PU - Newbie Nudes - All Activity

RE: Not worth the effort!

Sat, 09 Aug 2008 16:11:18 PDT

Newbie Nudes (1)

08-09-08 04:11pm

COMMENT REPLY by messmer (24)

To SuchSluts (0):

Those watermarks are nice and clear .. too clear, because they're in the hair, in the face, on the body, in all the most awful places ... in other words they do get in the way in a most intrusive manner. If someone put them discretely on the bottom right I'd have no problem with them but in the hair, on the body? Other amateur sites do the same thing. Redclouds, voyeur web (I think they're called), world wide wives .. they all got into the awful habit of defacing the pictures of their contributors in a ghastly way by putting the logo either near the person or on her/him. I thought at first the watermarks were meant for those who looked for freebies and that subscribers would get the unblemished picture, but a couple of sample pictures provided by "world wide wives" made me realize that this is standard practice in true amateur circles. I'm shaking my head over this. Who, in their right mind, would want a messed-up picture like that? Well, I guess someone would or the practice would have stopped ages ago. And good luck with your own site. If it's going to be minus watermarks I'll be cheering you on. :-)

View Thread (17)

RE: Not worth the effort!

Fri, 08 Aug 2008 16:45:21 PDT

Newbie Nudes (1)

08-08-08 04:45pm

COMMENT REPLY by SuchSluts (0)

To SurfKing (0):

I wouldn't mind if my post was deleted. I honestly didn't think this was such a serious place, or else I would have just said 'I like Newbie Nudes'. I was only contributing my thoughts. It's weird because we get thousands of compliments on the quality of our pictures. The invite was just to share. We do send pics without watermarks to those we trust won't do as I described to Mess. Our live cam shows don't have water marks either. Sorry to have gotten everyone so upset. We detest spamming by the way.

View Thread (17)

RE: Not worth the effort!

Fri, 08 Aug 2008 16:22:13 PDT

Newbie Nudes (1)

08-08-08 04:22pm

COMMENT REPLY by SuchSluts (0)

To messmer (24):

Well Mess, the reason for the watermark is to keep people from posting our pics as their own, or trading them as their own. We have thousands upon thousands of pics and a program that allows us to stamp them. We just stamp them before we post them. Did you mean the watermarks are blurred? If so, they just say suchsluts@mewbienudes.com . Anyway, glad you liked them. We try to keep the watermarks from getting in the way. We are in the process of creating our own site minus the watermarks ;)

Sluts

View Thread (17)

RE: Not worth the effort!

Wed, 23 Jul 2008 09:57:46 PDT

Newbie Nudes (1)

07-23-08 09:57am

COMMENT REPLY by messmer (24)

To SurfKing (0):

SurfKing wrote:

"As for the other individuals post you responded to, (#8) it clearly falls under "shameless promotions" in the posting rules. That person's post is clearly spam and why it hasn't been deleted I don't know."

I think you might very well be right re. spam but, to tell the truth, that never occurred to me when I read the reply. I just thought of it as the answer of a proud exhibitionist who didn't see any harm in one more voyeur peeking in on her. :-) Too bad the quality of the pictures is so bad, I would have enjoyed a nice, clear, clean (no watermark right across the body!!!) photo or two of the poster.

View Thread (17)

RE: Not worth the effort!

Wed, 23 Jul 2008 09:56:55 PDT

Newbie Nudes (1)

07-23-08 09:56am

COMMENT REPLY by Khan (Staff)

To SurfKing (0):

Surfking remarks: "... and why it hasn't been deleted I don't know.

If you'll see Reply #16 & 19 under an earlier Review of this site ... http://www.pornusers.com/replies_view.html?id=10240

... you'll see our ruling on this one.

Again, this kind of site is a bit of an unusual situation. As always, we encourage Users here to use their best judgement when deciding if a fellow Users' remarks are biased.

View Thread (17)

RE: Not worth the effort!

Wed, 23 Jul 2008 08:17:56 PDT

Newbie Nudes (1)

07-23-08 08:17am

COMMENT REPLY by SurfKing (0)

To messmer (24):

You summed it up perfectly when you said it's a community and should be free. The operators should just carry advertising to pay the bills. You are also spot on when you say it should not be listed on TBP- technically it is NOT a porn site.

As for the other individuals post you responded to, (#8) it clearly falls under "shameless promotions" in the posting rules. That person's post is clearly spam and why it hasn't been deleted I don't know.

View Thread (17)

RE: Not worth the effort!

Mon, 21 Jul 2008 14:36:09 PDT

Newbie Nudes (1)

07-21-08 02:36pm

COMMENT REPLY by messmer (24)

To SurfKing (0):

This site is definitely only for a small segment of the porn loving public, despite their claim of having a million and a half active members. It is for dyed-in-the-wool exhibitionists only because even happy voyeurs like myself have one heck of a time finding something of high quality.

I understand that they are amateurs but with today's cameras it should be a piece of cake to take some clear, sharp, appetizing pictures. My apologies to the lady(ies) I just responded to above. I found you personally attractive but the pictures themselves below par for a site that charges a subscription fee.

I still wish all their users loads of luck and pleasure in connection with their sexual preference but maintain that the site should not be listed in TBP. It's a community NOT a porn site and it should be free .. period!

View Thread (17)

RE: Not worth the effort!

Mon, 21 Jul 2008 14:13:49 PDT

Newbie Nudes (1)

07-21-08 02:13pm

COMMENT REPLY by messmer (24)

To SuchSluts (0):

I liked what I saw but there was a watermark right across the pictures and they were blurred. I haven't been to this site in ages, didn't bother keeping a record of my user name or password, so the question is: is that confounded mark in all the pictures or just in the freebies?

View Thread (17)

RE: Not worth the effort!

Mon, 21 Jul 2008 09:08:25 PDT

Newbie Nudes (1)

07-21-08 09:08am

COMMENT REPLY by SurfKing (0)

To messmer (24):

I have to agree with messmer's initial take on NewbieNudes. I would only recommend a paying membership to someone who is desperate to post pictures of themselves on the net, can't get paid to do it and isn't satisfied with just three pics a day.

I was a paying member (similar situation- a friend talked me into it. The friend later apologized) and over the course of a few weeks found it to be a complete waste of money. There are several issues I had.

First, they do not have 1.6 whatever million members. They've had that many people sign up during their existence, but my estimates are only 20,000 active users. Of those, less than half are posters. When a person deletes their account, (this happens A LOT) they do not lower thier "member" count. A small deception, but a deception.

Second is lack of quality material. Fifty percent of the content is blurry cock close-ups. There are also too many cell phone pics and just plain poorly taken pictures. Paying members can access "high resolution" versions, but I found the standard views far less grainy.

Third is the videos. Several people have told me this is what hooked them- only premium members can view them. I found 1 in 50 or 75 was watchable. The quality of these is usually so bad I can't fully describe it. Poorly edited, (if at all) absurdly short and terribly filmed. Quite a few are webcam/ cell phone captures resulting in unwatchable grainy images.

My fourth issue is more a personal pet peeve. A lot of people would go premium and then saturate the site with terrible pictures. I guess they wanted their money's worth, but I don't want to see 40 pictures every day of a woman I find totally unattractive doing almost the exact same pose in each picture. Slagging through all of the terrible content to find a couple of good pics was hard enough. This made it harder.

I'll make a sub-point to that last one. I found very few posters I liked, but when I did they were short lived. The best ones seemed to be standard members who would post for a week or a month and then delete their account. This was frustrating since quality pictures are so hard to come by on the site.

However, my biggest beef was people posting stolen pics. Being a paying member of a few real porn sites, I routinely recognized pictures that NN members were passing off as themselves. I got so frustrated with seeing material I had paid a lot of money to have access to being shown for free that I complained to NN. They completely blew me off and said that didn't happen on their site. They make it easy to report objectionable material, but not copyrighted images lifed from other sites.

In the end, I can only recommend this site to people desperate to be naked on the net. Even then, just do like 90% of NN posters do: start a standard membership, post 3 pics a day for a month or so and then delete it after you've had your thrill (or when the creepy private messages you'll get become too much).

View Thread (17)

RE: Not worth the effort!

Thu, 17 Jul 2008 15:42:04 PDT

Newbie Nudes (1)

07-17-08 03:42pm

COMMENT REPLY by SuchSluts (0)

To messmer (24):

We looove to put ourselves out there and hide nothing. Come have a look-see!

View Thread (17)

RE: Not worth the effort!

Sat, 15 Dec 2007 22:46:51 PST

Newbie Nudes (1)

12-15-07 10:46pm

COMMENT REPLY by Distant Lover (0)

To messmer (24):

A major attraction of NewbieNudes for me is the Fourm. Although NewbieNudes has over a million members, those who contribute to the Forum are a more limited number, and one can get to know the leading contributors. The Forum feels like a community of co-workers, neighbors, or the residents of a small town where everyone knows everyone else. I like many of the posters who contribute to the Forum. Some I like a great deal. Most I accept. Some I do not like. Nevertheless, everyone has a distinct personality, and contributes to the unique, and uniquely wonderful collective personality of the Forum.

View Thread (17)

RE: Not worth the effort!

Wed, 28 Nov 2007 16:10:22 PST

Newbie Nudes (1)

11-28-07 04:10pm

COMMENT REPLY by IDoctor99 (0)

To messmer (24):

For the most part I think we agree, but there are a few points I have to comment on.

There are good videos to be found, and no shortage of them. The quality may differ from studio porn, but the content isn't lacking. Just because this is an amateur site doesn't mean quality suffers tremendously; typical point and shoot cameras have 6 megapixels nowadays and video cameras are recording DVD quality movies. Some of the finer details may get lost in the transfer to the computer and eventually to the site, but I think most fans of "amateur" porn are fond of the less than crisp detail in the movies; sort of like some people prefering old black and white photo processing with its inherent grainy softness to modern day digital photo perfection. The lesser quality gives the admirer of amateur porn reasurance that he is, in fact, watching something unique and homemade. For those that prefer that style of video, which can be very hard to find in "mainstream" porn, this site is something near an answered prayer.

As for the isolated body parts, I have to say again; look around some more and you'll have no trouble finding incredibly hot women that hide nothing. In fact, pictures (such as those of my wife) of women wearing masks or pictures that have been censored to hide faces usually don't hold the highest rankings, as the site members prefer posters to not hide thier face. Having been a member there for more than six months, I can honestly say people that hide their faces (through whatever means) aren't the majority.

As far as what the site can offer the average porn viewer, I've been jerking off to porn for more than 20 years. It takes (what I personally feel to be) good porn to get me excited enough to enjoy myself when doing so. It stands to reason I wouldn't be able to get my rocks off every day that I don't have sex with my wife if this site wasn't able to provide me with good porn. It also seems that I would go to other porn sites if this particular one didn't give me enough to supply my masturbatory habit, but I don't. I stay right there at the same one. It has to have something going for it...

View Thread (17)

RE: Not worth the effort!

Wed, 28 Nov 2007 11:43:25 PST

Newbie Nudes (1)

11-28-07 11:43am

COMMENT REPLY by messmer (24)

To IDoctor99 (0):

Thanks for your reasoned response. I can see where you would love the site if you were an exhibitionist, trouble is I'm not. On the surface a "marriage" of exhibitionist and voyeur (like most Porn Users) would appear ideal but I really have a problem with too amateurish a quality of picture and video and have even more of a problem with isolated body parts which, in a true amateur forum, would almost have to be the norm by default because, as you pointed out, these are real people who don't want to put their reputations on the line, therefore I truly understand the necessity to either leave out the face altogether or to mask it in order to make it unrecognizeable.

For you this may be an admirable thing to do, for me, my reaction is to feel cheated, therefore I prefer sites that contain "doubtful" amateurs. In other words those who might be exhibitionists for money but are not (yet) the silicone enhanced, air-brushed Barbie-Doll-like professionals found in Penthouse and Playboy.

Reading between the lines of your post I think both of us agree that because of the innate nature of your favorite site it should not be rated by the average Porn User. Yours is a site where like-minded folks mingle and have a wonderful time in each other's company. And that's fine and deserves a high rating ... if it is treated like a forum and not another Porn Site.

View Thread (17)

RE: Not worth the effort!

Tue, 27 Nov 2007 19:56:12 PST

Newbie Nudes (1)

11-27-07 07:56pm

COMMENT REPLY by IDoctor99 (0)

To messmer (24):

You present an accurate take on the site in your last paragraph. The site is made up mostly of individuals wanting to be exhibitionists, or those who appreciate people that enjoy being exhibitionists.

As you stated in the last sentence of your observation, for the typical non-contributing member, the site perhaps offers less than what you can find elsewhere on the internet. For those who submit content or those that appreciate this type of content, it is quite possibly the best venue for them.

Also, it takes time to fully discover all this site has to offer. 15 minutes is NOT enough to form a full opinion; especially if using the free membership to do so. I'm sure you're familiar with the phrase "You get what you pay for"... I have a sneaking suspicion that you looked at the first page or two of photos that you were presented with and didn't find much to admire. It takes some time to figure out that you won't see much at all by viewing content that way; you need to search individual categories and search by ratings or popularity. When you do that, you start getting into the good stuff and can be surprised at the quality of the content. It isn't long before you've bookmarked several very hot posters in anticipation of their next contribution.

IF the site is one you would like to be a paying member of, you can get a three year membership for less than 4 dollars a month. True, you have to lay out 120 dollars on the front end, but if the site appeals to you, that 4 dollars a month is money very well spent.

Once you are a paying member, the videos are where its at on this site. Again, the quality and production values aren't what you can find on other typical, mainstream porn sites, but people go to NewbieNudes looking for amateur content, so they are actually getting exactly what they want. To compare the content quality to mainstream porn is an apples to oranges comparison and doesn't really apply.

In regards to the hiding of faces and such; again, the people here are real. They are not earning their living fucking in front of a camera. If they were discovered, serious consequences could be faced, yet they are sensual people who want to expand their sexual activity by sharing themselves with those who wish to watch. I, for one, admire people that hide their identity, and besides, I'm not so much interested in faces anyway. I'm more of a tits and ass man myself. If hidden faces bother you, just keep looking around. The truth is there are hundreds of super hot people with no qualms about getting recognized posting pictures AND videos of themselves.

As you said; this site is for a certain type of person with certain tastes. For the mainstream porn watcher it might not offer much at all on the surface. A closer, more intimate exploration of the site will yeild interesting results. Of that I'm sure.

View Thread (17)

RE: Not worth the effort!

Mon, 26 Nov 2007 23:11:45 PST

Newbie Nudes (1)

11-26-07 11:11pm

COMMENT REPLY by Distant Lover (0)

To messmer (24):

Most of the photos posted on NewbieNudes do not appeal to me. I find some of them distastefull. Nevertheless, with NewbieNudes there is always the thrill of discovery. Every now and then I see a photograph so beautiful that it takes my breath away. Because so many photographs are posted every day "every now and then" happens frequently.

Also, one can communicate with the pretty ladies in the photos. You don't get that with most web sites.

View Thread (17)

RE: asmith12's Review

Sun, 25 Nov 2007 09:23:23 PST

Newbie Nudes (1)

11-25-07 09:23am

REVIEW REPLY by Apple (0)

To asmith12 (86):

this is a totally reasonable review. the best best best pictures tend to hover in the high 8 ratings, because there are evidently people who fly through voting down pictures as they get to the top. also scenarios are more common if you look at individual galleries. i think maybe it doesn't make a ton of sense to have a profile here, because NN isn't *exactly* porn. like you said, asmith... it's more of a community. and, in fact, the home page calls it "amateur nude community."

thanks for giving it a shot, though! :)

View Thread (4)

RE: asmith12's Review

Sat, 24 Nov 2007 09:09:11 PST

Newbie Nudes (1)

11-24-07 09:09am

REVIEW REPLY by messmer (24)

To Distant Lover (0):

The girls of breathtaking loveliness may be there but are awfully hard to find and chances are when you do find them their faces are masked. The bulk of the pictures is from the breasts, or waist, down and they lack eroticism in their sameness and very amateurish quality. I, too, am not a fan of hard core but there is simply nothing there that would excite or tantalize me erotically. Of course, tastes differ and as asmith12 points out the community aspect might very well make up for what the picture section is lacking. I am glad you have found something that captured your attention, it wouldn't be for me.

View Thread (4)

RE: Distant Lover's Review

Sat, 24 Nov 2007 08:59:33 PST

Newbie Nudes (1)

11-24-07 08:59am

REVIEW REPLY by Distant Lover (0)

To asmith12 (86):

I would like to point out that while I love NewbieNudes I am not a member of the NN staff. I receive no money or benefits for what I post here or elsewhere about NN.

View Thread (7)

RE: asmith12's Review

Sat, 24 Nov 2007 08:51:28 PST

Newbie Nudes (1)

11-24-07 08:51am

REVIEW REPLY by asmith12 (86)

To Distant Lover (0):

I've tried to make a distinction between photo content and photo quality. And while content can be different (which I've mentioned), technical photo quality (focus, lighting, color balance etc.) just plain sucks (I'm not sure that I've seen one picture with a good technical quality except for those obviously stolen from porno sites).

View Thread (4)

RE: asmith12's Review

Sat, 24 Nov 2007 08:46:44 PST

Newbie Nudes (1)

11-24-07 08:46am

REVIEW REPLY by Distant Lover (0)

To asmith12 (86):

I simply disagree with you about the quality of the photographs. Sure, a lot of them are unappealing, but some are of breath taking loveliness. I dislike anything that is hard core. Other people, obviously, are attracted to that. One of the many things I love about NewbieNudes is that there is plenty there for everyone and every taste.

The fact that the frequently beautiful women who do submit photographs do so because they enjoy sharing their loveliness and not because they are paid to is an additional source of erotic appeal for me. When the beautiful women in the photographs submit comments and thread on the Forum I am able to appreciate their beautiful minds.

View Thread (4)

RE: Not worth the effort!

Fri, 23 Nov 2007 14:21:34 PST

Newbie Nudes (1)

11-23-07 02:21pm

COMMENT REPLY by messmer (24)

To jd1961 (82):

Wasn't I thinking the same thing! The type of stuff this site majors in is usually skipped by me for its inferior quality when I look at "amateurs.female" on the usenet. Anyone with a decent news server could find good quality pics in many of the news groups. (Just close your eyes to all the spam that's also found there!) Not to mention all the sites that offer free samples, if you have the patience to look.

View Thread (17)

RE: Not worth the effort!

Fri, 23 Nov 2007 13:11:05 PST

Newbie Nudes (1)

11-23-07 01:11pm

COMMENT REPLY by jd1961 (82)

To messmer (24):

This kind of stuff can be had for free all over the net. I don't think a site like this should even be listed at TBP.

View Thread (17)

Newbie Nudes Comment

Fri, 23 Nov 2007 11:20:24 PST

Newbie Nudes (1)

11-23-07 11:20am

COMMENT by messmer (24)

Not worth the effort!

All the arguments going on over "is it shilling or not?" if a member of an amateur site recommends it glowingly made me curious enough to become a member of Newbie Nudes: for all of 15 minutes.

It is my personal opinion that the ratings given by present contributors to this site are way out of line when one takes a look at what is actually offered there. Forget, for a moment, that larger pictures and videos are available for a hefty price and look at the general make-up of this amateur site:

The overwhelming majority of the members choose to remain anonymous (for valid reasons) which means faceless body parts all over the place and very few pics where one could actually admire the beauty of the WHOLE woman (and a paid subscription and larger pictures wouldn't change that). When you do come across a "whole person" pic you still have to consider yourself lucky if the face isn't masked somehow.

In my opinion you would have to be a contributor who gets a thrill from exposing his/her genitalia anonymously, or someone who likes to mingle with fellow exhibitionists, (not that there is anything wrong with it) to give the site more than a fifty! To the uninvolved (non-contributing) voyeur the site isn't worth a second look.

Visit Newbie Nudes - View Replies - Add Reply

RE: Distant Lover's Review

Tue, 20 Nov 2007 15:04:33 PST

Newbie Nudes (1)

11-20-07 03:04pm

REVIEW REPLY by asmith12 (86)

To Apple (0):

Maybe it makes sense to leave a comment (but NOT review) titled like "Anybody wants to review this site (membership is FREE)?" - it would allow for unbiased review by somebody from this site (even better - by some known and trusted member of this community). I hope it won't be against PornUsers policies.

View Thread (7)

RE: Distant Lover's Review

Tue, 20 Nov 2007 14:48:17 PST

Newbie Nudes (1)

11-20-07 02:48pm

REVIEW REPLY by Apple (0)

To asmith12 (86):

just so you know, NN is pretty sensitive to the same thing that's bugging you here. the folks pretty much flock all over anybody who tries to advertise their paid sites and the like. one of the things that is totally incorrect about the information on the NN profile at thebestporn.com is that there is a mandatory charge. actually, you can fully participate without paying a dime. there is just a restriction on # of pics you can post, and on PMs you can send in one day. oh, and you can't watch vids. the pics are all yours, though, as is chat, forum, PMs, etc.

View Thread (7)

RE: IDoctor99's Review

Tue, 20 Nov 2007 04:55:38 PST

Newbie Nudes (1)

11-20-07 04:55am

REVIEW REPLY by Khan (Staff)

To RagingBuddhist (17):

As we've said, this is a bit of an unusual situation. While the user does have input into the site by virtue of his uploading images, we've decided that, for the purpose of our rules, his involvement is not that of someone who has any real control over the site. We're allowing his review but encouraging users, such as yourself, to take his obvious bias into account when you determine if his remarks help you in any way.

Sorry if you don't agree with this course of action but its what we've decided is best in this situation.

View Thread (19)

RE: IDoctor99's Review

Mon, 19 Nov 2007 20:26:58 PST

Newbie Nudes (1)

11-19-07 08:26pm

REVIEW REPLY by Apple (0)

To RagingBuddhist (17):

"If that isn't someone associated with a site, who is?"

nonetheless, the guy who determines the rules decided this post doesn't violate the rules. BUT, so that i don't just sound like i'm trying to piss anyone off...

YOU, RagingBuddhist, could post pictures of yourself at NewbieNudes, and there would be women (and men, perhaps) who would find you attractive (no matter what you look like) and comment on your pics and make you feel like a million bucks. especially if you get involved at all in the forums, where naked people become de-objectified, thereby making them 100% sexier and 100% more accessible and removing the slight twinge of guilt that the more altruistic of us feel when we look at mainstream porn. and that goes for any of you! it may not be new, but it is revolutionary, imagine a world where all the smarminess and underage-ness was taken out of porn. certainly that wouldn't be for everyone, but i bet it's for a whole lot of us!

View Thread (19)

RE: IDoctor99's Review

Mon, 19 Nov 2007 15:24:01 PST

Newbie Nudes (1)

11-19-07 03:24pm

REVIEW REPLY by RagingBuddhist (17)

To Khan (Staff):

Khan said:
"[W]e do not allow webmasters or those associated with a site to submit reviews..."

I'm saying:
"Are you serious?"

He came right out and said it - "I post pics and vids there of my wife and I in action..." If that isn't someone associated with a site, who is?.

I thought we were all here to rate porn sites - not for self-promotion. Even if iDoctor99 hadn't mentioned that he and his wife are on the site, I still would've been suspicious of his interest in the site because of the score he gave, along with the lack of details usually left with higher scoring sites.

View Thread (19)

RE: Distant Lover's Review

Mon, 19 Nov 2007 06:54:01 PST

Newbie Nudes (1)

11-19-07 06:54am

REVIEW REPLY by Distant Lover (0)

To Distant Lover (0):

The best advertisement is a satisfied customer.

View Thread (7)

RE: IDoctor99's Review

Mon, 19 Nov 2007 06:01:06 PST

Newbie Nudes (1)

11-19-07 06:01am

REVIEW REPLY by Khan (Staff)

To IDoctor99 (0):

For the Record ...

We took a long look at this one and decided it did NOT violate our rules. While it's true, we do not allow webmasters or those associated with a site to submit reviews, we find that this is a bit of an unusual situation.

IDoctor obviously has a vested interested in how the site is perceived, however, we're categorizing that bias as we would that of an exuberant fan.

None of us here at PornUsers.com are new to overzealous fans coming and raving about a site. We've found this especially true when the site in question has a forum or live chat interface where equally zealous fans can be rallied.

As always, users here should use their own best judgement to determine when a reviewer's perspective is of value to them.

View Thread (19)

RE: Distant Lover's Review

Mon, 19 Nov 2007 02:37:01 PST

Newbie Nudes (1)

11-19-07 02:37am

REVIEW REPLY by asmith12 (86)

To Distant Lover (0):

I see; it probably means tons of newbie review praising NewbieNudes here. Sigh.

View Thread (7)

RE: Distant Lover's Review

Mon, 19 Nov 2007 02:16:41 PST

Newbie Nudes (1)

11-19-07 02:16am

REVIEW REPLY by Distant Lover (0)

To asmith12 (86):

IDoctor99 mentioned this web site in a thread posted to the Forum on NewbieNudes.

View Thread (7)

RE: IDoctor99's Review

Mon, 19 Nov 2007 00:56:29 PST

Newbie Nudes (1)

11-19-07 12:56am

REVIEW REPLY by asmith12 (86)

To Apple (0):

> which occurs to me is an inherent feature of a "review"
Nope :-). There is a subtle difference between "subjective" and "biased". It is like making an experiment in science - measurement errors are inevitable (like subjectiveness in reviews/ratings), bias (both in science and reviews) can and should be avoided.

The other points you're raising can be valid, and I should mention that if original IDoctor's review would be written in these words rather than in original infomercial style, it would probably face less opposition.

View Thread (19)

RE: Distant Lover's Review

Mon, 19 Nov 2007 00:39:54 PST

Newbie Nudes (1)

11-19-07 12:39am

REVIEW REPLY by asmith12 (86)

To Distant Lover (0):

May I ask how are you related to IDoctor99? 2 newbie reviews in single day cannot be a coincidence.

View Thread (7)

RE: IDoctor99's Review

Sun, 18 Nov 2007 17:41:55 PST

Newbie Nudes (1)

11-18-07 05:41pm

REVIEW REPLY by Apple (0)

To asmith12 (86):

sooooooo... aside from the fact that some of you may think this review is biased (which occurs to me is an inherent feature of a "review"), IDoctor is right about everything at the site. something he failed to mention, though, is the community that forms at newbienudes.

there is a very active message board, a couple of different chatrooms, and detailed profiles on the users, including little morsels like the ability to put a song in your profile voice greeting. occasionally we have competitions, there's a thorough verification process that allows you to know that the folks you are looking at are real and have consented. it's kind of like voyeurism/exhibitionism meets myspace.

there are some really foxy folks there, too: females, males, and couples. i'm not including my screenname here, so that you don't think i'm just trying to promote myself, but i'm happy to reveal it if you want another example of the members of NN.

i hope that even through your animosity over a perceived faux pas, you will all check out the site. asmith, i am guessing you already did... and if it's not for you that's fine. but a shill gets paid for posing as a customer. IDoctor is the one paying. that's how good the community is. thanks! -ms.apple

View Thread (19)

RE: IDoctor99's Review

Sun, 18 Nov 2007 14:21:07 PST

Newbie Nudes (1)

11-18-07 02:21pm

REVIEW REPLY by asmith12 (86)

To IDoctor99 (0):

> obviously you can't seem to get your mind around the idea.
No, the idea of the site is obvious (there is nothing really new about it BTW), it is you who can't seem to get your mind around the idea of THIS site, and the idea of THIS site is about unbiased reviews. And your so-called review cannot possibly be unbiased because there is your content on the site (moreover, originally you've put your ID in your "review"). You've wrote in one of your replies: "of course I want to promote it to others." - THIS site is NOT about PROMOTING anything; it is about sharing information.

> It is my firm and honest belief that there are few, if any, porn sites offering a better experience on the web for anyone interested in such material.
Even if it is firm and honest, it is biased.

View Thread (19)

RE: IDoctor99's Review

Sun, 18 Nov 2007 13:59:00 PST

Newbie Nudes (1)

11-18-07 01:59pm

REVIEW REPLY by IDoctor99 (0)

To asmith12 (86):

Ok, I'll make one more reply and then I'm going to stop because you are obviously not understanding the site and what it is for, nor do you have the capacity to understand what I'm saying in my review. Also, it is obvious you are set in your resolve just to bash me for whatever reason so it serves no purpose to attempt to communicate with you any further because you are so plainly not worth talking to.

This site was created to let people post their own homemade movies and private nude photographs. You seem to be having a problem understanding that. I can't say it any other way, this site has ONLY content submitted by members.

I'm not reviewing my own content. I can't lie; I'm only being honest when I say hundreds of members at the site love my material, but I reviewed the site here, NOT MY OWN MATERIAL as you acused me of. Originally, I did ask readers of my review here to stop in and say hi if they visited the site, but that is the nature of that particular site. Members post their own material because they want others to see it. What is the harm in asking visitors to leave a little note saying they stopped by and liked what they saw? That is a large part of what the site is about; it is a voting and rating site. If you see something you like, vote favorably on it and chances are you can influence what sort of material posters put out in the future. If you post material, the voter response will let you know what they liked and what they didn't like.

There are two types of members at this site. One is the sort that is a member only to look at other member's content. The other type is the member who uploads photos and videos for other members to look at. That is the very essence of this site; it exists as a venue to showcase your own material so that others may appreciate it.

Guys across the world share their toys with friends. "Hey, I got a new Corvette, hop behind the wheel man, you've got to drive this thing!" This site does the same for men and women everywhere, but it lets them share their sexuality with people around the world instead of their material toys. In my case, I think my wife gives wonderful blowjobs. I can't very well run around in my professional world telling my cohorts about it, but I can use the anonymous nature of the internet to post a video of it and get feedback from members on how good they think she is.

That is what this site is for, but obviously you can't seem to get your mind around the idea. I'll say it one last time, and this is all I've wanted to do from the start -- (but I've been dealing with your unceasing nitpicking) -- if readers enjoy REAL amateur porn, they need to check the site out, plain and simple. It is my firm and honest belief that there are few, if any, porn sites offering a better experience on the web for anyone interested in such material.

View Thread (19)

RE: IDoctor99's Review

Sun, 18 Nov 2007 13:18:51 PST

Newbie Nudes (1)

11-18-07 01:18pm

REVIEW REPLY by asmith12 (86)

To IDoctor99 (0):

> Whats the problem with finding a good thing and wanting to spread the word?
The problem is with creating your own content and trying to "review" it and put "rating" on it. Comment would be more appropriate for this kind of things (not exactly sure if even it would be ok with the spirit of the site, but in any case it would be better than fake review/rating).

> Can you guys be any more rude to somebody wanting to help out fellow porn watchers?
Sure we can, just ask about it politely enough.

View Thread (19)

RE: IDoctor99's Review

Sun, 18 Nov 2007 13:01:40 PST

Newbie Nudes (1)

11-18-07 01:01pm

REVIEW REPLY by IDoctor99 (0)

To asmith12 (86):

Whats the problem with finding a good thing and wanting to spread the word? If I found a tool that made changing my oil easier and more fun, I'd want to tell everyone about it so I could spread the happiness. This is the same thing.

I genuinely feel that this is the best porn site I have encountered in 10 years of online porn surfing and I want to tell the world about how awesome it is.

I personally don't buy anything or invest any energy into something unless I have reviewed a lot of first hand accounts of what its like. The same thing goes for porn. I value the reviews at TBP and thought I would do a good thing for interested parties by offering a user review of my favorite site, as I noticed there were none.

Sheesh! Can you guys be any more rude to somebody wanting to help out fellow porn watchers?

View Thread (19)

RE: IDoctor99's Review

Sun, 18 Nov 2007 12:45:26 PST

Newbie Nudes (1)

11-18-07 12:45pm

REVIEW REPLY by asmith12 (86)

To IDoctor99 (0):

Even if you do not receive any money from the site, you admitted yourself that you want to get more people there; that means that your "review" is biased from the very beginning, and rating you put in you review is completely useless. It MIGHT be suitable as a comment (not sure).

View Thread (19)

RE: IDoctor99's Review

Sun, 18 Nov 2007 12:22:28 PST

Newbie Nudes (1)

11-18-07 12:22pm

REVIEW REPLY by IDoctor99 (0)

To RagingBuddhist (17):

Guys, I can't seem to get around your criticisms. The only content on this site is member submitted. How can members who post material on the site speak of their experience but not seem biased? I don't see a way.

Seriously, check out the site. You don't have to pay to peruse the goods, but I'm sure after a while of looking around you'll want to pay so you can see everyone's videos. Being a paying member of this site is like walking into someone's home and playing everyone of their VHS tapes until you find one with them having sex on it.

How often do you get to see REAL homemade sex videos and private nude photographs of anyone, much less the thousands and thousands of members belonging to this site? Sure, there are other sites that cater to this sort of thing, but I'm a member of them and none of them get the job done as well as this site does.

I can't stress it enough. Check it out for yourself and you'll find it is very satisfying.

Enjoy!

View Thread (19)

RE: IDoctor99's Review

Sun, 18 Nov 2007 12:06:56 PST

Newbie Nudes (1)

11-18-07 12:06pm

REVIEW REPLY by RagingBuddhist (17)

To IDoctor99 (0):

Wow - After reading this review, I can almost picture a late night infomercial...

But this line really got me-
"If it wasn't for member contributions from individuals like myself, there would be absolutely no content at all and the site wouldn't exist."

Sure... no bias in the rating on THIS one!

View Thread (19)

RE: IDoctor99's Review

Sun, 18 Nov 2007 12:05:19 PST

Newbie Nudes (1)

11-18-07 12:05pm

REVIEW REPLY by IDoctor99 (0)

To Denner (146):

The definition and context of how I'm "connected" to this site doesn't seem to apply in this situation as it would with "shameless self promotion" of a site.

On a site like this, where you submit your home movies and personal photographs, the very nature of being a member is to be envolved in the site community. I can't see how a member couldn't be "affiliated" with the site, unless he only viewed material and never submitted any of his own. For a person to give a quality, accurate review of the site, that person needs to be a member who submits content. If it wasn't for member contributions from individuals like myself, there would be absolutely no content at all and the site wouldn't exist.

View Thread (19)

RE: IDoctor99's Review

Sun, 18 Nov 2007 11:46:49 PST

Newbie Nudes (1)

11-18-07 11:46am

REVIEW REPLY by IDoctor99 (0)

To asmith12 (86):

I could understand your observation if I was affiliated with a regular porn site in the capacity that I administrated it or something to that effect, but this particular porn site is a site full of member content and the members don't make money or anything of that nature.

I read through the rules about writing reviews and don't think that I violated any guidelines, but apparantly you guys think I have.

If it suits you, I'll remove the part that seems to offend you. Still, you guys should really check out the site. I've stopped going to other sites I used to pay for simply because they can not top this particular one.

View Thread (19)

RE: IDoctor99's Review

Sun, 18 Nov 2007 10:56:02 PST

Newbie Nudes (1)

11-18-07 10:56am

REVIEW REPLY by Denner (146)

To IDoctor99 (0):

agree with asmith - PU's with any connection to a site can't and should not make reviews....
There is a place called "Browse News" for inputs.

View Thread (19)

RE: IDoctor99's Review

Sun, 18 Nov 2007 09:26:26 PST

Newbie Nudes (1)

11-18-07 09:26am

REVIEW REPLY by asmith12 (86)

To IDoctor99 (0):

As I understand policy of this site, people affiliated with the site are not allowed to make reviews of the site they're affiliated with, because it cannot be anything but shilling.

View Thread (19)

RE: IDoctor99's Review

Sun, 18 Nov 2007 08:07:59 PST

Newbie Nudes (1)

11-18-07 08:07am

REVIEW REPLY by IDoctor99 (0)

To asmith12 (86):

Sorry to offend if that is what I did. I'm not "shilling" for the site, I'm interested in getting as many people as possible to view my wife naked and having sex. I suppose if I'm "shilling", its for myself. On the other hand, after years of surfing internet porn, I do believe completely that this is the best site I've ever been a member of, so of course I want to promote it to others.

I would love to include other members who's content is spectacular in my review, but I can't know if they would appreciate that. I think it would be a good idea though. This is the type of site where people are exibitionists - everyone naturally wants as many people as possible to look at them.

I'll contact my favorite posters on the site and ask permission to include thier member names in my review. If I get some to say yes and I include them in the review, would that seem less biased?

About my own content; my videos usually premier at the top of the pile as far as ratings go. They will hover near the top five for several days, and then gradually drop down into the top 100 or so as the typical rude low voters do their thing. I have a large following on the site, it is no lie when I say I am one of the better posters there. If you would only check this out to confirm, I'm sure you would agree.

View Thread (19)

RE: IDoctor99's Review

Sun, 18 Nov 2007 02:05:11 PST

Newbie Nudes (1)

11-18-07 02:05am

REVIEW REPLY by asmith12 (86)

To IDoctor99 (0):

> Leave me a comment and let me know you saw this review!
You're obviously shilling for the site, and this is not welcome here.

View Thread (19)