| Type |
Site - Score |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Reply
476
|
The English Mansion
(0)
|
Reply of
SteveWebslave's Reply
> no, we would not refund somebody who joined our site, downloaded a gallery, then said they didn't like it
It means that all the references to Josh's e-mails are completely irrelevant, so I'm not even sure that you did have a right to mention such potentially sensitive information in public forum (especially as in this case you seem to be bound not only with publicly available privacy policy, but also with your contractual obligations with JoshP).
Bottom line: as I've already said, my understanding is that support did an extremely poor job in handling this situation. Furthermore, I'm sure that allowing refunds in such cases of 'hate on the first glance' (sure, not after user downloaded 20G of content) would be beneficial for all the parties involved.
|
10-30-07 08:23am
|
Reply
477
|
The English Mansion
(0)
|
Reply of
SteveWebslave's Reply
> You talk about my interpretation as if there is some ambiguity here as to who was in the wrong.
Sure there is some ambiguity and some of your interpretation; first of all, there is no way to identify person reliably on the Internet (except for digital certificates, but I really doubt they were involved).
But this is not that important, what is more important is your answer to the following question: if somebody (without any e-mails which you would interpret as coming from him) will subscribe, then come in, download one gallery and say that he's not satisfied, asking for a refund - what would you do? Will you refund or not? If no, then all the references to Josh's alleged e-mail are irrelevant, if yes, then the whole thing just didn't make any sense from business point of view - cost of time and efforts (not to mention loss of goodwill) spent on this pretty specific case has already exceeded the refund amount many-fold.
PS > Why you are blindly jumping to this guy's defence is puzzling?
It's very simple and you should expect it on the Internet, especially in places like this one: I'm a customer too, and dealing with unscrupulous merchants all the time (see for instance my comment 'Swindling alert'). I can imagine that you're dealing with fraudulent customers all the time either, but fortunately that's not my problem :-).
|
10-30-07 03:30am
|
Reply
478
|
The English Mansion
(0)
|
Reply of
SteveWebslave's Reply
> Keeping customers happy, is actually something we are very proud of and something we do very well...
No comment.
> It appears from your comments that you are condolning somebody joining a pay site, downloading what they want and then demanding a refund by getting their bank or credit card company to dispute the transaction. You seem to be suggesting people should commit fraud?
That's only the way you prefer to read it. What I've said is that if there is a conflict between VISA customer and VISA merchant (and it doesn't matter what is the reason of the conflict: fraudulent charge or service so poor so it wasn't really possible to use it), one of the ways (which seems the most convenient to me) is to bring this conflict to the customer's bank to solve, that's it. And then it will be the bank who will decide how to deal with the matter. I should mention though that as far as I know, historically VISA/MC tend to like their customers much more than their merchants, so in case of doubts conflicts tend to be resolved in customer's favor. Any other questions?
> After all, this is what Josh P did...
Again, this is just your interpretation, and given the way you've interpreted my own words, personally I tend to doubt this your interpretation too. Still, in case of conflict it shouldn't be decided by me (and even less by you as you're the party of the conflict) but by appropriate conflict resolution body (like bank in the case of VISA-related conflict).
|
10-30-07 02:29am
|
Comment
479
|
Lady Sonia
(0)
|
|
10-29-07 10:21am
Replies (1)
|
Reply
480
|
Blacks on Blondes
(0)
|
Reply of
jd1961's Reply
> some of the people that run these sites are charlatans
I think 'swindlers' is a more precise word :-).
|
10-29-07 06:42am
|
Reply
481
|
Femdom Time
(0)
|
Reply of
SnowDude's Comment
In addition: there is another site I've just run into and will think of joining; it is Lady-Sonya. From info in public areas, she does look more as a powerful (and sexy) woman than a dom; she also does seem to do some switching.
|
10-29-07 06:24am
|
Reply
482
|
Blacks on Blondes
(0)
|
Reply of
jd1961's Reply
Thanks. Sure, it's always a good idea to check everything before final click, but it's sooooo boring. Unfortunately, it seems that there is no way around :-(.
|
10-29-07 06:20am
|
Reply
483
|
Femdom Time
(0)
|
Reply of
SnowDude's Comment
Women being powerful but not dominating? Don't know of such sites, as well of sites featuring 'switches'. So if you'll find such a thing out, please let me know too :-).
As for more mild action, you may want to take a look at meninpain.com (not all action there is exactly mild, but on average it is quite mild compared to others). Also some of models from there are indeed switches (and several were featured both as doms - on meninpain and as subs - on other kink.com sites such as sexandsubmission, 2 examples of such models are Annie Cruz and Isis Love, but there are more I'm pretty sure); while it is not exactly a site about switches, getting some clips both sites (with the same model being dom and sub) can be kind of close.
PS I was a bit afraid of writing yet another positive thing about kink.com because somebody can say I'm affiliated with them which I'm definitely not; it is just that in 'Safe Sane Consentual' BDSM niche very few can compete with them (with one notable exception being SlavesInLove).
|
10-29-07 06:12am
|
Reply
484
|
Indian Sex Land
(0)
|
Reply of
bbiillyy's Reply
I'll try, thanks.
Still I'm wondering - why some sites still try to use nonstandard codecs when standard ones (such as WMV9) provide at least the same quality? There is no need to answer - I'm just ranting :-).
|
10-29-07 04:50am
|
Reply
485
|
Blacks on Blondes
(0)
|
Reply of
jd1961's Reply
I see, thanks.
By any chance, do you have some observations where it happens more often (for example, it might be a 'feature' of some processors like Epoch)? If we would know where to look for it, it would be easier to avoid.
|
10-29-07 02:48am
|
Reply
486
|
Indian Sex Land
(0)
|
Reply of
bbiillyy's Review
Any idea what codec they use for WMVs? I've run into 'codec not found' problem with their preview WMVs; can figure out but it's simpler to ask :-).
|
10-28-07 03:49pm
|
Reply
487
|
Dare Ring
(0)
|
Reply of
lost's Review
For some reason I don't really trust you; review is way too close to poorly worded e-mail spam.
|
10-28-07 03:26pm
|
Reply
488
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Denner's Poll
PU, TBP, Rabbits, Inspector - that's are sites I use (in that order).
|
10-28-07 03:21pm
|
Reply
489
|
Fucking Machine 1000
(0)
|
Reply of
ace of aces's Reply
> but i don`t think that my given information are wrong......
I didn't mean it; what I've actually meant is that I'd like to see more site-specific information which would show why your ratings are different.
> they took another which didn`t accept credit cards or something like
> this. i also think there was no possibility to dl in one part,
> and the older videos had weak quality (wasn`t it dl as a zip?!) you
> are a member of that side right now? does anything changed?
I'm/was a member of a few other kink.com sites (see my reviews of UltimateSurrender and SexAndSubmission), and yes, their billing/authentication system is still a pain in the neck (they do provide alternative billing though, so occasionally it does work :-) ). As for DL as a zip - they usually do have it (you can get whole single episode as a zip, which is enough for me). Cannot be 100% sure about fuckingmachines.com without being their member, but usually such things are quite consistent across different kink.com sites.
|
10-28-07 03:10pm
|
Reply
490
|
The English Mansion
(0)
|
Reply of
SteveWebslave's Reply
Not sure that you're listening out there (your reply was posted way too long ago), but on any account your support did an extremely poor job. First of all, keeping customers happy is a cornerstone of doing long-term business (opposed to hit-n-run businesses), and deviating from it have already cost you lots of customers (for instance, myself - I won't join the site with such a comment and such a webmaster reply).
Second, to make their customers happy, both VISA and MC have policies which allow to challenge any credit card charge quickly and efficiently (and which can be barely argued in case of website subscription with no goods physically delivered); I wonder why JoshP didn't come to his bank and say "I want to dispute the transaction of $XX.YY which appear on my statement on DD MMM 2006. I wasn't satisfied with service provided and wasn't able to solve it contacting the merchant" - usually this is enough to get full refund via your own bank (takes a few weeks but eventually does work).
PS Or maybe support is run by one of site dominatrixes? That would explain attitude, but still is a very poor way of doing business.
|
10-28-07 08:50am
|
Reply
491
|
Blacks on Blondes
(0)
|
Reply of
jd1961's Reply
> I hate those pre checked boxes
Do you mean that you did run into such 'free-trial-renewed-at-price' pre-checked boxes when subscribing before? Are they common now? (this was my first time running into such thing, so I was really upset with it).
|
10-28-07 06:47am
|
Reply
492
|
Fucking Machine 1000
(0)
|
Reply of
ace of aces's Review
Just in case if you do care (if not, please ignore):
What I think is the biggest problem with your reviews, is lack of specific information about the sites - all reviews are quite similar to each other, and it is very difficult to understand why do you rate site higher or lower. I was going to put 'no' trust rating exactly because of 2 your reviews: this one and 'Obscene machines'. Reviews are very similar to each other, and it is not clear why one of the sites got much higher rating (14 point higher - that's quite a lot). Then I went to site home pages and was able to guess what's the difference between them, so your ratings are likely to be consistent (so I didn't put any trust rating for now), but IMHO it should be obvious from reviews too.
Also a side note: as you're into this niche, did you try fuckingmachines.com? It would be nice to see your review/rating of them too (so it will be possible to compare it with other 2 sites you already reviewed).
|
10-27-07 02:56pm
|
Comment
493
|
Blacks on Blondes
(0)
|
|
10-27-07 01:27pm
Replies (9)
|
Reply
494
|
JAV HQ
(0)
|
Reply of
David B's Review
It looks that you're shilling for the site, aren't you?
|
10-24-07 06:55am
|
Reply
495
|
Nakedby
(0)
|
Reply of
ace of aces's Reply
I see, thanks.
|
10-22-07 06:36am
|
Reply
496
|
Ultimate Surrender
(0)
|
Reply of
exotics4me's Reply
About poll on Aug 9 - as there wasn't more relevant poll one at the time, I've used this one. Let's wait for results of poll I've suggested if it ever comes.
> you are not a voice for the millions of internet users
I'm definitely not, and you're not too BTW. All I write is my opinion only, and I am really surprised the lengths you are going to to make me change it. I've made my point (the one that I strongly disagree with paying that much attention to this kind of criteria) and made it clear to others, that's what this whole site is about, or it isn't? Therefore, I don't see that much to discuss here.
> I ran out of room at the end and couldn't explain it all
Cannot help to say that for me it sounds way too close to infamous "My dog ate my homework" :-).
|
10-21-07 01:08am
|
Comment
497
|
Porno 4 Portables
(0)
|
|
10-20-07 05:04pm
Replies (0)
|
Comment
498
|
Porno 4 Portables
(0)
|
|
10-20-07 03:16pm
Replies (2)
|
Reply
499
|
Nakedby
(0)
|
Reply of
ace of aces's Review
> fast dl speed (up to 672/kbs)!
Is this kBit/sec or kBytes/sec? For kBits/sec it doesn't look too impressive, for kBytes/sec it sounds "too good to be true" :-).
|
10-20-07 02:33pm
|
Reply
500
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Drooler's Poll
Actually it's about feeling, but bitrate is IMO the next closest thing (provided that you're comparing files of the same type; old .MOV files can look horrible in rather high bitrates).
|
10-20-07 02:20pm
|
