Separate from the site or network score (although related), I do try, when writing a site review, to mention some of the positive and negative aspects of the site I am reviewing.
In the case of White Ghetto, the major positive factor is that it is part of a nice network. I searched really hard to find something positive to say about the site. :)
On the negative side, other than I didn't like any of the models or the video clips or anything else about the site, I tried to say it in an intelligent way. But I'm afraid that it mainly came out as "I just don't like this site".
So I'm glad that I finished with my review of that site, and will hopefully focus more on sites that are easier for me to enjoy.
But the truth is that a site score has limited value. What is more important, on an individual basis, is whether the site caters to your personal tastes. My tastes are mainly softcore. I don't mind some hardcore, but I would like it to be good-looking or glamorous or nice. I don't like rough.
Site content (quality and quantity) and ease of use and price are the main factors in determining score, for me. My approach is different than the TBP approach, which does not consider price. But those are the factors which are important to me. Price does matter.
But I do try (and hope) that my reviews will have some usefulness or value to a PU member who might read the review, as an indicator of whether a site might be worth a membership or not. Based on individual tastes, of course. For a lot of PU members, my personal tastes are far too softcore.
I am not following the PU suggestion of rating an individual site that is part of a network as an individual site.
Instead, I am rating the overall network of sites.
I have reviewed several different sites in this netFameSolutions network, and I gave the same score to each site. Each site has a different individual value, but most of the value comes from the ability to access all the sites in the network, to access all the videos (and pictures, which are a minor part of this network).
I explained in each separate review in the BOTTOM LINE (summary) section the basis of my score: that I was not giving the site a score based on the value of the site itself, but on the network of the sites.
Perhaps I did not make that point clear enough.
You are entirely correct that, if I was thinking consistently, based on the negatives I reported about this individual site, my score would have been far lower than the 87 I gave the site--if I was rating the site on an individual basis. But I am not rating the site on an individual basis, but on a network basis.
I wrote at the end of this review: "I'm giving this site a score of 87 for its network value. As a stand-alone site, this site personally has zero value for me. But tastes vary. Some PU members might find it worthwhile to visit."
Technically, I am being too hard when I say the site has zero value, but I basically regard this site as a waste of time for me, personally.
But I wrote in this review, "I'm giving this site a score of 87 for its network value". What I meant was that the network of sites has a score of 87, even though this individual site has, for me, little or no value. Individual tastes vary, so maybe some people will enjoy at least some of the video clips.
Sorry to write such a long explanation to a simple remark, but I am trying to explain clearly what I meant when I said I was giving this site a "network score", instead of a score as an individual site.
Thanks for clearing that up. I keep learning that people can get turned on (or off) by almost anything. I've seen a porn site where the turn-on was a girl picking her nose (for snot). Ugh. But that's certainly not the worst that could happen, I suppose. Lol.
Drooler, bittersweet memories are part of life's lesson. There will always be the next great porn site with fabulous models to lust after. Remember to keep up the good fight, and help us discover those great softcore sites.
(But don't report too many at one time, because my porn dollars are severely limited.)
Language can be strange. In America (the U.S)., straight, when referring to sexual orientation, means heterosexual.
But this is a British gay site. So what the word "straight" means here, I don't know. The site itself advertises "all straight". I doubt these are supposed to be heterosexual models that gay men are supposed to lust after. But maybe that's a niche I've never heard of before.
I joined about the same time as you, for the 2-for-1 pricing of $29.95 for 60 days. I have not been rebilled yet, but the offer specified that the renewal price was $29.95 for every 60 days.
I never got an email confirming my membership, or the price that I was supposed to pay, but I did get access to the site the same day I signed up.
Video clips at SilverstoneDVD and Devilsfilm download as WMV files.
There are 2 file sizes for each clip: small and big.
I downloaded the big file size.
Tech specs for the video clips (at both SilverstoneDVD and Devilsfilm):
(for the big file size WMV download):
bit rate 2115 kbps
dimensions 720x528
Sample femjoy specs:
bit rate 7259 kbps
dimensions 1280x720
The femjoy bit rate varies from clip to clip, but is much higher than what you get at the DVD sites.
(I would have added this to my first reply, but the message can't be edited past 10 minutes.)
Some people can enjoy being frustrated.
Some people enjoy the tease.
But satisfaction is the best. :)
That's why I go for the nude sites.
And with the nude mega-sites, there are a large variety of very attractive girls, which is what I focus on. Single-model sites, unless the model is absolutely fantastic, are too expensive. I only have a limited number of porn dollars, so sites like met-art, mplstudios, justteensite, mypreciousvirgins are where I usually spend my cash.
Quality of clips:
I am not an expert like Toadsith, so I can't give the technical aspects of the DVD clips, or the expert's appraisal of the clips. I am giving an average viewer's response to video clips (who has some, but not extensive experience in viewing porn clips).
If you've been a member of justteensite, justteenmovie, or femjoy, you will have seen extremely clear, clean videos. I am talking about visually. They have the highest quality in terms of clarity and detail, almost like high-quality photos.
The video clips at SilverstoneDVD and DevilsFilm are not as high quality visually as the videos at Femjoy, justteensite, and justteenmovie. I remember reading one post at PU that explains that DVD clips are not visually as high quality as the video clips at some special sites because of economic reasons (it's cheaper to shoot lower quality clips because of the video camera cost and maybe other reasons).
The high def video is listed as 1280x720 at justteensite and justteenmovie.
The femjoy, justteensite and justteenmovie clips I saw were softcore, which is apart from the quality of the clip.But the clips were made for those sites, not as part of a DVD. SilverstoneDVD and Devilsfilm are hardcore clips, made for a DVD market. So that explains why the visual clarity is not as high.
I saw a large number of clips at SilverstoneDVD and Devilsfilm, and thought they were good or decent quality, not high quality, but good. I did not see any clips that were visually mediocre as in milky or blurred. These are professionally shot clips, no jerky camera shots, fairly good editing (editing could be improved, the entire clip could be improved, but what do you expect from a porno DVD?).
These are straight sex clips, with almost no story.
Production values are not great, but the colors are good: for the skin colors of the models, for the colors of the settings.
I did not examine all the clips. For me to look at a clip,
1. I look at the model in the clip: Is the attractive? If not, skip the clip.
2. If the model is attractive, I watch the streaming clip, to see if the sex is stupid, is the moaning and groaning too annoyingly fake, the background music too loud or jangly.
3. I download and save the clips I like. To see them again later.
All the clips I saw had good, not mediocre, viewing-quality.
There are at least some models at SilverstoneDVD and Devilsfilm that are really attractive. The clips would be improved if they had some story, some teasing, sex that was less mechanical, better acting by the model, less fake moaning and groaning by the female and male models (but the moaning and groaning is less than in many porn clips), better background music, softer background music, and the entire clip could be improved. But at least you get some clips of attractive girls that are watchable.
Visually, these are good-quality hardcore clips.
We have a black president.
Gays/lesbians are accepted in open society, some states even recognize same-sex marriages.
Why can't porn stars be accepted as contributing members of society?
The regular price for site membership is $29.95/month recurring.
With your promo code, REDUC33, the price is $19.95/month recurring.
Using the PU link to join site, the price is $14.95/month recurring.
The cheapest way to join, is to use the PU link to the site, and then join, using the $14.95/month price that is enabled thru the PU/TBP link.
Using the promo code you show, brings up a higher price of $19.95/month recurring.
I agree with you.
But...
There is a recent poll, dated 06-27-09, that asks if you would consider joining a non-nude model site. 42% of the people voting answered "yes". There were 38 votes total as of today. Frankly, I was suprised the percentage was so high, because most of the members posting reviews and in the forums seem to prefer nudity and more explicit sites.
Evidently there are a lot of PU members that might consider joining this site, if they thought the girl was hot enough. This is a good-looking girl, and the sample photos are nice tease. So for people who really enjoy this niche, it could be worth joining.
The people who make porn (the actors, models, cameramen, whoever) make up the porn industry.
The people who make cars (at GM, Ford, Toyota, etc.) are the car (auto) industry. But the people who sell cars and who service cars might also fit into the car industry. The people who drive cars or are passengers in cars are not considered part of the car industry.
The same for the software industry. The people who write software, or sell the software, make up the software industry. The people who use software are not usually considered part of the software industry.
But why do you say "the whole notion of a porno industry is ludicrous."
Apparently you enjoy porn. And you realize it's made by people, sold by people. So why is it strange or foolish to call porn an industry? Porn is a market/industry with billions of dollars in sales every year.
I might join a free non-nude modeling site, if I liked the model(s). But for a paysite modeling site, I definitely want to see all of her. She might start off with clothes, but if she doesn't take it all off, I would wonder why I joined.
I personally don't care that much about academy awards or the awards given out for porn stars.
Academy awards do much a huge difference in the careers/salaries of actors. I don't know how much the porn awards affect the careers of the porn stars.
As a pat on the back, I have nothing against academy awards or porn star awards.
As far as who should vote on these, I think the fans should have as much or more say than the insiders. Insiders are the only voters for the academy awards, because supposedly they are the experts who are qualified to vote. By that reasoning, maybe the insiders are the only ones who should pay to see those pictures, and the fans should either get to see the pictures for free, or we should just skip seeing "movie" pictures, since we are not qualified to evaluate the pictures compared to the expert insiders.
This is a softcore teen site. Mainly photos, with a few videos.
So far only 1 review, back in Oct. 2007, by Drooler. He gave a 72 rating, meaning site barely acceptable. Since there are many sites in the 80s and 90s, it's probably not worth joining this site.
A 3-day trial (with full privileges) is $12.99. Since a 1-month membership (recurring) is $19.99, I think it's better to go for the 1-month membership. $12.99 seems expensive for 3 days, especially since I don't have the super-fast download capability of some of the PU members.
What piques my interest in the site are some of the very good-looking models. A few sample photos I've seen of some of the models look yummy.
I realize there are sites in this category that are better value (more content, greater variety of models, probably better site navigation, more frequent update schedule, etc.), but I think the site is probably worth a 1-month membership. That's personal opinion, personal taste.
Would any recent members comment with their opinion on the value of the site, whether they thought the site was worth joining or not? Their likes or dislikes about the site?
Have there been any PU members who joined this site in the last 6 to 12 months?
I agree Eva is very nice-looking, but on a cost-value basis, I think I'll go for a teen mega-site, like mypreciousvirgins or something similar. Solo teen sites are tempting, but too expensive, unless I'm ready to marry the girl inside. :)
Have any PU members joined this site? Eva is cute girl, but site preview is very limited.
Site advertises "updates monthly". I'm glad the site appears to be truthful, but it's difficult to think a site is worth more than a 1-month membership with a monthly update schedule.
What is amount of site content, and quality of content?
The pictures? The videos?
If membership gives you access to this site only, it's hard to justify even a 1-month membership to this site, unless you're absolutely crazy about this model named Eva.
I respect my personal right to privacy. But for the right amount of consideration(cash), I might be tempted into submitting action shots of some of my fellow PU members, if I were allowed to be the photographic/cinematographic director and could be assured that the photos had artistic and financial integrity. These photos could present a better alternative to the avatars some PU members are posting.
Explicit is in the eyes of the beholder, the same as personal taste. In the United States, Playboy used to be prosecuted for obscenity, and that is a softcore magazine that in those days basically showed a few solo girl spreads with nudity but no masturbation or any sexual
action at all. Around the 1970s, I think (not really sure, my memory is really poor sometimes) a lot of drugstore and convenience store chains in the U.S. were forced to stop carrying Playboy because of public sentiment and lawsuits. Those stores that did carry Playboy (and Penthouse and most certainly Hustler) had to keep the magazines hidden away from public view because minors might be corrupted by the magazines. So the stores that carried Playboy kept the magazine in a special adult section or hidden away under the counter.
I don't know if Playboy is still being prosecuted for pornography in the U.S. today, but back in the 1960s, 1970s, etc., when it was being prosecuted, it was more softcore than what you find at Met-art or Femjoy, which are major softcore sites today. By that, I mean the pubic area back then was covered with natural pubic hair. Today you see the bare look at Femjoy and Met-art, with no hair covering the pubic region, so the pubic region is much more exposed, or completely exposed today.
Original Link of News http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,25641940-2862,00.html
Basically, the first post quotes a newspaper article stating that it's illegal to make money from porn films in Victoria, Australia, and that the police raided the office of G Media, which runs the Abby Winters web sites.
The long-term future of the G Media company, and its web sites, is apparently unclear.
Abby winters is a major internet porn site, and this is really a kick in the head to the porn community.
If a girl looks anywhere near a teen, then a teen site will accept her photos. The teen site might advertise that the models are teens, and they might even start out that way, but as time goes on, they will probably accept photos of anyone that looks young. Would they turn down photos of a young woman in her 20s? As long as she looks good or OK, I can't see a teen site turning down her photos.
Met-art was based on the idea of "Most Erotic Teens" art, and most of their models in their introductory photo sets are teens or in early 20s.
As for giving an accurate age for the models in the photo sets: most teen sites don't. They market the models as teens, because that's what the target audience is looking for, no matter what the ages of the models actually are.
Ace of aces, I sent you an email thru PU (actually, 2 emails) on how to join the network for $5 for 30 day membership, full access to all the sites in the network. Be sure to check your inbox (or your spam box) to see the details. This is a great deal, very cheap 30 day membership for $5, no tricks, just a low-cost offer.
Protecting Minors We are strong supporters of RTA and ICRA, two of the most recognized self labeling organizations. Our site is properly labeled to assist in the protection of minors accessing inappopriate content. For information about filtering tools, check this site.
DISCLAIMER: ALL MODELS APPEARING ON THIS WEBSITE ARE 18 YEARS OR OLDER.
To report child pornography, go directly to ASACP! We're proud to be a corporate sponsor.
Have concerns or questions about porn addiction? We recommend this helpful resource.
