review to the exact number 155,000 and change :-)

09-21-11  01:17pm

Reply
13
Visit Viv Thomas

Viv Thomas
(1)
REPLY TO #6 from Denner: (Nick Spillum's Reply)

Thanks - great to get a response so fast from a WM... and: unlike those sets/vids offered at sites like Teendreams - it's good to hear, that the main site itself has much better quality...
BUT: WHY? - at all offer that low down quality vids/sets in license that make users think: That Viv Thomas deal is not worth it???


09-21-11  08:39am

Reply
14
Visit Viv Thomas

Viv Thomas
(1)
REPLY TO #4 from darrcamp: (Nick Spillum's Reply)

I have had alot of problems using the site,...the first time I have ever had problems using a site. I can only reach the site after I clear my explorer cach and restart my routers,....please let me know what to do. This is by far my fav site, I had been looking for one like it for some time.

Thanks,


01-12-11  11:03am

Reply
15
Visit Viv Thomas

Viv Thomas
(1)
REPLY TO #1 from Sweeties: (Nick Spillum's Reply)

Thanks for the quick update. I really do love this site. Webmasters and users sharing thoughts and ideas. This is what it's supposed to be about!

08-17-10  10:51am

Reply
16
Visit Viv Thomas

Viv Thomas
(1)
REPLY TO #3 from Drooler: (Nick Spillum's Reply)

OK. Thanks. I think that's a great move for your site.

Any chance that earlier material could be brought up to the 2400px standard? Sorry if I sound impossible to satisfy, but the Viv Thomas stuff is really good, and if you have larger originals anyway, why not? I'm thinking especially girls like Sandy (Zsanett Egerhazi), Mia Stone, Eve Angel, Sophie Moone, Nicky Case, Peaches ...


03-30-10  09:27am

Reply
17
Visit Viv Thomas

Viv Thomas
(1)
REPLY TO #1 from Drooler: (Nick Spillum's Reply)

That would be great. 2000 pixels or higher would be very nice. I really like the photography work of Viv Thomas. It should "live large," so to speak.

10-29-09  12:19pm

Reply
18
Visit Viv Thomas

Viv Thomas
(1)
REPLY TO #1 from nadiencendia: (Nick Spillum's Reply)

Hi, Falcon!

Yes, you are right, I explained it wrong. In VT you have the same Streaming videos, but you can download them in VTV. If you look at my review of VTV, you will see that there I explain it Ok.

Unfortunately, I can no longer edit my review. But I can add a comment on the VT site to clear this out.

Thanks for your response.

Nadie


05-08-07  07:54am


*Message rows highlighted in light orange are replies to replies.

Shown : 1-18 of 18  

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 2.29 seconds.