Welcome GUEST!      CREATE ACCOUNT - Forgot Password?

Create an account to share your experiences and more!


Auto Log-in Future Sessions (on this computer).
User Comment A note about the site and any replies from other users.

Visit Mason Wyler

Mason Wyler (0)

Allicide (3) 02-07-10  11:38am
Male Profile TRUST USER?   YES (8), NO (0)

Issues with reviews

No offense, but why are straight men and women reviewing gay material? It isn't going to hold the same appeal. It is like having a resturant critic without taste buds. You can see the food and smell the food but you miss the most important element.

Reply To Comment

Comment Replies (6)

Replies to the user comment above.

Msg # User Message Date


messmer (137) Just curious. What motivated you to write this comment? You made me go to Spencer's review and I find it very objective. The negatives listed are in connection with flaws in the site not in connection with its "gayness." Are there other reviewers to whom "gay" is/was a stumbling block? Asked very non-confrontationally. :-)
02-07-10  12:24pm

Reply To Message


Allicide (3) REPLY TO #1 - messmer :

It wasn't specifically directed toward Spencer. Perhaps I should let him know. I just noticed that most of the primary reviews on here for gay sites are done by females or straight men. Don't get me wrong I'm a writer. I believe any good writer can be objective but there is a difference in writing an article and reviewing. It isn't that I think sexual orientation should limit a person's ability to review the site but as a primary review I would think the reviewer should have an interest in the material. You might ask someone who knows nothing of baseball to cover the game but the coverage will be missing the essential element of interest. I notice that your favorite sites are straight sites. I would ask you are you more likely to trust a review posted by a gay man or by a straight man with similiar taste? Again it isn't a slight to Spencer's review but he does essentially say that he guesses the content is what is expected. I think he did a fine job. I just think the primary review should be done by someone with interest toward which the site is based. I wouldn't trust a food critic with no sense of taste to tell me if the food was good in a resturant. They might give an accurate review of the ambience and service but the important element is going to be lacking through no fault of their own.
02-07-10  11:59pm

Reply To Message


messmer (137) REPLY TO #2 - Allicide :

Thanks, Allicide! I can see your reasoning. I, for one, would feel much more qualified to review mature, lingerie or hairy sites than someone who loves teenie or glamor sites. I am glad your remarks were not directed toward Spencer because, after reading his review, I couldn't understand your reaction. I haven't really seen too many reviews by Porn Users when it comes to gay sites so it was a natural assumption on my part. As I stated, originally, just curious about the comment. Thanks again for the explanation.
02-08-10  09:07am

Reply To Message


PU Staff
Hi Allicide,

Fair question for sure. I can't disagree with the argument. I assume you're referring to our reviews at TheBestPorn.com btw.

I do agree our reviews can suffer when it comes to personal tastes. Gay sites and certain fetishes has to be our ultimate weakness. There are probably other specialized review sites that could provide more personal opinions about the content. We probably couldn't compete with that.

Where we do excel is with our expertise on pay-sites in general. We detail more about each site (regardless of it's niche) than any other review site. Our team views more porn content than any other reviewers in the biz, in all genres. To say they may not be superfans of gay content, is fair. But they have enough viewing power to make fair comparisons and intelligent observations. They have the experience to effectively detail the major/minor strengths and weaknesses of any adult pay-site.

Our goal is to be able to cover nearly every pay-site in adult. That would be impossible if we didn't take a chance and go outside our comfort zone. Perfection and demands may never be met 100%, but overall as long as we're providing users with a service they'll return to again and again, then it's worth the effort.

02-08-10  10:47am

Reply To Message


Allicide (3) REPLY TO #4 - Rick :


Please, don't get me wrong. I'm new to this site and from what I can tell the ratings are very fair. I went to some of the other review sites and more often then not it is obvious they are PAID reviews. How can you claim to be an unbiased review site if you allow banners and advertising? I think you guys are great. I plan on adding more reviews.

02-08-10  03:20pm

Reply To Message


manholelover (24) i must concur with allicide here. Although I'm not criticising the professional reviewers at all,in fact I find their posts very informative, there is a lack of gay reviewers and members here generally. It probably does reflect the population in general, but I've looked for similar sites like this one aimed at a specific gay market, and there's none, only sites which are probably sponsored by certain companies, blogs, or else just one person reviewing all material. Nothing touches the depth and interactivity of this site. I only hope more gay people will post. I intend to do my bit, but perhaps a little marketing from PU could get more gay contributors...
06-20-11  04:33pm

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.