PU - Rachel Aziani - All Activity

RE: tangub's Review

Sun, 05 Jun 2011 01:02:42 PDT

Rachel Aziani (1)

06-05-11 01:02am

REVIEW REPLY by tangub (101)

To otoh (34):

Hi Otoh....yes i did try DTA but i couldn't get it to work here on the basic settings that i had success with on a previous site and to be honest i don't really know enough about using it to try changing the settings to suit different websites.

View Thread (2)

RE: tangub's Review

Sat, 04 Jun 2011 16:40:24 PDT

Rachel Aziani (1)

06-04-11 04:40pm

REVIEW REPLY by otoh (34)

To tangub (101):

Tangub, re the lack of zips, and saving your pics as... have you not tried a download manager? DownThemAll for Firefox is free, and effortlessly downloads a whole page full of images.

Otherwise, thanks - as ever - for the review :)

View Thread (2)

Rachel Aziani Comment

Sun, 06 Sep 2009 03:42:11 PDT

Rachel Aziani (1)

09-06-09 03:42am

COMMENT by Victorycreed (2)

Tried the Trial.

Videos are short, but sweet. I just wish for better camera angles. They have a live video feed from her office and she has a lot of bonus sites available.

Visit Rachel Aziani - View Replies - Add Reply

RE: (Edit: Problem fixed) Security warnings popping up like crazy

Wed, 01 Apr 2009 19:25:20 PDT

Rachel Aziani (1)

04-01-09 07:25pm

COMMENT REPLY by jd1961 (95)

To exotics4me (431):

Probably someone hacked into the site and left a little script. You see it on myspace all the time. But your software caught it. I'm sure the Aziani site has probably removed it by now.

View Thread (4)

RE: (Edit: Problem fixed) Security warnings popping up like crazy

Tue, 31 Mar 2009 23:18:05 PDT

Rachel Aziani (1)

03-31-09 11:18pm

COMMENT REPLY by exotics4me (431)

To badandy400 (103):

I agree, I really like this site and the network. On a related note, Microsoft lists this exact Trojan as the #1 threat right now, even over the Conficker, so I guess there is a chance that somehow it has infected their site without them noticing it. I don't know a lot about tech talk, but do know that the JS in the Trojan name means it has something to do with the Java Script. I'm hoping they get it fixed soon.

View Thread (4)

RE: (Edit: Problem fixed) Security warnings popping up like crazy

Tue, 31 Mar 2009 17:52:34 PDT

Rachel Aziani (1)

03-31-09 05:52pm

COMMENT REPLY by badandy400 (103)

To exotics4me (431):

That is too bad. I wonder if any other members are having issues. This is one of the nicer sites out there and I am sure they would not allow anything like this on purpose. Perhaps they should investigate and if there is an issue take the site down for a day to fix. Sending members any sort of malware is obviously bad for business.

View Thread (4)

RE: (Edit: Problem fixed) Security warnings popping up like crazy

Tue, 31 Mar 2009 16:25:02 PDT

Rachel Aziani (1)

03-31-09 04:25pm

COMMENT REPLY by exotics4me (431)

To exotics4me (431):

Here is my most recent attempt, which is now being completely blocked by my Security Software.

"The requested URL could not be retrieved

While trying to retrieve the URL:

http://www.aziani.com/lost/index.php

The following error was encountered:

The requested object is INFECTED with the following viruses: Trojan.JS.Agent.wh

Generated:
Tue Mar 31 19:24:16 2009
Kaspersky Internet Security 2009"

View Thread (4)

Rachel Aziani Comment

Tue, 31 Mar 2009 14:25:42 PDT

Rachel Aziani (1)

03-31-09 02:25pm

COMMENT by exotics4me (431)

(Edit: Problem fixed) Security warnings popping up like crazy

(Problem is fixed)

With all the talk of the April Fools Virus, this alarmed a bit, I was going to join the Aziani network, a network that I have not only rated high on here, but will say is one of my favorite big boob networks, especially with all the Georgia Jones content and her little boobs, but enough about that. I'm getting multiple security warnings from each of the sites in this network. I copied and will paste those below.

I would wonder if they know the Trojan is on there or if it could have to do with the April's Fool Virus?

Visit Rachel Aziani - View Replies - Add Reply

RE: Zack's Review

Wed, 03 Dec 2008 21:56:00 PST

Rachel Aziani (1)

12-03-08 09:56pm

REVIEW REPLY by nygiants03 (160)

To Zack (0):

You give Kelly Madison a 99, and Rachel Aziani a 50??? Something is not right here........

View Thread (8)

RE: Zack's Review

Tue, 02 Dec 2008 13:17:06 PST

Rachel Aziani (1)

12-02-08 01:17pm

REVIEW REPLY by badandy400 (103)

To mr smut (40):

That was the point. To not leave much to be interpreted.

I certainly hope I did not waste my time either. I did not intend for that posting to get that large!

View Thread (8)

RE: Zack's Review

Tue, 02 Dec 2008 13:13:16 PST

Rachel Aziani (1)

12-02-08 01:13pm

REVIEW REPLY by mr smut (40)

To badandy400 (103):

Hello Andy,

that was in a lengthy explanation what I was trying to say. I only hope that you didn't waste to much energy or let's say I do hope that Zack is able to understand what our point of view is and that he will be willing and able to make his reviews helpful for others.

Cheers,
Smut

View Thread (8)

RE: Zack's Review

Tue, 02 Dec 2008 12:47:08 PST

Rachel Aziani (1)

12-02-08 12:47pm

REVIEW REPLY by badandy400 (103)

To Cybertoad (77):

Look, I am 23 and I love the look of nice tight teens with ripe, firm racks.

BUT...something about this woman really does the trick. I wish more women looked like her as they aged. She really does have an amazing ability to age....or perhaps an anti-aging machine! :)

A 50 will not hold much merit here with out a lot of logical, intelligent argument to why it deserves to be knock off. Which hopefully we will see.

But as it stands right now it does not matter much to scoring.

Oh and yes, gotta love those shapely naturals.

View Thread (8)

RE: Zack's Review

Tue, 02 Dec 2008 12:41:30 PST

Rachel Aziani (1)

12-02-08 12:41pm

REVIEW REPLY by badandy400 (103)

To Zack (0):

As always, we welcome new members and try to help them on there way a bit.

My friendly advise is when whenever someone give a low 50s or high 90s score there needs to be very valid reasoning. it is going to be hard enough to convince people here that this site deserves such a low score, but it will not happen if you leave out details on the reason why.

Tell us why the issues you had were such a big deal to you. Saying "it is what it is because it is what it is" will not do the trick either, not that you have done that but it happens more often than we like.

Remember, the reviews we right are not for our own benefit, rather they are to help others. We all have different tastes. You have an issue with the shape of her tits which is fine, but I personally like them. But I can tell without paying whether or not I like how she looks by simply looking at a homepage or tour page. What is important in scoring is everything else. The model not having the features you are looking for does not constitute a 50! That would be like me doing to a solo site about a guy and giving it a 50 because I did not like the shape of his ass. Of course I would not like the shape of his ass, i am not into that sort of thing! So rating the site as a 50 would not be fair simply because it did not stand a chance with me, but someone else might come along and absolutely love the way the guy looks.

What would then be fair is for me to say I did not like his ass, then rate the site based on other features. Price, updates, videos and picture quality, amount of content, and so one.

Not liking a models tits is only worth a few points. There is much more to the site than that, and as I said, that taste will vary with each person that looks at your review. A good way to handle that is to say that you did not like them and to encourage the reader to check out the tour page first to make sure they have no issues with them. That would be a helpful suggestion to the reader and make you sound good. :)

Now about the guys dick. Many people going model sites because they are simply interested in the specific model. The dick she is sitting on becomes a little less of a concern. However, I will agree that an ugly guy can ruin a great scene as it can be distracting. Besides, small cocks make me feel better about myself!! :)

Just try to be as objective about your reviews as you can and load them with information. Your review is barely 12 lines, so it is more of a comment than a review. 12 lines simply is not enough content to convey your message. As for 50s, try not to write reviews while you are pissed off at a site about something. When a review is all negative people tend to not look at them because it is painfully obvious the person just wants to vent.

The bottom line here is: don not be talked out of your opinions about sites you like or dislike, just tell us exactly what puts them on your porntacular list or your shit list.

View Thread (8)

RE: Zack's Review

Tue, 02 Dec 2008 12:24:26 PST

Rachel Aziani (1)

12-02-08 12:24pm

REVIEW REPLY by Cybertoad (77)

To mr smut (40):

HEHE,
Yes she is a knock out for sure.
I was open to what they have to say of course just a 50 seemed very harsh.
And yes she is natural from what I know perhaps others can give input as well.

Thanks.
CT

View Thread (8)

RE: Zack's Review

Tue, 02 Dec 2008 11:57:34 PST

Rachel Aziani (1)

12-02-08 11:57am

REVIEW REPLY by mr smut (40)

To Cybertoad (77):

Hi Sir,

I think it's a great discrepancy between objective pros and cons and the explanation that should normally be given in the bottom line by Zack. I see about 2 1/2 pros and 1 1/2 maybe 2 cons with the rest not being explained in the conclusion of the review.

B.t.w. I can see the shape of her boobies in the preview and have to say that these are nice natural ones. I personally like what I see :-)

Cheers,
Smut

View Thread (8)

RE: Zack's Review

Tue, 02 Dec 2008 11:19:06 PST

Rachel Aziani (1)

12-02-08 11:19am

REVIEW REPLY by Cybertoad (77)

To Zack (0):

This site is among PU's top rated sites, and no one then this review has gone under 80 in any review of this site. You gave it the lowest possible review but said little as to why you rated it the lowest possible score. You are entitled to your review opinion, I just saw the review score as severely harsh given prior evidence by others shows it to be a very satifactory site.

View Thread (8)

RE: ace of aces's Review

Mon, 04 Aug 2008 19:46:55 PDT

Rachel Aziani (1)

08-04-08 07:46pm

REVIEW REPLY by badandy400 (103)

To lurifax (0):

In that case I can not share a respect you might feel you have earned. Ace of Aces is a valued PU and he has my respect. His "childish" statement was in fact very valid. You can not vote on his trust rating because you have not done any reviews yourself to see the other side of the fence here. Pointing out a fact does not make him childish?

I would like to add that we are not necessarily paid for doing these reviews. What monies we do by chance get through the raffle does not even come close to covering all the costs of going through all these websites. Hell the $400 I have gotten so far does not even pay for the hard drives I have used since I began reviewing. But I am greatful for it all the same, everything helps. Besides, there are those of us who do post here simply to help out another PU to make informed decisions and avoid being ripped off and get a lot from the work of other PUs that have taken the time and effort to post.

Also, sometimes sites lack in certain areas but go well beyond in others and it can make up the slack produced elsewhere. Videobox does post some lame videos, but they make up for it in their absolute size and that if you do not like a few videos there are plenty others to move on to. When reading a reviewers reviews you have to look at a few of their others to get a feel for that reviewers style and taste. If a reviewer has a taste for blonde teens he might give a blonde teen site a little higher score than you might feel is warranted simply because he got what he wanted.

View Thread (25)

RE: ace of aces's Review

Mon, 04 Aug 2008 17:52:18 PDT

Rachel Aziani (1)

08-04-08 05:52pm

REVIEW REPLY by lurifax (0)

To badandy400 (103):

Hello badandy400,

My disappointment with reviews in general is based on the lack of (visible) consistency or accountability in the setting of scores. TBP for example do not show on what criteria they give scores. (�Porninspector� does something like it, but not enough.)

On whatever grounds you use (download speed, DVD quality, HD and so on)� If a table is set up - showing the scores (0-10/10, or 0-100/100 etc.) - and the same table structure is used over the board one gets COMPATIBLE results. The AVERAGE gives the score�

Let�s look at what happens when a new factor, like HD, comes in to the valuation;

At present you have no room for manoeuvre. (You have �painted yourself into a corner�.) With a template, as suggested, you don�t have that problem as you simply add HD to the template. � That�s basics in any valuation process.

Your point about Criticising or Creating a review is taken. My reason for not doing the latter is that I have neither time nor interest for it. Besides, I leave that to you guys. You are paid for it (I hope...).

If I have to choose between Camaro and Firebird, I stick to my bike until I have enough money to by a proper car like BMW or Mercedes�

I should not have bothered with Rachel Aziani in my last posting � I had not done so before.
My visit to Rachel Aziani was just a sidekick to AZIANI.com.

My comment to �ace of aces� was as a reply to his childish previous remark, and �13� is the impression I got of his mental age. I do not apologise for it.

View Thread (25)

RE: ace of aces's Review

Sat, 02 Aug 2008 21:44:20 PDT

Rachel Aziani (1)

08-02-08 09:44pm

REVIEW REPLY by badandy400 (103)

To lurifax (0):

About Videobox, how would a site make a video truly in HD if it was actually filmed in standard quality? That would be cheating. Videobox does have speed as well. I have spent countless hours downloading at 40 MBit/s and a fair amount of time even faster. I can not comment about customer service either way, I have never needed to contact them.

I believe the Xmovies score difference compared to Videobox is justified. They are basically the same site fundamentally. However, Videobox has more videos, more options for download, higher bit rates, and costs less especially to users who do not join trough TBP. Therefore, Videobox in fundamental areas is superior thus warranting a higher score. Analogy: If you compare a Camaro to a Firebird one might get a 98 while the other gets a 95 since they are about the same in many respects, now compare that Camaro to Saleen S7 TT and now the S7 gets a 99 and the Camaro gets a 80 simply because of what it is being compared to. Videobox gets its score because no other site in that genre has touched them on fundamental issues and because many people simply like it better.

As for Rachel Aziani, there is some hardcore content. Admittedly there is not a lot but it certainly does exist. Solo sites can be repetitive on what goes on, but that is understood when joining. If someone joins a site that features one model they typically have a keen interest in that model and want to see her in as much as they can get their hands on. I for example I am huge Amy Reid fan and would download 100 scenes of her doing about the same thing with out thinking twice about it. Many times the only true difference is a change in setting and clothing, which is enough. I love seeing the same model in different outfits. Solo masturbation is usually about the same across any site, some sites show many different models, but they are doing about the same thing. On a solo site you get the same model which can be nice because you are familiar with her and do not have to wonder if the scene is worth downloading and watching because you do not know if you will like the model or not.

If you do not like the reviews and scores given to sites then you should consider writing some yourself. It is much easier to critic someone else's writing than to write your own, I noticed this myself quickly when I first started writing reviews here.

"The intelligent reader," I would like to point out that I do have a reasonably high IQ and I would be willing to bet than many of the top posters on this site are above average as well. We have managed to keep things fairly civilized around here, unlike many other forums which typically is a sign of intelligence.

Also, we do not appreciate insulting Ace of Aces. Intelligent people should be above that. Besides, I doubt that a 13 year old has signed up for and wrote reviews for 60 sites or so using mom's credit card while going unnoticed! These things tend to stand out. Ace of Aces has my respect.

View Thread (25)

RE: ace of aces's Review

Sat, 02 Aug 2008 18:54:23 PDT

Rachel Aziani (1)

08-02-08 06:54pm

REVIEW REPLY by lurifax (0)

To ace of aces (179):

Aren't you too young for this?

I get the impression that you can hardly be older than 13 years of age.

View Thread (25)

RE: ace of aces's Review

Sat, 02 Aug 2008 18:44:17 PDT

Rachel Aziani (1)

08-02-08 06:44pm

REVIEW REPLY by lurifax (0)

To badandy400 (103):

The intelligent reader would have concluded that I was not 'bitching' about Videobox, but gave an example of how reviewers manage to paint themselves into a corner.

At first I thought "Why bother?", but for your benefit I shall explore;

As I was replying to 'ace of aces' 'review' on this site...what would be the point of making a statement, or comment, to the aforementioned 'review', on the Videobox site?

I have previously declared (nearly) all and every 'problem' I have with the 'Rachel Aziani' site... Although I could add that it is a bit too repetetive, but then again, that is just how it is with all the single model sites.

If anything, I should add to my original comment to 'ace of aces' 'review': What "hardcore"? The closest to it I have seen would not even shock a religious fanatic.

As for 'bitching' about Videobox...

1. I don't really have much critisism about the site, but what I have, I shall account for when it comes to that - probably in September this year.

2. As I mentioned before, I am not happy with the inflation of points given to websites by reviewers in general. Unfortunately I have not found a proper forum, where to vent and/or discuss these matters. As it stands, the whole point system is, if anything, ridiculus.

More often than not, sites are not compatible on the same criteria - although they are given points as if they were.

As an example;

Presently I am subscribing to xmovies.com, which TBP has given a score of 86.3. (I cannot make out what the 86.3 relates to.)

In comparison with Videobox, which has a TBP score of 98.0 one is led to believe that Videobox is vastly superior to xmovies.com. I, however, do not see it in such easy terms.

Whilst Videobox is outstanding in it's quantity of videos as well as how they handle their data base, it is comparably shortcoming in other aspects, where xmovies.com excels like website speed, download speed and quality of video clips, and not least; an actual, working and polite customer service (24/7!).

Between the two, I have come to the conclusion that, for the best result, one should work the two places in tandem. AMEN!

View Thread (25)

Rachel Aziani Comment

Tue, 29 Jul 2008 09:23:34 PDT

Rachel Aziani (1)

07-29-08 09:23am

COMMENT by Cybertoad (77)

Membership ended today :-(

My membership ended, :-(
Last few days the site slowed I wrote tech support nothing yet. Download is good but the site slowed down some reason, I would think was me but other sites are blazzinly fast like normal to me.
Over all I stand by the review I made, its a great site thats keeps you coming back. If they can fine tune this site willl rocket to the top.

Visit Rachel Aziani - View Replies - Add Reply

RE: ace of aces's Review

Wed, 23 Jul 2008 23:14:07 PDT

Rachel Aziani (1)

07-23-08 11:14pm

REVIEW REPLY by ace of aces (179)

To badandy400 (103):

hehe...yeah certainly it looks like it is his way of replying. i am not the only how get`s a bad reply from him ^^..but at least he can`t vote me either because he hasn`t got 5 points :)

View Thread (25)

RE: ace of aces's Review

Wed, 23 Jul 2008 16:14:18 PDT

Rachel Aziani (1)

07-23-08 04:14pm

REVIEW REPLY by badandy400 (103)

To lurifax (0):

First of all, you should bitch about Videobox on the Videobox page. Ace of Aces is experienced at reviewing yes, but not on the payroll.

You seem to have a real problem with this site, so what things about it do you not like? I have read your comment already, but their has to be more than that making you mad about it.

View Thread (25)

RE: ace of aces's Review

Wed, 23 Jul 2008 16:10:42 PDT

Rachel Aziani (1)

07-23-08 04:10pm

REVIEW REPLY by badandy400 (103)

To ace of aces (179):

Hum....looks like someone is on the rag!

Admittedly I did not give the site a 99 either, but it certainly is not far from it in my eyes. There is a lot of good things going on here. Besides, it is not like you are a "one review wonder" here after all you are in the top 10 rank here at PU. Dont worry, they guy in 12th agrees with you!

You just cant make everyone happy. At least he cant vote against you yet...haha!

View Thread (25)

RE: Cybertoad's Review

Mon, 07 Jul 2008 18:17:41 PDT

Rachel Aziani (1)

07-07-08 06:17pm

REVIEW REPLY by badandy400 (103)

To Cybertoad (77):

I would not get to rough on him though. He is right after all. I found that to be an extremely annoying part of this set of sites. Granted though it is worth the hassle to get the content. Besides, we were all "one post wonders" until we posted again. I am sure people thought the same of me when I made a big stink with my 100 score for Videobox, and look now, I have something like 300 posts. Gotta give people a chance, especially when they are right. Just do not be too blinded by the fact that you love a site to ignore flaws that other people might think is a big deal. I have been very irritated by things before and wanted to knock a site for it. I can understand him being mad because this site really does screw up download managers.

At the same time you guys are right as well. It is not something worth causing someone to overlook the site over. I loved the site and it is on my permanent rejoin list!

View Thread (7)

RE: hmmm

Thu, 03 Jul 2008 13:09:51 PDT

Rachel Aziani (1)

07-03-08 01:09pm

COMMENT REPLY by badandy400 (103)

To Cybertoad (77):

I was setting several up as well, but if it took a while sometimes they would time out and end would have to start over! No resuming here.

View Thread (3)

RE: Cybertoad's Review

Wed, 02 Jul 2008 23:46:38 PDT

Rachel Aziani (1)

07-02-08 11:46pm

REVIEW REPLY by Cybertoad (77)

To ace of aces (179):

I agree aces, thats not cool.
Ok ya give a review, but no site suck at
everything.
I think in MHO, they should give him a free membership and then let him say it sucks.

Its a good site, its a great model.
It has a good network. And ok navigational look.

Not perfect, but not a bag of turd soaking camel balls either.
And there is allot of good in that site.

And with many reviews he's still at zero, wonder why.
Negative don't help all alone, you need balance.

View Thread (7)

RE: hmmm

Wed, 02 Jul 2008 23:42:59 PDT

Rachel Aziani (1)

07-02-08 11:42pm

COMMENT REPLY by Cybertoad (77)

To badandy400 (103):

Ya, to complete my DL, I setup 8 at a time DL in IE and come back.
A manager wont work for me on that site.
There is allot of good there so I am sure in time they will get it right.

View Thread (3)

RE: ace of aces's Review

Wed, 02 Jul 2008 16:10:42 PDT

Rachel Aziani (1)

07-02-08 04:10pm

REVIEW REPLY by lurifax (0)

To ace of aces (179):

A "review" should be as objective as possible.

Else it is not a 'review' but an opinion.

Having got your point of view clarified, I shall not bother any further to read any of your "reviews" as I can se no value in them.

View Thread (25)

RE: hmmm

Wed, 02 Jul 2008 14:47:16 PDT

Rachel Aziani (1)

07-02-08 02:47pm

COMMENT REPLY by badandy400 (103)

To Cybertoad (77):

I agree. The woman is worth a little hassle for. But, they do need to reconsider the timeout and frequent relog in. As I have mentioned in my reviews, this is pretty annoying and screws up download managers.

View Thread (3)

RE: Cybertoad's Review

Wed, 02 Jul 2008 10:04:01 PDT

Rachel Aziani (1)

07-02-08 10:04am

REVIEW REPLY by ace of aces (179)

To Cybertoad (77):

only criticism without any positiv to mention is RUBBISH :)..how i like such viewers like lurifax (0) ;)

View Thread (7)

Rachel Aziani Comment

Wed, 02 Jul 2008 09:25:44 PDT

Rachel Aziani (1)

07-02-08 09:25am

COMMENT by Cybertoad (77)

hmmm

There seems to be a few small site flaws, but I still think the model exceeds the site flaw, just MHO of course.

I had noticed that time out too.
Wonder if its just the site or the network that has that flaw. Worth taking a look.

Visit Rachel Aziani - View Replies - Add Reply

RE: Cybertoad's Review

Wed, 02 Jul 2008 09:21:54 PDT

Rachel Aziani (1)

07-02-08 09:21am

REVIEW REPLY by Cybertoad (77)

To ace of aces (179):

Yea, funny how they just don't make em like this anymore .

View Thread (7)

RE: Cybertoad's Review

Wed, 02 Jul 2008 07:39:56 PDT

Rachel Aziani (1)

07-02-08 07:39am

REVIEW REPLY by Cybertoad (77)

To TheRizzo (23):

Hey Rizzo,

But my brother, I am not easily impressed by solo's either.
Nor am I a cougar fan really.
But this site mind you is a solo and natural.
At her age well wow. Body of a 20 year old worth the visit even with some site flaws.

I was impressed.

View Thread (7)

RE: ace of aces's Review

Wed, 02 Jul 2008 05:20:57 PDT

Rachel Aziani (1)

07-02-08 05:20am

REVIEW REPLY by ace of aces (179)

To lurifax (0):

if you didn`t get the point, the review is an subjectiv review from a user !... other styles other tastes....only thing you can judge from my review is the reliability of the given information.

the given points should never let you decide if you join a site.

information rules and going with it obviously reading the special reviews and not only looking at the points..

at least, if you look at my average given points you would have guessed by yourself that i am totally with the points i have given and if you look at my reviews you will see that my given points are not everytime the same as others have given them.

View Thread (25)

RE: Cybertoad's Review

Tue, 01 Jul 2008 22:17:27 PDT

Rachel Aziani (1)

07-01-08 10:17pm

REVIEW REPLY by TheRizzo (23)

To Cybertoad (77):

I am not much of a solo girl site, but she is absolutely stunning so I may make an exception and give it a try this month. Love those tits.

View Thread (7)

RE: ace of aces's Review

Tue, 01 Jul 2008 17:00:15 PDT

Rachel Aziani (1)

07-01-08 05:00pm

REVIEW REPLY by lurifax (0)

To ace of aces (179):

What a load of rubbish! (If the '99' is out of 100.)

I have previously complained about the trend among all (professional) website reviewers.

'Ace of aces' have obviously fallen into the same trap.

A typical example is 'VideoBox', which is given 98/100 by TBP.

Shortcomings @ 'VideoBox';

1. Not all videos are of DVD quality.
2. Many 'updates' are 'recycled' old videos.
3. ...and last, but not least: No HD quality to be seen anywhere!

In conclusion I ask; would an adjustment (improvement) with regard to the 'shortcomings' only be worth 2% - or less?

Obviously not.

View Thread (25)

RE: Trial membership

Tue, 01 Jul 2008 16:19:52 PDT

Rachel Aziani (1)

07-01-08 04:19pm

COMMENT REPLY by lurifax (0)

To nygiants03 (160):

Hi,

TBP has got the figures wrong.

Presently there is a trial offer @$4.95 for both the Aziani sites.

View Thread (3)

Rachel Aziani Comment

Tue, 01 Jul 2008 16:16:16 PDT

Rachel Aziani (1)

07-01-08 04:16pm

COMMENT by lurifax (0)

Funny Server

You have better believe it! They have put a timer on the server, which means that 75 minutes after you have logged in the site freezes - regardless of what you were doing.

1. Very annoying as one has to start all over again (after a new sign-in).

2. Makes shit of your download managers normal capacity.

An other 'funny' thing about the site is that the server seems unable to upload faster than 1.1MB/s.

Visit Rachel Aziani - View Replies - Add Reply

RE: Cybertoad's Review

Tue, 01 Jul 2008 10:38:14 PDT

Rachel Aziani (1)

07-01-08 10:38am

REVIEW REPLY by ace of aces (179)

To Cybertoad (77):

yeah, she`s gorgeous :)

View Thread (7)

RE: badandy400's Review

Wed, 18 Jun 2008 08:53:01 PDT

Rachel Aziani (1)

06-18-08 08:53am

REVIEW REPLY by ace of aces (179)

To badandy400 (103):

yeah, she is so hot *ouch*

"I am happy it was recommended to me." ^^..who was that good old boy who did that? :) ...lol

View Thread (1)

RE: ace of aces's Review

Fri, 13 Jun 2008 00:52:02 PDT

Rachel Aziani (1)

06-13-08 12:52am

REVIEW REPLY by ace of aces (179)

To badandy400 (103):

hehe...i will always write reviews about the sites i have visited but mostly i am to lazy to do that :)...

View Thread (25)

RE: ace of aces's Review

Thu, 12 Jun 2008 14:18:01 PDT

Rachel Aziani (1)

06-12-08 02:18pm

REVIEW REPLY by badandy400 (103)

To ace of aces (179):

I will be doing this one shortly...dont worry. Actually I have a good number of reviews to write!

View Thread (25)

RE: ace of aces's Review

Thu, 12 Jun 2008 14:05:05 PDT

Rachel Aziani (1)

06-12-08 02:05pm

REVIEW REPLY by ace of aces (179)

To badandy400 (103):

hi, ,it`s me again, now i am waiting for youre review of that site ^^, hope i did`n`t blinded you by my given points ;)

View Thread (25)

RE: ace of aces's Review

Tue, 06 May 2008 08:42:13 PDT

Rachel Aziani (1)

05-06-08 08:42am

REVIEW REPLY by badandy400 (103)

To ace of aces (179):

I am not logging in after every video, but it is rather frequent. It is less than three hours for me. I will try to see how long it takes before logging me out.

View Thread (25)

RE: ace of aces's Review

Tue, 06 May 2008 04:13:32 PDT

Rachel Aziani (1)

05-06-08 04:13am

REVIEW REPLY by ace of aces (179)

To badandy400 (103):

hm...i used the dap download manager and had no problems as i remember. but i can remember that i had to relog after a while ( arround three hours) but defenetly not after every video...i don`t download photos, so for me it wasn`t a problem that there were no zips :)...which browser do you use? maybe it`s also a problem of the browser. i use the inetexplorer.

hope that you enjoy the site anyway.

View Thread (25)

RE: ace of aces's Review

Mon, 05 May 2008 16:14:33 PDT

Rachel Aziani (1)

05-05-08 04:14pm

REVIEW REPLY by badandy400 (103)

To ace of aces (179):

AHHH!!! I joined! But, I did not realize that the photosets did not have zips for them! Also, I am noticing that I have to keep relogging in download the next video. So my download manager is not doing me a whole lot of good.

From before we talked about the bit rates. The new stuff is 2.59 MBit/s I believe, but Windows shows them as like 5.5 MBit/s....kinda weird. They are actually 2.5 and do not look bad at all.

No zips and lots of logins....I wont be giving it a 99 because of this, but the content is not bad. Brazzers does a login deal like this too and lost a few good points. Video box makes me login Saturday early afternoon, so once a week, and so far BangBros has never made me login except for the first time.

View Thread (25)

RE: ace of aces's Review

Mon, 05 May 2008 07:59:20 PDT

Rachel Aziani (1)

05-05-08 07:59am

REVIEW REPLY by ace of aces (179)

To badandy400 (103):

let me know if my point of view was or wasn`t to subjective .

View Thread (25)

RE: ace of aces's Review

Sun, 04 May 2008 14:49:56 PDT

Rachel Aziani (1)

05-04-08 02:49pm

REVIEW REPLY by badandy400 (103)

To ace of aces (179):

Well. That depends on a lot of things. But here even the lower end should look good still. A decently compressed and filtered 4000 Kbit/s video should look wonderful. Usually when videos get over 2000 they start looking pretty good. Of course there are exceptions, some still suck! Of course the higher the better, but there is a point where is make little difference to increase the bit rate and just makes it harder for a persons computer to play it. Try taking and average computer that is 4 years old and skip around an 8 MBit video....it does not work so well.

Thanks for the info, I just might have to join this site and check everything out myself. That is one beautiful woman! :)

View Thread (25)