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!

Do users with an empty profile seem less trustworthy to you?

Type: Our Site
Yes 40% 20 Votes
Maybe just little shady 30% 15 Votes
No 30% 15 Votes
Other (see reply) 0% 0 Votes

Reply to Poll
Register to Vote!

50 Votes Total

Jun 14, 2007

Poll Replies (23)

Replies to the user poll above.

Msg # User Message Date


Drooler (220) Actually, a profile with suspicious-looking information would cause more mistrust than none at all. I hardly read them, anyway.

Usually, it's reviews and comments that get my brow furrowed. Ratings of 100 and 99 and finding absolutely no problems with a site ... that indicates that I can't trust the person to give a fair and balanced review.

And it might not be deliberate deception, but I can't trust bias or poor judgement, either.

06-14-07  01:02am

Reply To Message


jd1961 (95) Why should someone be allowed to leave an anonymous trust rating? That makes no sense.
06-14-07  02:57am

Reply To Message


nygiants03 (162) I put maybe just a little shady, because it shows they do not put much time into this site to care about puting one up. Usually ones with no profiles put little effort in their reviews.
06-14-07  06:48am

Reply To Message


IcemanTC (8) They just wanna keep their privacy... as I do.
06-14-07  01:13pm

Reply To Message


Tom22 (6) There is nothing a person could put in a profile that would make me trust them. Profiles are not relevant to trust in my opinion. What they have to say in their comments or reviews is the most telling as to their trustworthiness.
06-14-07  02:50pm

Reply To Message


Tom22 (6) REPLY TO #2 - jd1961 :

What do you suggest, their name, address, phone number and bank account numbers ? I would question someones maturity and intellect that would leave a great deal of information about themselves on a website without a truly good purpose and without being paid for the risk they are taking.
06-14-07  02:58pm

Reply To Message


Jay G (67) REPLY TO #2 - jd1961 :

I Totally agree. Anonymous trust ratings are a real problem to me.

Anonymous seems cowardly, aomeone trying to game the system to hurt others and make themselves look good.

But, why? I love getting and sharing information and am sure my anonymous slimer said he didn't trust me because he didn't like the kinky sites I review (even in porn users there are those who are pretty intolerent of others with different likes/dislikes). If we disagree, it's OK, but I want to know why you disagree.

Thanks for your input, I feel better about my dislike of anonymous ratings.

06-14-07  08:39pm

Reply To Message


Drooler (220) REPLY TO #7 - Jay G :

Is the problem really anonymous trust ratings, or only the negative ones? If you had only positive anonymous trust ratings, would you mind?

I've seen negative trust ratings applied to me just around the time I was having a disagreement with certain people. But then we worked things out, and the ratings went positive. Still, I can't say whether it was them or someone else, as they were anonymous.

Anyway, I take the negative ones with a grain of salt. If a member even has 50% "No" ratings, I wonder if it really matters or not. The quality of the reviews and comments have more weight than the trust ratings do, anyway, IMHO.

One drawback of requiring member identification is "payback": X dissed me, so I'll diss X. But I don't think it's a good reason to rate someone negatively. We can put ourselves above that level of smallness and rate members on the quality of their reviews. But of course, we can't guarantee that everyone on this site is up to that. That's why I think anonymous trust ratings are OK; they make that kind of "payback" harder to do.

06-15-07  02:02am

Reply To Message


exotics4me (463) One of the things that I thinks shows in the replies is that we have some newer and older users of the internet. When anyone mentions privacy, think about this, no one really knows if anyone is being honest in their profiles anyway. I even left my email public, it has actually caused a few people to email me, and ask me about this model or that model.

I also think putting my occupation for example, I also all but give away the state I live in, but as of right now there are over 200,000 people in this state with the same job I do. Talk about trying to find a needle in the haystack.

On a side note, I received my first no trust vote, anonymous and no comment. Which is my only real problem with the anonymous vote, at least leave a comment if posting no anonymously. If not, there is no way for me to improve my reviews. I know that the yes votes I have left, I left anonymously, at least most of them. But that is mainly because it is me saying nothing needs to be changed.

Last, I have heard from a few who have said my scores seem a little high. After reading over the grade key, I wouldn't change my scores, if anything, I may have been a little low on a few. 80-89 according to the key is needing improvement in a few key areas, but would still recommend. I don't have many clunker sites since I'm mostly into glamour/softcore with a little hardcore thrown in. The sites I have reviewed are almost all my 2nd or 3rd time being a member on them.

I see that as being an 80 minimum. If I'm willing to give a site a second or third visit that would mean I recommend it to myself enough to join again.

06-15-07  06:55am

Reply To Message


Drooler (220) REPLY TO #9 - exotics4me :

About the scores we give to sites, I've come think of them as being the middle of what could be about 3 points more or less (e.g. an 83 being in a range of 80-86).

It's just too hard to make a precise number rating, imho, so I look at my own ratings of sites and have to see them as really expressing some kind of range also. Otherwise, I'm asking myself, "Should I really have given this an 82?" and so on.

06-15-07  01:26pm

Reply To Message


jd1961 (95) REPLY TO #8 - Drooler :

What's to stop me from entering with a proxy and giving myself anonymous positive trust ratings? Not a thing. I am baffled as to why they allow this.
06-15-07  08:15pm

Reply To Message


jd1961 (95) REPLY TO #9 - exotics4me :

My guess is that your anonymous no trust vote came from a webmaster
06-15-07  08:21pm

Reply To Message


Drooler (220) REPLY TO #11 - jd1961 :

Now that's a creative alternative!

All the more reason not to get too serious about the trust ratings, too.

06-15-07  08:46pm

Reply To Message


Jay G (67) REPLY TO #8 - Drooler :

Good points, Drooler.

But I guess my biggest problem was the anonymous negative without explanation. I guess I'm thin-skinned, but when someone throws an egg on my car, I'm bothered and would like to know what's going on.

Not "trusting" is different from having an honest disagreement. I like porn that others might be uncomfortable with, ok, but to not "trust" me????

06-16-07  01:02am

Reply To Message


Drooler (220) REPLY TO #14 - Jay G :

Definitely true: mistrust is hardly the same thing has having different tastes. Still, it could be possible for someone to "merge" the two concepts, mistaken though that would be.

There's even the possibly that someone might accidentally click "No" when they meant to click "Yes," and then jump right back into "soak brains with porn" mode without even realizing it. Dumber things than that have been done before.

06-16-07  02:23am

Reply To Message


PU Staff
This question had more to do with the user profiles than it did the Trust Ratings. Interestingly enough, there are several questions that will come up shortly dealing more specifically with Trust Ratings.

If I might add ... (and this has come up several times now) ...

In my opinion (and considering how they were designed to be used) it is an overaction to take Trust Ratings too personal. They are simply an indication of how much a fellow user can trust (expect) that your reviews will coincide with how they'll feel about the site if they visit. I'd guess that the #1 cause of negative Trust ratings is exceedingly high or exceptional low scores given in a review.

The original idea of Trust Ratings was born from the need to combat those who would create accounts for the sole purpose of giving a site a high score. They do not, nor have they ever been meant as any kind of indication of a person's personal trustworthiness. While I can't change the thinking of those who see them as a personal affront, I can at least remind everyone of how they were designed to be used.

Oh, and I'm pretty sure webmaster accounts can NOT give Trust Ratings.

It is not a perfect system but then we don't claim to be perfect. We will continue to look at ways the site can be improved. As always, your feedback is appreciated.

06-16-07  06:10am

Reply To Message


PU Staff
REPLY TO #15 - Drooler :

Drooler, you're quite correct in saying that *sometimes* a negative rating might have been a mistakenly cast vote. Because of that, it never hurts to reply to negative vote asking for the reasoning. You may not get a reply, and hopefully you won't be personally insulted if you don't, however, if it was a mistaken vote, it'll bring it to the users attention and they can easily recast their vote.
06-16-07  06:16am

Reply To Message


Drooler (220) REPLY TO #16 - Khan :

Thanks, Khan, for reminding us of what the trust ratings are really all about.

In addition to not taking them personally, there's the implicit message to write the reviews carefully, with a balance of positive and negatives and a reasonable enough score. After all, you have to include enough pros and cons to get 2 points for a review, among other things. It's explained on this site.

And getting a "Trusted User" badge, that's a tough hill to climb: 30 "Yes" votes. I was actually hoping I'd be closer to that by now, considering that over 1,0000 users are registered. But I don't have a problem with the requirements. It really means something to get it. (See, I don't know how to do that proxy thing with the IP addresses. LOL.)

06-16-07  09:47am

Reply To Message


PU Staff
REPLY TO #18 - Drooler :

>> "See, I don't know how to do that proxy thing with the IP addresses. LOL"

Haha .. right. Of course the fact that we require users to have 5 points before they can give Trust Ratings (hopefully) will discourage folks from doing the proxy thing. In a recent conversation with a User, Rick (TBP/PU's Founder) commented about why he selected such a high number for the Trust Badge. He said, "The goal was to choose a target that in the long run would be attainable and still somewhat challenging." Which as you point out, makes it really mean something special once it's achieved.

Your comment, "... there's the implicit message to write the reviews carefully, with a balance of positive and negatives and a reasonable enough score" really hits the nail on the head in regards to what we hope the Trust Ratings will do.

Again, thx for your feedback.

06-16-07  10:32am

Reply To Message


Jay G (67) REPLY TO #15 - Drooler :

Thanks drooler! I enjoy reading good writing, and your writing is always fun to read.
06-17-07  09:02am

Reply To Message


SnowDude (214) I was away when this poll was posted, so maybe my comment is a little late. I was definitely bothered by the anonymous trust ratings at first but now I try not to let it bother me very much. Right now I don't have any negative votes, but can tell that people changed their vote after awhile. That's probably just the nature of the beast and newer users will tend to be more harsh than people who have been around awhile.

So, I don't mind anonymous ratings since people want to feel free to say what they think without being targeted if the person being rated wasn't happy. I do think, however, that people should leave a reason for what they didn't like so that user has a chance to correct or at least address whatever was wrong. I always wrote back to people who gave me a negative rating asking why and most people changed their vote after a time. Really, I just wanted to know what I could do better since I'm not perfect and don't claim to be.

Just my $0.02.

06-26-07  08:53pm

Reply To Message


Schnitzel (29) REPLY TO #3 - nygiants03 :

I agree entirely!
07-12-07  04:03am

Reply To Message


ramscrota (12) I one of those who has a virtually empty profile. That's simply because I haven't got around to filling it out. And In any case, the person w/o profile details doesn't necessarilly have anything to hid. Afterall, they can simply fill their profile with bullshit, and who would know?
02-13-09  04:23am

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.