Welcome GUEST!      CREATE ACCOUNT - Forgot Password?

Create an account to share your experiences and more!


Auto Log-in Future Sessions (on this computer).
Feedback History A detailed history of activity from this user in all different categories.
Webmaster : Curvy Kitty (3)

View Feedback:   Replies (6)         Other:   Site Feedback (35)   |   Replies Received (4)

Replies Received

Replies to your reviews or comments.
Shown : 1-4 of 4  

Type Site Feedback / Review Date
Visit Curvy Kitty

Curvy Kitty
REPLY TO #5 from badandy400: (Curvy Kitty's Reply)

I think you missed many of my points. I was not saying 100s of reviews, I as referring to reviews with scores of 100 or close too.

Everyone says they have "high res" photos and HD video but many people do not. You say that you have been around PU for a while, you should have noticed that many of us want the actual specs. Physical resolution, bit rate, photo dimensions and so on. That is what I am looking for.

HD in the past six months is well behind par. HD has been affordable for years now. You are going to get no sympathy there. No HD five years ago is to be expected. I would not expect an amateur site to front $100,000 for an HD camera that many computers would not be able to play. Not asking to be ahead of the curve, but certainly keep up with them.

Limited trials are limited robbery. Those are 99% of the time a rip off.

Something you need to consider is that when reviewing a site you compare it to similar sites for content alone. I would not go to your site and then complain that you do not fit into a size 2 dress. That simply would not make sense. Comparing content niche to niche is good. I think you understand that part. The other part is the more of the technical aspects. Video size and quality, photo sized and quality, navigation and on and on and on are comparable globally. Your product must look as good as the best otherwise it is not the best. Score of 100 indicate a site that is the best on the net, not just a single niche. Others have more content, Videobox, many have better HD, you may very well have the best niche content but that does not account for the other aspects.

"The member that posted, I will be honest is quite well a friend and perhaps was not fair for him to post." That was my initial point and is what I wanted to hear.

04-02-11  04:47pm

Visit Curvy Kitty

Curvy Kitty
REPLY TO #3 from badandy400: (Curvy Kitty's Reply)

Well, I have been in the porn world for a good while as well and I had not known of your site. That in itself does not speak well for your exposure.

Frequently when someone is a member of a site for several years they do not get around the porn world much and do not have much to compare to. Reviews from fanatics do not do people much good. Only one of the reviews you have comes from a known member here at PU. All the rest come from people with a single review, yours. We have seen previously when a series of unknowns submits 100's and similar score and it turns out to be shilling.

It would not be a stretch to conclude, or at lest speculate, that you asked these people to write reviews for you. We a webmaster is in contact with their members it is very easy to get to that. That makes for bias reviews because they do no want to disappoint you.

The flip side of that is that you do have contact with members which is a good thing. Having not been to your site I can not say if it is good or not.

On that note, I will not join your site because there are no trust worthy reviews, my opinion, and I feel that you are trying to manipulate the system here. We have no information about your site, types of videos, media specs, cancellation policies, or any of the important stuff many of us here look for.

In reading other comments you have wrote to other members I have noticed you try to sneak out of people compared to other sites. You ask not to be compared to professional sites, skinny site, granny sites, and so on. The simple fact of the matter is that my money is equal no matter which site I subscribe to. You ask us to ignore obviously superior sites.

Being a solo site we would not expect for you to have as much content as the huge network site. Sites do get held to different standards based off of what they are, particularly when it comes to archive size and update size. What no one mentions is the physical quality of your videos and pictures. I would expect a 100 site to produce full HD no matter the niche, as an example.

Bottom line is I do not trust you or those who have reviewed your site.

04-01-11  07:52pm

Visit Curvy Kitty

Curvy Kitty
REPLY TO #4 from Jay G: (Curvy Kitty's Reply)

More power to Curvy Kitty! There will always be Taliban-like characters in any society who think everyone should act exactly like they do. It's always hard to stand up for real freedom and appreciate people with different tastes than ourselves. I appreciate the wonderful diversity of life and sure enjoy it when others have a good time, even if it's different from my good time.

07-29-07  06:07pm

N/A REPLY TO #1 from Rick: (Curvy Kitty's Reply)

The poll doesn't mean we endorse the illegal sharing of content.

I do think the poll still has value though. Something might be illegal, but still happens. No point in avoiding it as a question that I see. It's harmless to ask.

04-30-07  01:18pm

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

Shown : 1-4 of 4  

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.


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 2.91 seconds.