Welcome GUEST!      CREATE ACCOUNT - Forgot Password?

Create an account to share your experiences and more!


Auto Log-in Future Sessions (on this computer).
User Polls Daily polls where users can vote and give their opinion!

Are you suspicious of new users who create accounts just to post in the forum?

Type: Our Site
Yes 18% 7 Votes
No 21% 8 Votes
Undecided 13% 5 Votes
Depends on the first few posts 49% 19 Votes

Reply to Poll
Register to Vote!

39 Votes Total

Aug 24, 2009

Poll Replies (12)

Replies to the user poll above.

Msg # User Message Date


Jay G (67) The proof is in the pudding, as the old saying goes. Reviews filled with elated opinion and few facts are suspect. On the other hand, any review anywhere has to be read critically to get the most out of it.

My strong opinion is a great number of detailed reviews is really helpful and I would be reluctant to see new reviewers eyed too suspiciously or rejected simply because they're new.

08-24-09  06:35am

Reply To Message


messmer (137) If the new user raves about a site or even gives a url to the site then the alarm bells go off, otherwise I reserve judgment until he has posted some more.
08-24-09  07:34am

Reply To Message


turboshaft (24) It really depends on the first few posts.

As people say, the thing about first impressions is you only get to make one. If you start in the forum and the first post is something like "Check out _____! Free ___ and ___!!" well...I get suspicious to say the least, but usually angry, and I don't even run the site!

I wish new users would take a few minutes to look around to see how the site is set up; no ads, pop-ups, or any other bullshit to think this is the place to unload some digitized death threat or spam sandwich. I love how I can come back here day after day and see a level of civility and tolerance not even found in American government.

I really get more suspicious of new users who join just to post short, super high scoring reviews for obscure sites, but maybe that's a different poll.

08-24-09  07:56am

Reply To Message


atrapat (112) If they put external links anywhere on their message or signature, absolutely. Otherwise, there's rarely reason for suspicion.
08-24-09  08:52am

Reply To Message


Drooler (220) First, a big kudos to turboshaft for the statement: "I love how I can come back here day after day and see a level of civility and tolerance not even found in American government." To say nothing of talk radio or the cable "noize" channels (Fox and MSNBC, to name just two).

Now back to our feature: "... who create accounts just to post on the forum" is a statement of the user's intent, which could be difficult, ultimately, to determine. A user might start with the forum and hang out there for a while not doing anything else, and then BOOM comes a load of well-written, nay I say "fair and balanced," reviews without fear or favor. It could happen.

Shills, on the other hand, can't be shills if they don't shill. They're pretty easy to spot.

08-24-09  02:28pm

Reply To Message


exotics4me (463) In a way, I'm more suspicious of those that down known good sites. They'll say things like, "That site is terrible, no customer service, download speeds at 1.9 kb/s on a 10M connection, tried to rip me off" The overly excited new members are no different than me when I first joined and reviewed Eve Angel's site a 96. Keeping in mind, no forum back then. I was in a way gushing about my favorite site.

Back when I was webmaster of a forum based around Philosophy/Psychology, the rest of the staff and I would notice patterns. We had three new members in three nights at nearly the same time. None of them posted at first. We had to verify and allow members. Well, one posted one night and was talking about a book he had read about Philosophy and Debate. The next night, one of the other new ones posted and agreed with him, calling it "The best book I've read on the subject". The third night, the other new one posted and agreed with them. If not for the timing of the posts and fact that none of them had anything else to post, we wouldn't have been suspicious.

Turned out to be the author of the book. He was using an IP changing software, so all 3 accounts had different locations. The staff left it up to me to piss him off. I posted on his thread and said I had read the book, giving it a review of, "Amateurish, redundant, Roget is your friend, reads like a middle-school report". He signed in with name A, but it had name B's IP address. After arguing for awhile, he signed in with name B, but with name C's IP address.

Then to end, he bit when I offered him a banner ad for his book to come clean. He came clean and I replied, "It would be unethical of me to promote your book, now that we know you're a liar."

Oh and I don't know how many of you see the many threads by new members after midnight Pacific time, but there are many that Khan must remove early in the morning hours.

08-24-09  04:39pm

Reply To Message


badandy400 (103) It really makes little difference to me. The forum is for discussion and some times that is just what people want to do. If we shun people who post in the forum but no where else we might turn away people with very good input.
08-24-09  05:17pm

Reply To Message


pat362 (375) I reserve judgement on any new member to PU until they have posted on the forum or made a review.
08-24-09  06:24pm

Reply To Message


PinkPanther (46) Man, if we're gonna be all "Who are you to invade our little slice of porn heaven?" or whatever any time a newbie comes along, this place is gonna get pretty inbred pretty fast - as many forums do when the long-time members are all up in the face of newbies.

People who are joining to spam will spam and they should be treated as spammers. People who come to participate and share opinions and experiences and knowledge should be welcomed as fellow participants.

08-24-09  07:34pm

Reply To Message


GCode (101) REPLY TO #9 - PinkPanther :

What he said -----^
08-25-09  02:05pm

Reply To Message


RagingBuddhist (65) When someone comes in with something like a 98 score and a 20 word review, I'm definitely suspicious. I've been known to question a review in a reply first, but I'll always withold putting a negative trust rating on 'em until I see they continue to put up what I guess you could call erratic scores and reviews.
08-25-09  05:18pm

Reply To Message


dracken (246) It really depends on the first five posts or so... A guy can have good intentions but be new to forums (unlikely but it happens)

I usually try to give one or two helpful tips before not trusting someone.

08-25-09  07:10pm

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.


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 0.02 seconds.