Welcome GUEST!      CREATE ACCOUNT - Forgot Password?

Create an account to share your experiences and more!

E-MAIL   PASS  

Auto Log-in Future Sessions (on this computer).
User Review A review of the site and any replies from other users.

Visit I Dream Of Jo

I Dream Of Jo (0)

Newbie
98*
Elmien (0) 05-30-13  12:40pm
No Badges TRUST USER?   YES (1), NO (1)
Status: Current Member for over 2 months (at the time of review).
Updated: 05-30-13  10:03pm  (Update History)
Reason: scoring that i gave i felt was to low and added additional comments
Pros: Idreamofjo.com is one of a kind! Artistic, sensual and dam close to perfection! She has the perfect girl next door look and is dedicated to her work and fans, always trying to improve on every scene she works on. Always coming up with something more sensual and artistic than before. Photos and videos are of high quality and the "older" photos and videos was done before the "HD" era and is understandably lower quality. (Nothing you can do for on that) but her latest videos and photos are of the best quality and standard. Her sweet shy personality brings something special to her bts and that's what makes her special. Always sincere and true. Her photo and video shoots are second to non and is more than just the average.
Cons: There wasn't as much bts as expected and would be nice to see or hear how some of the scenes falls in place or where it comes from... Or for example how all can go so wrong. Interaction with her fans is a little restricted but that's understandable (everyone needs some time off?)
Bottom Line: Idreamofjo.com is the perfect site to if you want to see "porn" and "art" mixed together to see the most sensual love making and solo scenes of all times! There is some amazing story lines as well to keep the heart pumping with the most amazing lesbian love making scene... This is the only site I have ever come across where there is so much variety of solo/girl girl and bts scene that is done so amazingly! She has a perfect personality that makes anyone just simply wanting more from her.

Reply To Review

Review Replies (10)

Replies to the user review above.

Msg # User Message Date

1

Nick Spillum (13)
Webmaster
Thanks for the review Elmien, it's a good one. I'll chat to Jo to see if we can come up with some kind of back story each week.

Would that help, or do you have any other suggestions?

05-31-13  12:34am

Reply To Message

2

RagingBuddhist (65) Here we go again. A relatively unknown site, a perfect and damn near perfect score back to back. Nothing coincidental about that...
05-31-13  03:47pm

Reply To Message

3

marcdc1 (165) REPLY TO #2 - RagingBuddhist :

Buddhist you don't mean what I think you mean do you?

:)

05-31-13  05:49pm

Reply To Message

4

RagingBuddhist (65) REPLY TO #3 - marcdc1 :

No, I don't mean two reviews that look like commercials. They couldn't be that, could they?
05-31-13  06:44pm

Reply To Message

5

Elmien (0) REPLY TO #4 - RagingBuddhist :

Commercials? Are you kidding me? I'm a member of this site and came across this misleading review... First of all there is no other site coming even close to this site. I have been to other sites and with big disappointment always returning to Idreamofjo.com. This is the only site I came across that shows so much passion and sensuality that its almost to good to be true. And for those wondering about the updates... Well rest assure that the site is being updated every week. As you enter the site there's a clock showing when the next update is due.. And its always been on time.
05-31-13  10:44pm

Reply To Message

6

RagingBuddhist (65) REPLY TO #5 - Elmien :

No, I'm not kidding you. Compare what you and thaavi have written against the majority of the reviews on here. Neither of you have included much of anything in the way of details but both of you have raved about the webmistress. That lacks the balance that we're looking for in reviews. It also doesn't help that two people have come in on the same day to give perfect and near-perfect scores for a relatively obscure site. The regulars here have seen this way too many times before and it's why the scores from new members to PornUsers aren't factored into the sites overall score.

I'll invite you to check out this page to see what reviews are supposed to contain, paying particular attention to #3.

05-31-13  11:45pm

Reply To Message

7

Elmien (0) REPLY TO #6 - RagingBuddhist :

Me and Thaavi came in on the same time due to communication... See there is a lot of communication on our "web mistress" site. Personally I didn't even wanted to post a review due to negative comments that will be given but as a member of that site I felt its necessary to inform the people how addictive this "webmistress" site is. Ife your a real follower of Jo/monica you would understand..

And to get to the review posting guide lines....
I've never been good at following it... How do you choose a certain amount of good qualities if there is so many? And the cons? What cons? I call it space to improve... Not cons... Sorry but by writing a review is not to follow guide line but to express your experience and knowledge of the site...

06-01-13  12:08am

Reply To Message

8

luv lickn clit (21) REPLY TO #7 - Elmien :

Settle down everyone! Elmien, it does raise a red flag when 2 members join PU on the same day, and both post favorable reviews of a site within hours of each other. Both reviews were lacking the kind of detail that everyone here has come to expect.

For what it's worth, I was a member at Viv Thomas a few years back, and there were plenty of girl/girl vids with Jo and her playmates. You are correct about her--she truly enjoys other women, and the scenes I have of her and her girlfriends are almost all very hot! But other members here are looking for detail in reviews and maybe comparison to other similar sites. That's what we need to figure out if its a site that we would consider joining.

For example, if you've had memberships at Sapphic Erotica, Euro Girls on Girls, and/or 21st Sextury, how does Jo's site compare? If you could edit your review, and provide that info, it would be a lot more useful.

06-01-13  03:30am

Reply To Message

9

RagingBuddhist (65) REPLY TO #7 - Elmien :

[And to get to the review posting guide lines....
I've never been good at following it...]

Very few of us have written the kind of review that's expected here when we first started writing them. It takes time and a little patience to get them together.

[How do you choose a certain amount of good qualities if there is so many?]

List them in order of importance until you hit the character limit.

[And the cons? What cons? I call it space to improve... Not cons...]

If there is room for improvement, that is, indeed, a con

[Sorry but by writing a review is not to follow guide line but to express your experience and knowledge of the site...]

That's where the balance factor comes in. We all write review to let people know about our experience with a site and there is quite naturally a bit of subjectivity in what we write. But, again, to rave about the webmistress without giving us any details about the rest of the site doesn't tell us anything about the total experience.

06-01-13  11:06am

Reply To Message

10

thaavi (3) REPLY TO #6 - RagingBuddhist :

All the data here: http://www.thebestporn.com/review/idreamofjo/#review
06-03-13  03:37am

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 0.02 seconds.