| Type |
Site - Score |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Reply
1326
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Drooler's Poll
I've regretted letting my libido pre-empt my common sense and going for long term memberships, then regretting wasting the money because the site wasn't updating or was less than optimal quality.
|
11-11-08 11:24am
|
Reply
1327
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Drooler's Reply
Schumer's reaction to limitations of free speech, whether they are applied to porn or to radio, are echoed by many, many others in Congress including Barbara Boxer, Dianne Feinstein and Henry Waxman, all from my state of California. There has been no, repeat, NO disavowals by anyone on the Left of the intentions to establish limitations on free speech and the comment by UpChuck Schumer was not a careless or casual remark. It was totally consistent with all other public statements made by US Liberals.
With the Liberals in power, the UK has already made major moves that are preludes to what we'll be seeing now that we have a Liberal administration and a very Liberal Congress.
Refer to the discussions in the PU Forum Free Speech and Porn and Big Brother Comes Knocking in the UK for more on where we are heading.
I'd sure like to be wrong but I've seen absolutely no indication anywhere that I am.
|
11-09-08 09:41pm
|
Reply
1328
|
N/A
|
Reply of
pinkerton's Reply
That would also be me. I'm obsessive about stashing anything that looks like it might be worth watching to the point that I have a ton of stuff I've never looked at. But periodically I'll find something at random and I'll really enjoy it. It's rare that I'll load a video that's true crap so I have areal treasure trove of boner exercise material that just keeps on growing.
Now with the new administration in place and UpChuck Schumer's (d, NY) anti-pornography tirade on Thursday, we may be in for some real challenges gathering up the good stuff if thye Dem's have their way in the next year or two, so I'm betting that external hard drive sales may be booming soon.
|
11-09-08 11:50am
|
Reply
1329
|
N/A
|
Reply of
pinkerton's Poll
Just finished checking out some of my stash and have another few adds:
1. Dwelling on one aspect wayyyyy toooo lonnnnng. OK, doggy style is good, but for 10 straight minutes?
2. Spending several minutes watching the "stud" jerk off while the babe just sits there waiting. What's the appeal?
3. Editing in earlier action again later in a scene. We've seen it already so what good is repetition?
4. Phony cum shots where the jiz is not real. And while [real] facials are OK, I agree with Pinche that there are far too many.
|
11-08-08 09:07am
|
Reply
1330
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Reply
My wording wasn't very good.
Yes, I disagree with anonymous trust ratings and accept the fact that they will be continued to be permitted. And the requirement that all negative ratings must have an explanation and that the explanation provided is reviewed addresses 90% of my concerns. I'm cool with the decision to retain anonymous ratings.
What I'm curious about is the reasoning of those responding YES to the poll who, by answering yes are saying that they have posted anonymously.
|
11-08-08 08:47am
|
Reply
1331
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
As I write this, 8 out of the 23 responses are yes, yet no one posted a reply explaining why they feel anonymous trust ratings are appropriate.
I still fail to understand why anonymous negative ratings are permitted. After all everyone is relatively anonymous on the web anyway.
|
11-07-08 11:03pm
|
Reply
1332
|
N/A
|
Reply of
pinkerton's Poll
All of the poll chices plus everything said so far in these replies.
My adds are:
1.the slapping of faces and tits by the stunt cock, either with his dick or with his hand(s).
2. Artsy fartsy videography where the idiot behind the camera (or the director) are more interested in impressing themselves than in photographing the babe that should always be the center of attention.
3. Excessive attention to the guy's dick and scrotum instead of the babe's PTA*. If we wanted a focus on male body parts, we'd sign up for the gay sites.
*PTA = Pussy, Tits and Ass.
|
11-05-08 11:27am
|
Reply
1333
|
MetArt
(0)
|
Reply of
Drooler's Reply
Love the models, the quantity of content and the superior quality of the photos and the photography.
My one and onlt beef with Met-Art is that they view videos as a toss in, not a feature. Watchiong a model's photo session on video, the ptimary theme of most of their videos,is boring.
The few videos that are actual productions are quite well done but there are so few of them that a video fan like me tends to want to move on.
|
11-03-08 08:41am
|
Reply
1334
|
N/A
|
Reply of
nygiants03's Reply
She's a new one to me but worth keeping a close eye on.
Another fox is Nicole Vaidisova. However she seems like she's slipping in her determination.
|
10-31-08 07:07pm
|
Reply
1335
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
TENNIS!
Especially women's tennis.
You see it's this way. Those cute little tennis outfits with the flying skirts coupled with the tops that show the hard, erect nipples makes me a big women's tennis fan.
I know, call me a "prevert," but the women's game is also better than the slam bam men's game because there's a lot more strategy involved and the talent is awesome.
My favorite tennis babes for looks are Ana Ivanovic, Martina Hingis (now retired), Dominika Cibulkova and, of course, Maria Sharapova.
|
10-31-08 01:14pm
|
Reply
1336
|
Nubiles.net
(0)
|
Reply of
obsessedoverit's Reply
"For future reviews... maybe curtail my personal preferences a tad."
Don't do that. References to your personal interests are what make a review useful and provides context to your ratings.
|
10-29-08 07:19am
|
Reply
1337
|
Nubiles.net
(0)
|
Reply of
obsessedoverit's Review
Just a comment.
As I see it the review was in conformity with the normal expectations of we Porn Users and was well written. I re-read the review and don't think that obsessedoverit ever suggested a bait and switch occurred with Nubiles. He simply said he likes ebony and flashing and that it wasn't available on Nubiles.
While I'm OK with ebony and flashing, it's not something I look for so that observation has no impact on my interest in the site.
I guess the only issue I have with the review is that P. U. offers the same discount as paysitesdiscount.com and he didn't mention that.
His review reinforces my interest in the site because his "pro's" are what I want and his "con's" are of no significant concern to me.
In fact, his credibility is really established by his comment that the site's focus is "not his niche" which explains his score. The site is definitely my "niche" because it has some hardcore and does a far better job of editing than FTV Girls.
obsessedoverit's review was very well done, in my opinion.
|
10-28-08 07:45pm
|
Reply
1338
|
N/A
|
Reply of
surferman's Poll
Alright. I answered PU because I'm responding to a PU poll...
Here's what really happens.
When I'm on holiday I always have my laptop with me and I check my email at least twice a day; once in the morning and once at bedtime. Sometimes if nothing else is going on, I'll check during the day.
I also check all of my financial accounts every morning, in particular my checking and credit card accounts, to see what bad shit may be going on. (Last fall, when on a week stay in Kauai, I did my usual check of my checking account and found that a bogus check for $5,000 had just been processed. Thank goodness I checked because that check was followed by two more and would have wiped out my checking account and the overdraft backup securities account. I called the bank's 800 number immediately and found out that the first check was processed two hours before I called so they were able to do a trackback instantly. Skip the details...but the shithead processed two more checks that were in the system. The best part, he tried a fourth check, but with a bank that contacted my bank to verify the funds were available while he was standing there. Bingo. They nabbed the guy in the act.)
Back to the subject. Then, after I check my financial accounts and email, I check Porn Users to see what's new on the site reviews, then the PU forums, and any replies to my reviews and comments.
Then I check VideoBox for the latest updates on that site and then any other sites I'm on.
That means that there's no need to "catch up" when I get home because I'm doing that daily.
|
10-28-08 07:26pm
|
Reply
1339
|
Danni.com
(0)
|
Reply of
obsessedoverit's Review
Unless their customer service has been reestablished (it virtually vanished a year or so ago) I suggest keeping your money.
Content is, as obsessedoverit says, good and plenty, but when something goes wrong, as it does very frequently, the customer can be shit outta luck.
No replies to emails and no answers on their 800 number.
With Danni.com, it's a case of caveat emptor. Let the buyer beware.
This site would be one of the top sites if someone with a decent interest in the customer took charge.
|
10-26-08 11:03am
|
Reply
1340
|
N/A
|
Reply of
roseman's Poll
Concept makes no real sense. The concept of porn is the notion that real copulation is occurring and that the watcher is stimulated by the fantasy that he/she is participating.
I would like to see technology permit olfactory transmission and/or user directed multiple camera angles.
|
10-26-08 10:55am
|
Reply
1341
|
N/A
|
Reply of
PinkPanther's Reply
Agree completely with Pink Panther's list and ranking.
Chatter by the stuntcock or the director is not an issue with me because I am into the action. If I don't like the noise, I just turn off the sound.
|
10-25-08 08:55am
|
Reply
1342
|
N/A
|
Reply of
kkman112's Reply
Me too (Toshiba 17" Laptop).
|
10-22-08 02:57pm
|
Reply
1343
|
N/A
|
Reply of
elonlybuster's Poll
Frankly, for me, I don't worry about it at all.
Given all the publicity about disease and all the "morning after solutions" to unintended impregnation, it's impossible to imagine a porn actress who isn't well prepared before the fuck scene.
As for the guys, if they aren't prepared, then they are subject to the Darwin effect. (Stupid people will die off faster).
Now, speaking from the User/Viewer/Wanker's point of view, I don't give a shit if rubbers are used or not because I am into the female body. I don't care for anal sex, for example, except when she's getting fucked in a reverse cowgirl position so I can see everything I enjoy seeing.
If a condom is used, fine. Show me the PTA.
If a condom isn't used, fine. Show me the PTA.
By the way, I have an associated question. I've seen scenes where the sperm jockey uses a condom, ejaculates his load in the rumbber, then the babe drinks it down. Can anyone explain why protection was used except perhaps the after-action is it's own fetish niche.
[PTA = Pussy, Tits and Ass.]
|
10-20-08 11:27am
|
Reply
1344
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Drooler's Poll
As is elephant, I'm mostly video these days. But if I decide to check out the photos of some babe, I'll check a shot or two near the end to see how far the set goes, then I'll D/L the zip. That way I can do the slide show at super fast speed on my photo program which almost makes the photoset an animated video, albeit a bit jerky.
|
10-18-08 10:46am
|
Reply
1345
|
DDF Busty
(0)
|
Reply of
roseman's Comment
Frankly, these guys are really missing the boat. If they stayed at $29.95, I bet they would be making a ton more from a lot more subscriptions at the nominally top price in the web porn biz of $29.95.
Consider the fact that the only real variable cost these guys have is the small amount of additional bandwidth needed to accommodate the new customer.
The proof of this is when you consider how many sites offer a "stick around" price when you cancel a membership.
(I am paying $5.95 a month for a site that I started at $29.95 after trying to cancel. It notched down from $29.95 to $19.95 to $14.95 to $9.95 to $5.95 as zi tried each attempt. They are getting $5.95 a month from me just because they have some content once in a while that I like. I don't want to cancel because, for the price of a Big Mac meal deal at McDonalds I can get access to a good porn site - without gaining weight even.)
I'd sign up for DDF Busty in a New York minute if they priced it at $24.95, and would put it in my A list at $29.95.
|
10-17-08 10:18am
|
Reply
1346
|
AV9898
(0)
|
Reply of
Khan's Reply
Wow, you guys are fast!
|
10-16-08 09:51am
|
Reply
1347
|
AV9898
(0)
|
Reply of
deadelvis's Comment
This is what appears in the TBP review:
Monthly: $9.95 (recurs at $29.95/mo.)
1 Year: $99.50 (non-recurring
|
10-16-08 07:02am
|
Reply
1348
|
FTV Girls
(0)
|
Reply of
apoctom's Comment
BINGO!
There are three things that FTV needs but does not have.
1. The search function that you want. (I'd give my left nut [well, not really] for FTV to have a search function like Twistys and Babelicious where you can get as specific as labia size in addition to the usual stuff.)
2. A full length download option instead of several segments.
3. Reduce the length of time devoted to just one activity. (7 minutes of a babe diddling her pussy with a dildo where the scene is identical at minute 1 as it is at minute 7 is boring as hell.)
I'd also like an archive that contains all samplers for all content, not just the recent additions
|
10-15-08 10:24pm
|
Reply
1349
|
Bangbros Network
(0)
|
Reply of
gamblinman's Comment
Candidly, I lost interest in BangBros when they pulled a price bait & switch, but mine was a promised discount listed on PU that billed at the full rate. Their response to my email complaining about it simply said that the discount wasn't authorized and that they had no idea who Porn Users is.
I had been a member for a few months a few years ago and was OK but was not motivated to continue my membership. They've got some babes in exclusive videos that, at the phantom discount, would have kept me on as a member for several months.
I really don't understand the logic in a site being belligerent with its customers. It's rare, fortunately.
|
10-15-08 10:15pm
|
Reply
1350
|
N/A
|
Reply of
roseman's Poll
None. I'm with Drooler on this one.
|
10-14-08 06:59am
|
