| Type |
Site - Score |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Reply
1426
|
Twistys
(0)
|
Reply of
Wittyguy's Review
Twistys has a third bonus site, Anette Dawn.com, which is not a clone.
Blue Fantasies is a very well populated site with tons of good stuff. Naughty Staff is a brand new site with excellent stuff, but not much of it yet.
Thus there are 3 clones and 3 separate content sites in addition to the mother lode called Twistys.
|
07-25-08 07:08pm
|
Reply
1427
|
Twistys
(0)
|
Reply of
badandy400's Reply
I just checked one photo set and one photo in it...here's the label...janaredlng_003.jpg.
It's a Jana Cova photo set posted today that they call "Dip and Lick" and the red, I suppose, refers to her bright red panties. There are clues, obviously, and I suppose their naming is better than others that use just numbers, or the same names for everything.
|
07-25-08 07:05pm
|
Reply
1428
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
Frankly, DP puts far too much focus on the schlong and far too little emphasis on PTA for my taste.
DP, in most cases, causes the PTA parts of the babe to be obscured in favor of a hairy male ass or two.
That's kinda why I am happier without DP, or, if it must happen, if it means the babe is servicing two guys with a single blow job I can go along with that.
(By the way, PTA means Pussy Tits and Ass)
|
07-25-08 10:55am
|
Reply
1429
|
Danni.com
(0)
|
Reply of
nineinch's Review
Having been a member during the good old days when Danni ranm the site and things were good with great support efforts, the DRM was annoying but the site provided work-arounds.
Then Danni sold the site, the support staff stopped responding and they stopped a lot of their features, especially the big boob stuff like "Honest Bra" (all naturals). Worse, the work-around for DRM protected downloaded files was dropped so the "Danni Promise," while still on the site, was no longer operative.
Their best feature, in my opinion, is the live shows with member interaction. (The one with Shay Laren was totally memorable.)
But their worst aspect, a non-functional (non-existent?) Customer Support staff and a large bunch of old, but good, content that is available only in "Danni-vision" or in very low res mpeg drags it way down.
Based on this review and the possible improvements that may have occurred during my one year hiatus, it's possible the site has returned to its old glory as a top-notch site. I may sign up again to check things out.
|
07-23-08 06:53am
|
Reply
1430
|
N/A
|
Reply of
turboshaft's Reply
A note of explanation. The shop knows me as a business customer so he could have thought he was doing me a favor telling me about the porn so that I could deal with an employee. However I did tell him when I brought it in the day before that he was to charge me, not my company, for the work done. In other words it was not a 100% MYOB deal, but closer to a 75% MYOB.
|
07-20-08 07:17pm
|
Reply
1431
|
Twistys
(0)
|
Reply of
Drooler's Reply
To amplify a bit on Drooler's reply, the Twistys network has 7 separate sites:
These five are individual with unique content. Some models appear on more than one site but there is no duplication of content among these five sites:
Twistys - the "parent site" Multiple updates daily
When Girls Play - Lesbian - Several updates monthly. They keep it fresh. (This does not appear to be a separate site that has a preview/join us capability.)
Anette Dawn - Single model site with 4 or 5 updates each month.
Naughty Staff - Brand new site - No established update schedule as far as I can tell.
Blue Fantasies - Glamour site - 2 or 3 updates each week
These two have content duplicated from Twistys that fits their genre. There's no unique content:
Eurofoxes
BustyOnes
As Drooler said, the quantity is superb for the price.
|
07-20-08 01:39pm
|
Reply
1432
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
I'm with Davit.
A few years ago I took a computer to a repair shop that had some porn sites listed in My Favorites on IE and some recent activity in history. (I transfer all of my downloaded stuff on an external hard drive to save space on my computer's hard drive.)
He fixed the problem, whatever it was, and when I picked it up he said "I found some 'naughty stuff' in history." He offered me some suggestions on how to clear out such stuff.
I thanked him with no other comment other than to discuss the issue that he resolved. Haven't been back to that shop again.
The new shop I use has never brought up the subject. Either they haven't looked, don't care, or have decided that they want to keep me as a customer.
In any case, it shouldn't be a big deal unless the repair shop guy wants to make a big deal about it...then it's time to find another shop.
|
07-20-08 10:36am
|
Reply
1433
|
Naughty Staff
(0)
|
Reply of
Wittyguy's Comment
There are a few duplications with other network sites that the site says will be corrected. I'm looking forward to the Naughty Staff site growing with more of the super-high quality of material it has already provided.
|
07-19-08 10:21am
|
Reply
1434
|
Mac and Bumble
(0)
|
Reply of
badandy400's Comment
Mac & Bumble was a great site several years ago and was rather popular with great content.
Two possibilities since then, both not particularly good:
1. The site's owner has lost and is just letting the site sit dormant while he collects revenue to support his retirement.
2. The site was sold to someone who has decided to use it as a scam operation.
These days there are so many great sites at great prices, and there's also Porn Users where many will be educated about shit sites like M&B that their approach to doing business will fail.
|
07-17-08 07:11am
|
Comment
1435
|
Twistys
(0)
|
|
07-16-08 01:36pm
Replies (3)
|
Reply
1436
|
N/A
|
Reply of
moshic's Poll
I agree with Drooler.
My machine handles 1280's like a champ but has major trouble with 1900's. Maybe a new machine will do better, but the bigger issue is the huge space needed for the huge formats for only slightly better sharpness.
If given a choice, I'll stay with the 640's to save on disk space unless the added sharpness is significant enough to go higher.
But a poorly lighted video, or worse, one shot at lousy angles or with a shaky camera, cannot be improved by technical adjustments.
|
07-16-08 07:57am
|
Reply
1437
|
Veggie Bang
(0)
|
Reply of
badandy400's Review
You refer to a "trial price" but I can't find one. The TBP summary shows a $29.95/month price as does the website. Could it be that yours was a short term (or a tie-in) deal of some kind?
|
07-15-08 07:55am
|
Reply
1438
|
N/A
|
Reply of
NMC2008's Reply
Ditto. I don't like QuickTime at all.
I do stream many videos first to see if they are worth downloading, but I'll never knowingly join a streaming only site.
|
07-14-08 08:02am
|
Reply
1439
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Vegas Ken's Poll
Frankly seeing a skinny, anorexic, immature, rich bitch like Paris Hilton getting laid ranks just one step below watching two German Shepards getting it on.
If it's a girl with a good face and body like Lindsay Lohan...now we're talking.
Bottom line, it all depends on the girl.
|
07-12-08 07:55am
|
Reply
1440
|
Cherry Red Lips
(0)
|
Reply of
NMC2008's Comment
Thanks for the warning! When I see "Full Trial" in a TBP listing the site gets a big uptick with me.
Your post will same a lot of us $4 for this and the sister sites.
You know when a site is pulling this kind of crap they assume we horndogs don't share the negative 411 with anyone so they think they can just go to the bank. The good news is that we've got PU, the Consumers Reports of Web Porn, so the scammers' opportunities will shrink faster than my willy in a cold swimming pool.
|
07-11-08 07:01am
|
Reply
1441
|
N/A
|
Reply of
apoctom's Reply
Just so long as it's not a fluffer. ;-)
I agree with apoctom. I can't think of any scenes where a "non-nude extra" would be involved except in the "Fuck my Wife, Please" series where some douchebag sits there while his "wife" is getting slammed by some porn dude.
Th one thing about porn that is not available to us horndogs but is available on the set is the olfactory element. I'd love to get a whiff of the raw tuna aroma after a good fuck especially if that aroma is mixed with a sexy French perfume.
But on second thought, looking at some of those sweathog porn studs with their ugly hair and uglier tattoos that look like they are total strangers to personal hygiene, I'm not so sure I'd be very interested in smelling their sweat.
Never mind.
|
07-10-08 01:05pm
|
Reply
1442
|
All Elite Pass
(0)
|
Reply of
mbaya's Comment
Another bad deal.
To all webmasters out there. Scams like this hurt yoiu far more than the few extra bucks you can bring in.
Web porn has "grow up" from the earlier part of the century and your competitive edge will be quality, novelty and value. When you pull scams like this you piss off your mark, of course, but now with PornUsers.com, you will lose a large number of potential motivated customers who won't come near you.
Wake up, webmasters. There's gold and a lot of it in playing this business straight.
Dee, Inc., the site owner, will get no business from me!
|
07-09-08 07:10am
|
Reply
1443
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Reply
OK, when I originally read Rick's post I understood it wrong. The post says, in pertinent part:
Starting NOW, reviews and ratings by registered users with under 5 points (status = Newbie) will no longer count toward the site's score or review count [emphasis added].
How will this help?
1. Previous fake/shill users...
2. This will encourage authentic users to at least reach the rookie level (5 points or more) so the reviews (their vote essentially) do mean something and to shows other users they're legit.
3. This will help discourage fake/shill users...
Will newbie reviews still be displayed?
Absolutely. It's important to us not to point our fingers at who is and isn't a fake/shill. In this regard, all reviews will still be displayed on our site and now labeled as Newbie. This now tells readers that the user has simply not written many reviews and to keep that in mind.
I agree that a legitimate Newbie who takes the time and effort to write a review should have his effort recognized and that a Newbie who reaches Rookie status should have his earlier scores counted so it looks like we're on the same page.
As for the "age-out" of a score, that's a great idea as well, given how many sites stop updating; are sold; get much better, edtc.
|
07-08-08 07:31pm
|
Reply
1444
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Reply
I think you answered my other question.
I got the impression that the scores posted by a newbie didn't count until they reached 5 points, at which time all of the scores posted earlier would count, retroactively.
It sounds like you're saying that the first 4 posts by a newbie will never count and that, once a newbie reaches 5 points, such as when he posts his fifth score, his scores will start counting from that point forward but not retroactively.
|
07-08-08 05:53pm
|
Reply
1445
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Your News
I really like the change. My only question is whether a newbie's rating will affect the overall result:
1. While he's still a newbie?
2. After he's become a regular but has not updated a review written while he was a newbie?
|
07-08-08 12:58pm
|
Reply
1446
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
Missing my answer:
Yes, but I'm struggling with it. ;-)
|
07-08-08 07:01am
|
Reply
1447
|
N/A
|
Reply of
mr3633's Reply
That's my feeling as well.
There are too many "lure" sites out there that are designed to be portals onto a computer to do damage of some kind or another. My machine is loaded with all kinds of protection (even Internet sex requires the use of protection these days) but I don't know what someone else's computer has in the way of security controls.
Therefore it's hands off without the owner's direct participation, whether it's accessing MSN Sports to check a score, or accessing PornUsers to see the results of a poll.
|
07-07-08 10:32am
|
Reply
1448
|
Euro Babes
(0)
|
Reply of
Drooler's Comment
I just checked out the public site which isn't very impressive and does nothing to get my interest.
They've got the best name in the business but seem not to want to do much with it. I'm interested just because it may have some good stuff, but their listing of talent is short and is missing some of my favorite names.
|
07-06-08 06:33am
|
Reply
1449
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
I have no problem with it, but the fact that the review is written after just a LIMITED trial, where the reviewer did not have the opportunity to see everyuthing on a site should be required. A review from a full access trial is (or should be) the same as from a full month.
That's why I voted undecided, because the question does not distinguish between FULL and LIMITED trial.
That said, my recent review of Whale Tail 'N would have been to rate it quite low if I wrote it during a 3 day trial, not after 2+ months membership, because it's a loaded site with lousy site design. It took me almost a month to get used to it and enjoy the site.
In fairness, when writing a review after only a short 3-day or less experience with the site should include that fact so the reader knows what the review was based on.
|
07-04-08 06:49am
|
Reply
1450
|
Whale Tail 'N
(0)
|
Reply of
Khan's Reply
I got the discount without any difficulty.
|
07-03-08 01:52pm
|
