Review Replies (9)
|
Replies to the user review above. |
| Msg # |
User |
Message |
Date |
1
|
exotics4me (463)
|
Just wanted to add here that while some of the content is available on other sites, it isn't available in the quality that it is on Babelicious and to a lesser extent Sexy Babes. If Babelicious has a set that I already have, I replace the set I have with the Babelicious set since it is usually close to double the resolution. Also not for sure what the reviewer considers "lousy" video quality. Looking at my hard drive and the Babelicious network videos, I see what looks to be a standard of 640 high end on those with what looks to be a minimum of 2000 bitrate.
If you consider that lousy, you haven't been to many sites, it is well above the average.
|
11-11-08 08:10am
Reply To Message
|
2
|
xbigvmanx (14)
Webmaster
|
REPLY TO #1 - exotics4me :
Babelicious isn't bad its the sites that are affiliated with it. I reviewed them together and that's why I said there are only two websites that are really worth your time which were babelicious and sex babes. I have noticed that if you look deeper there are some models like Ember, Swan, Tawney Roberts to name a few on sexy babes.tv that have old footage which are grainy, poor picture qaulity resolution of 320. That is what I meant by lousy footage. I have videos from Sexy Babes for example that I have seen from cyberage.com and their galleries you can get from Karup or ATK. If I was going to review Babelicious on its own it would probably get a 75.
|
11-11-08 08:34am
Reply To Message
|
3
|
PinkPanther (44)
|
REPLY TO #2 - xbigvmanx :
Every member of this forum is, of course, entitled to their own method of scoring a site, but it's hard for me to understand how this network of sites gets a 69 from this user when Babelicious as a stand-alone site would earn a 75, and the user says that SexyBabes.tv is also a worthwhile site - and you get the whole of both sites, not a teaser of one or the other - so I would think that you would then have a base of 75 plus whatever should be given for the addition of SexyBabes.tv - and then you've got some bonus sites as well. It's hard to see that not getting you to 80 at least.
I agree with Exotics that, while you can find stuff in this network that has been posted elsewhere, sometimes in the same week, the higher quality posting of the set is in this network of sites as compared to, say, Twisty's.
The worst thing about this network of sites in my opinion - the navigation between the various sites - the whole thing would be SO much better if they connected it up in a more cohesive way, which they have mentioned as a possibility.
|
11-11-08 08:52pm
Reply To Message
|
4
|
xbigvmanx (14)
Webmaster
|
REPLY TO #3 - PinkPanther :
Its hard for me to understand how people think these websites are in the high 90s. But I am respecting their opinions as long as everyone gives me the same courtesy. Anyway I am sticking to my score because I am reviewing these websites as if they were one entity. That is why they are getting a 69 and I am not backing down on my score. After subscribing for years on other high quality pornsites there is a standard and they haven't met that standard at least IMHO.
|
11-11-08 09:14pm
Reply To Message
|
5
|
PinkPanther (44)
|
REPLY TO #4 - xbigvmanx :
And I question your addition
Babelicious = 75 (according to you) plus SexyBabes.tv, which you say is a decent site plus other sites in the network = 69?
It's a strange method of scoring a site IMHO
|
11-11-08 09:18pm
Reply To Message
|
6
|
exotics4me (463)
|
REPLY TO #2 - xbigvmanx :
I understand what you are saying, but your review lists a con as, "Lousy video quality". It isn't specific to the "other sites" as a matter of fact, in your bottom line you are specific to say, "I concentrated on those two sites". All sites that have been around for a long period of time have some bad quality clips. You mention ATK, where most of their videos are in parts and can't even be downloaded in full clips and are not any better in resolution on the videos. ATK also does not have full zip downloads and doesn't have half the resolution of the picture sets found on babelicious or sexy babes.
And most of all, I cannot understand why when you join a site that you would take off for "bonus" sites. That isn't the least bit logical. There is the old saying that you don't have to go to those sites. I would even question most of the logic in the review. Like saying it is hard to get the content on your hard drive, only to then say the zips are good and something other sites don't offer. I'm not trying to be negative towards you, quite the opposite in fact. I am saying though, that your review borders on looking like a review posted by someone trying to lower the overall score of this site. Especially since you mentioned that you read the other positive reviews. I've said it on here before, everyone is entitled to their opinion, but there still is a point where we have to consider that society today is known to have some members that dislike the "popular" whether it is sites, people, etc.. And that is what this review sounds like.
|
11-12-08 06:10am
Reply To Message
|
7
|
Cybertoad (92)
|
There are 5 main reason I rated this site as a 90's since you asked why it was rated.
1. Staying power this site and the network have been producing often and regularly along time.
2. Wow awesome models, not just good but consistently knock outs.
3. Good consistent download speeds.
4. Good selection and surfing.
5. Often updates.
I am not sure why you would rate a site that low is my question, wow a 60's for a site that has been consistently pouring out good adult material for years.
I read yours cons, and well they do not say anything in regards of why its lousy?
What speed video are you seeing ?
Site doesn't guarantee exclusive so why is that a con?
And what about navigation do you see difficult.
My take is your review was very short and is why I think others are asking um mm Why a 60's when there is not much you are saying to support that statement. You are entitled to your opinion in the review, but you are gonna see opposition in rating a site this good in the 60's . That means the site is barely usable in your view including the network wow....
But I respect your right to say what you feel about a site I responded because you asked why others rated it high.
So I answered since I gave a 93.
Still stand by it being a 93.
Cybertoad
|
11-12-08 09:45am
Reply To Message
|
8
|
xbigvmanx (14)
Webmaster
|
REPLY TO #7 - Cybertoad :
More power to you if you love this website. But these websites did leave a bad taste in my mouth because after going thru a lot of other websites that are better quality like ftv, karup, or clubsandy I admit there's a standard of what I am expecting out of a high quality website. When I review websites, I check out content, easy navigation, quality and exclusiveness of material, themes, and what's most important for any consumer do I come out a satisfied customer? As far as I am concern customer satisfaction really went low. I am still keeping my score. What does it matter if I am giving it a bad score? My opinion is not the end all be all for these websites. Let the customers decide if their going to like it or not. I am just giving them a different perspective that is not as cracked up as other people say it is, and that is just IMHO.
|
11-12-08 02:20pm
Reply To Message
|
9
|
Cybertoad (92)
|
REPLY TO #8 - xbigvmanx :
Dude. LOL
You said "Its hard for me to understand how people think these websites are in the high 90s"
That is you inviting a response, I gave one, I really do not care what others place as review. So nope your reviews means little to those of us whom think highly of a site that you do not, that is correct. What I was asking is details on why you posted it, and you chose to not give one thats your choice yet again, but as a member ppl will ask questions, says so in the review protocols. Something along the lines of individual opinions etc. And nope know one wants to make you change your score.
They want to know why its what it is, the review did d not say enough.
Thats the point, and in closing you asked "Its hard for me to understand how people think these websites are in the high 90s"
Loaded lines like that will get a response usually lol.
Enjoy.
Cybertoad.
|
11-13-08 12:05am
Reply To Message
|
| *Message rows highlighted in light orange are replies to replies. |
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 0.01 seconds.
|
|
