| Type |
Site - Score |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Comment
3001
|
Strict Restraint
(0)
|
|
03-30-10 04:52pm
Replies (0)
|
Comment
3002
|
Cum Bots
(0)
|
|
03-30-10 04:49pm
Replies (0)
|
Reply
3003
|
Anabolic.com
(0)
|
Reply of
Darrow's Review
Assuming Darrow has no personal axe to grind with Anabolic and has lied about the site in his review (which I have no reason to think is the case - the review, while short, does seem to be genuine) crap like this really pisses me off. Anabolic is one of the better studios out there. The internet isn't a passing fad, and many people want better access to the studio's library through a website. And most of us (here at PU anyway) are willing to pay for that privilege. But... instead Anabolic drops the ball and creates a site that fails to recognize the value of a decent web site. Like some other studios, I get the sense that this one is just raking the money in so they see no need to give the customers any value. Someday, Anabolic, this crap will come back to bite you and all the other sites that screw over the customers.
Thanks for the review, Darrow, and welcome to the PU site. I think you'll find PU to be an amazing community and an excellent resource.
|
03-21-10 12:48pm
|
Reply
3004
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
I agree with BadMrFrosty. All my porn is now digital. I even converted all my DVDs to digital too. It's more convenient, and a lot easier to stash away.
|
03-20-10 09:05am
|
Reply
3005
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Wittyguy's Poll
I may be a accused of being a bit of a conspiracy theorist, but to paraphrase Kissinger, even paranoids can have real enemies. With the right-wing nuts that make up much of government and law enforcement, I'm sure we're being monitored. Oh wait, someone just knocked on the door... I'll finishing bad-mouthing government when I get back...
|
03-16-10 05:01pm
|
Reply
3006
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
100% not. And not just because I'd worry that it could create an anti-porn backlash but also we live in a culture where it is pretty obvious that there is a disconnect between what people say and what people do on this issue. So for me, that means two things: 1) the politician is so stupid that he or she doesn't realize that people who say they are anti-porn probably actually don't mind it, and 2) the politician himself (most likely a man in this case) is a hypocrite because he dabbles in porn himself. Look at the anti-gay politicians and religious leaders who eventually get outed.
And I always get a hoot out of the argument that the porn industry is actually smaller and less important than it really is. Yes, it really is just us sickos here at PU driving the whole inductry and we each spend $100 million a year on our habits. It certainly isn't 100 million people spending $100 each per year...
And for the first time in my lifetime, here in Canada we have a right-wing federal government that is more hard-line pro-religious than in the U.S.
|
03-10-10 03:17am
|
Reply
3007
|
Public Flash
(0)
|
Reply of
bacardiancoke's Reply
Excellent review. Thanks for making it so detailed. I had been a member a year or so ago and downloaded most of what was there and I was actually thinking about joining again this weekend, but based on your review I think I'll skip it. You just saved me some cash. The bad news is, as has been pointed out, that this site had so much potential. This is a poorly served niche - U.S. publio nudity. I hope they come back with some new stuff soon.
|
02-19-10 12:48pm
|
Reply
3008
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Vegas Ken's Poll
I rejoin VideoBox and American Vice about every 6 to 8 months and download like a mad bastard. I've rejoined several Kink sites (The Training of O, specifically) several times. I'm with Jag G on this - while I'm always on the lookout for a good new site, I keep coming back to the old ones for the updates.
|
02-19-10 11:02am
|
Reply
3009
|
N/A
|
Reply of
badandy400's Poll
Sure there are other review sites out there, but nothing like TPB and PU. I rely on both before I make a decision to shell out for a site. The information gathered on both can be different and be very reliable. The ability to post a question on PU and get a reasoned answer makes it an amazing site. The people behind TPB and PU are providing a great service and I hope they're getting rich beyond their wildest dreams doing it. And let's face it, being able to communicate with other porn-addicted perverts makes each of us feel almost... normal!
All hail TPB and PU!
|
02-16-10 04:07pm
|
Reply
3010
|
Private.com
(0)
|
Reply of
slutty's Review
Interesting review - thanks for doing it. I've been thinking about trying a membership at Private but I think I'll wait based on your review. Your complaints about Private seem similar to my complaints about Hustler. Private and Hustler are two of the biggest names in the adult business and you'd think that they'd put the resources into getting it right. But both don't seem to have bothered. I wonder if it isn't partly a mentality that they're too big and too important to fail. Tell that to some car manufacturers and banks. Part of the sad reality though is that this industry isn't known for its customer service model. I suspect that both Private and Hustler figure that they could invest in making a great site that brings in a lot of revenue or they could make a crappy site that still brings in a lot of revenue. One of the reasons that I really like Kink and American Vice is that they leave a member with a sense that they actually care what the customer wants.
|
02-10-10 06:37pm
|
Reply
3011
|
VideoBox
(0)
|
Reply of
Monahan's Reply
Monahan:
I agree with you on this issue. The search function isn't as good as it could be simply because of some errors in entering the information. I suspect that this is a result of the sheer volume of files being added each day. VB has five updates as you know, and I'm assuming that both bonus sites have a least one update each day. I'm a VB fan, but this site is more about quantity (and value) than quality.
|
02-10-10 06:28pm
|
Reply
3012
|
VideoBox
(0)
|
Reply of
exotics4me's Reply
Thanks for that information. I never really spent a lot of time looking at the add-on channels. I looked at the number of titles available and the monthly cost and just assumed that it was poor value. But now hearing that there is a lot pf 90's stuff there I will definitely take a look.
Thanks for the tip.
|
02-02-10 05:05pm
|
Reply
3013
|
FTV Girls
(0)
|
Reply of
Monahan's Comment
This is definitely something worth checking out. I'm not normally a big fan of softcore, solo sites, but FTV Girls is an excellent site. Given the stunning beauty of the models and high quality of the site I'll certainly be checking this out.
|
01-31-10 03:49pm
|
Reply
3014
|
VideoBox
(0)
|
Reply of
exotics4me's Comment
Thanks for this. I take a VB membership for a month a couple of times a year and have wondered about the value of these new additional memberships. One of the things I always look for are older videos (from the early to mid-90s). Next time I'm renew (which won;t be for six months since I'm in now) I'll be more comfortable considering one or both of the add ons.
But... they seem pretty expensive. How do you think they stand up as value?
M
|
01-30-10 05:43pm
|
Reply
3015
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Duante Amorculo's Poll
Maybe I've mis-read the question, but I've read it in the context that made sense to me. Some of you read it as asking what would happen if your favorite starlet changed somehow and continued making scenes. I've read it as what would happen if a favorite left the business. For me, to put it in context, all I need to do is think about two of my favorite all time performers, Tammi Ann and Inari Vachs. Nothing except my own death will stop me from watching their scenes. Now if one or both ever came out of retirement and started working, I'm not sure that I'd be so much into their new work. But in their prime, those two lasses pretty much peg the perfect meter for me.
|
01-22-10 11:35am
|
Reply
3016
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Colm4's Poll
And I should also say that I first thought (and maybe still do a bit) that this is the creepiest poll topic I've seen since joining PU, but the debate and discussion that it's generated has been great.
|
01-14-10 04:50pm
|
Reply
3017
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Colm4's Poll
This is a really interesting topic. Too bad it’ll be buried soon when the next poll come up.
One problem with this whole issue is definition. Call me a literalist, but it seems to me that child pornography should involve, at a minimum, a “child” and “pornography.” And, of course, our whole culture agrees on what those terms mean, right?
People mature at different rates. So I think the only logical, workable solution is to pick an age and declare that to be the “age of consent.” 18 seems to be a good compromise.
So the problem is how do we define a child? Obviously the onset of puberty could be a measure, but since that age has been falling over the past hundred years that is no longer a good measure. There needs to be some recognition of maturity too. But how do you capture that in law? I don’t think you can. So we stick with a somewhat arbitrary but reasonable age.
My biggest concern about this is where we’re heading as a society: we seem to lack any ability to put things on a sliding scale of severity. On this scale, some pot you grew in your back yard is treated no differently from the hardest drug for sale on the street. In our example, a picture of a topless 17 year old on a beach is treated the same as horrific photos of a toddler being raped. The biggest problem with this is that when the soccer moms (of both genders) demand that the minor stuff be lumped in with the most heinous of crimes then the cops will naturally go after the easier stuff. That’ll take needed resources away from the true crimes.
For me, at a certain point it becomes the social requirement to regulate a natural desire. If you get turned on by a pre-pubescent child, then you are seriously ill. If you find yourself sneaking a glance at the neighbor’s 14 year old daughter who was well served by puberty with a womanly body you aren’t sick, but you need to exercise restraint because physical appearance can’t be the only measure. To bolster this point about natural desire and the need for restraint, consider the titles of so many porn flicks. (And I admit, this point may be wrong and simply reveal my own biases.) It seems to me that for every title that uses “MILF” or some word or phrase that would appeal to someone who likes 30+ women there are 20 titles that play on some word or phrase that denotes youth. Barely Legal, Just Turned 18, Barely 18, The Babysitter, 18 and Natural, 18 and Easy, Anal Teen Tryouts, Dream Teens, Eight Teen Tryouts, I’m so Young, Nasty Youngsters, Young and Anal… okay, you get the point. My point is that if we lowered the age of consent to 16, we’d see a bunch of movies titled “Just Turned 16,” “Barely 16,” etc. The point is that most of us have base urges to lust after womanly bodies, and if we shift the social restraints to a lower age then most of us would be okay with that.
|
01-14-10 04:38pm
|
Reply
3018
|
N/A
|
Reply of
asmith12's Poll
I'm in the same boat as Drooler I think. Porn back when I was a teen wasn't like porn today. At least nothing that I had was like anything today. Mostly Playboy and Penthouse, which were pretty tame. And here's a historical fact for you young'uns: back in the day, women actually had pubic hair. Yes, I know you think I'm telling stories, but it's true. I'm not sure what happened. Maybe evolution took care of the pubic hair gene in women. I don't miss it.
|
01-11-10 02:23pm
|
Reply
3019
|
FTV Girls
(0)
|
Reply of
FTV Staff's Reply
FTV Staff:
Thanks for clarifying that a key assumption that I made was wrong, namely that the public nudity on your site is ‘staged’ in that you have some arrangements with a resort. I made that assumption based on the large number of nude outdoor scenes made there, and that was an incorrect assumption. My apologies for making the incorrect assumption and I’ve edited my review to remove that.
I will say that now knowing that you don’t ‘cheat’ with the public stuff I’ve got a better appreciation of your site. I understand that given the current political and religious climate in the U.S. that any public nudity involves a lot of personal risk for the models and the staff. I agree with you that the EU sites have the ability to appear to push the envelope a lot more, but knowing that it isn’t really pushing the envelope due to the more liberal views of sexuality in the EU takes away a lot of the excitement found in viewing an American site. Now knowing that you don’t ‘stage’ or pre-arrange the public stuff raises it to a whole different level.
While I understand your dismay in having just one facet of your site reviewed, I tried to make it very clear that my review was only for someone looking at it from that perspective. I really liked your site – the models are stunning and you present them in ways that really show them off well. I give you full credit for that. My intention though, was to get the message out to others who may be like me: having no real interest in solo girl sites, but liking public nudity. I think that anyone who reads my review and wants public nudity will be more apt to consider a membership knowing that there is both quantity and quality.
Thanks for taking the time to correct my review. Having this kind of interaction between customers and webmasters is one of the key reasons that this site is so popular.
|
01-04-10 04:56pm
|
Comment
3020
|
American Vice
(0)
|
|
12-28-09 08:01am
Replies (0)
|
Reply
3021
|
N/A
|
Reply of
nadiencendia's Poll
Better or worse, I'm not sure. A lot more formulaic though. Gonzo was cutting edge back 10 to 15 years ago but the directors who developed it had some creativity. So many scenes now start in a frequently-used porn house with the girl in lingerie. There's no tease, no tension, and no build-up.
|
12-22-09 06:00pm
|
Reply
3022
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Denner's Poll
This isn't what will make me avoid a site, rather it is something that will make me more likely to join - it's a full look at the inside of the site so I can have a high level of comfort of what I'm getting. Sites like Videobox and American Vice do this. You could spend a day looking through every title that they have before you shell out the cash for downloads. Not only does this allow me to be sure that the site offers what they say it does, but I have confidence in the site because they have confidence to let me see inside. I'll still take a membership in a site that only has a few pages of 'previews' but only if TBP and PU folks tell me what's in there. I didn't do this a couple of weeks ago and got sort of burned. I got a membership to an exhibitionist site that only had a limited preview, limited info on TPB and no PU review. To my unpleasant surprise it had no videos, only pics. I wasn't fleeced because after I took out the membership I dug around again and did find reference to it being a pic only site, but a full look through it would have been better.
|
12-15-09 03:52pm
|
Comment
3023
|
Hustler Unlimited, formerly Hustler
(0)
|
|
12-10-09 04:39pm
Replies (1)
|
Reply
3024
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Drooler's Poll
For some models I get everything that I can. Most of the models I do this with are 1990s stars and no longer in the business so getting everything is probably impossible. But I try...
|
11-28-09 06:13am
|
Reply
3025
|
N/A
|
Reply of
james4096's Reply
Great response!
That's the same for me, coincidentally. Just like how I used to buy porn magazines for the articles... ;-)
|
11-27-09 03:40pm
|
