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 Ass Traffic

Ass Traffic (0)

Active
87
roseman (253) 01-25-07  11:20pm
Rookie Badge  Talk Back  Comments  Pollster  Top Monthly User  Hardcore Badge  Trusted User  Male Profile TRUST USER?   YES (68), NO (1)
Status: Was a member approx. 1 month prior to this review.
Pros: - High quality videos and photosets.
- Zip downloads (pics and screenshots).
- Lots of content to download.
- Fast download.
- Download accelarators allowed. (1 file per download)
- NO download limit.
- Pretty cool site design.
- Bonus access to videos.
Cons: - No network access.
- Expensive.
- Some non exclusive content.
Bottom Line: A pretty good anal website, if it had network access I believe that it would be one of the best porn sites of the net.

Reply To Review

Review Replies (3)

Replies to the user review above.

Msg # User Message Date

1

mudman (36) Roseman_

You've hit me, so here's my inquiry.

What do you find wothwhile when it comes to photography? What size of image and what quality? Do you have interests in lighting or not?

Are there photographers you are impressed with or are you being ignored here?

With regards to videos, regardless of subject matter what isues to you have? Every site should offer enough formats for all to enjoy, and every video should be clear enough for anyone to see and appreciate. Since I'm even mentioning this, it's not something we've been burderned with. Which sites, in your opinion, serve us viewers as we should be served?

02-05-07  10:59am

Reply To Message

2

roseman (253) REPLY TO #1 - mudman :

LOL.
Well, mudman if you have ANY questions about the concrete website that I did review please feel free to ask.
I feel that answering to your general questions about photos and videos has NOTHING to do with this site.

02-06-07  07:29am

Reply To Message

3

mudman (36) REPLY TO #2 - roseman :

Roseman:

Now I'm lost. Which cut in stone web site are you referencing. You've review 27 of them.

Every site needs to offer a basic basis of quality. Every member or potential member deserves this much. Videos need to accessible to all and photos need to be clear, seeable, large enough and somewhat appealing. This certainly places some constraints upon artistry, but not unreasonably so.

Are you suggesting that anything goes, if the particular site's subject matter agreed with your or whomever interest, is okay? Seems an insufficent standard to me. Everything out there need to live up to more, as the majority is falling way short. We user/members feed this beast with our subsciptions, our money, so we should get quality regardless of the site. So I find so problem on not addressing any one failing site over another. The problem is in the system. It wants us to accept too much mediocrity as some form of quality. "Here's a great site, now spend you money and be unhappy with it."

I don't think I'm opposing you, but we may not be being as clear with each other as would be desireable.

mudman

02-06-07  10:29am

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.