SKIPPY,
THANKS FOR THE EMAIL UPDATE.
I'M GLAD THE LINK WORKED.
I GOT THE OFFER IN 2013, HAVE BEEN A MEMBER SINCE THEN OF THAT SITE.
I'VE NEVER HAD ANY BILLING PROBLEMS.
THE PAYMENT PROCESSOR THAT WAS ASSOCIATED WITH THE OFFER WAS ROCKETGATE.COM.
YOU CAN TURN OFF THE PU INTERNAL EMAIL SYSTEM.
WHICH SEEMS TO BE BUGGY.
BOTH EMAILS I SENT TO YOU USING THE SYSTEM WERE REJECTED.
SKIPPY,
I TRIED A SECOND TIME TO SEND YOU AN EMAIL USING THE PU INTERNAL EMAIL SYSTEM.
AND I GET ANOTHER ERROR MESSAGE THAT THE EMAIL FAILED/WAS REJECTED.
THEN I SENT AN EMAIL DIRECTLY, FROM YAHOO EMAIL.
THAT EMAIL APPARENTLY WENT THROUGH.
I'M NOT SURE WHY THE PREVIOUS EMAILS WERE REJECTED.
MAYBE IT WAS BECAUSE I HAD A URL AT THE TOP OF THE MESSAGE BODY.
ANYWAY, I ASSUME YOU DID GET MY EMAIL.
THE SUBJECT WAS: FROM PU MEMBER LK2FIREONE: SPECIAL OFFER...
SKIPPY, I'D LIKE TO SEND YOU A PRIVATE EMAIL.
TURN ON YOUR PU INTERNAL EMAIL SYSTEM, IF YOU ARE WILLING TO ACCEPT A PRIVATE EMAIL FROM ME.
AND THEN YOU CAN TURN OFF THE EMAIL SYSTEM, IF YOU DON'T WANT TO USE THE PU PRIVATE EMAIL SYSTEM ANY MORE.
TO USE THE PU INTERNAL EMAIL SYSTEM:
GO TO YOUR PU MEMBER'S USER PROFILE.
SELECT/HIT THE EDIT HOT LINK NEAR THE TOP OF THE PAGE.
CHECK THE BOX "ALLOW USERS TO CONTACT ME THROUGH MY PROFILE (EMAIL WILL BE FORWARDED TO YOU.)
SELECT/HIT THE SAVE BUTTON DOWN BELOW THE LIST.
i also used XNews. But it stopped updating years ago. And now, to use SSL, you have to use some other program with it. And it's for 32-bit computers, and mine is a 64-bit. And there are other reasons it's outdated.
So I have been playing around with some newreaders, but none are as simple as XNews was.
NewFlash Plus is free, easy to use. But when you download a file, for example, a JPG file, it opens an instance of the file, as well as downloads it.
I have an anti-virus program, Norton Internet Security, but if the files open at the same time that they download, then I think that is a security risk.
I want to download files, scan them for malware, BEFORE I open them.
That's what I do, even from sites I trust, like my paid pornsites: Metart, Diesel Access network, TMW, whatever.
I read years back you can use a stenography program and encode a virus inside a picture of any extension. Jpeg, jpg, bmp, etc.
By "you", I don't mean me and you, but someone who has hacking skills.
I used to collect Playboy Playmate photos years ago.
I just rejoined a newsgroup yesterday, because I was frustrated at how much time and effort it takes to collect Playmate photos from Playboy Plus. It was at least 5 years or more since I was a newsgroup member.
I have to learn how to use a newsreader again, and there are other methods I have to learn. But to build a collection of Playboy Playmates, and to organize it, newsgroup access is still so much easier and less time-consuming than trying to use Playboy Plus.
Easier to build a collection of playmates through newsgroup.
Even though many of the photos of playmates are available at this site, it's easier to build a collection of playmates through a newsgroup than it is through Playboy PLus.
The collection will also be more complete through a newsgroup.
The problem with a newsgroup is that you have to learn to use a newsreader, and pay for the newsgroup access, and a few other methods you will have to learn.
But for fans of past playmates, a newsgroup offers more complete files (in photos, not in videos), and an easier method of collecting and sorting your photos.
It's been many years since I belonged to a newsgroup, but Playboy Plus made me realize that poor site structure (and other problems with the site) makes newsgroup access a worthwhile alternative for collecting Playboy material.
But there is a lot to learn about how to use a newsgroup effectively.
The magazine and internet site Playboy Plus is softcore. But what surprises me is that the company is heavily into hardcore.
From Wikipedia:
Sales of Playboy magazine peaked in 1972 at over 7 million copies.[2] The company now derives only one-third of its revenues from Playboy magazine, with the other two-thirds from the dissemination of adult content in electronic form, such as television, the internet and DVDs.[3] Much of this electronic revenue comes not from the soft nude imagery which made the magazine famous, but from hardcore pornography connected with the company's ownership of Spice Digital Networks,[4] Club Jenna,[5] and Adult.com [6]
I would guess that all the playmates would have their original photosets on this site.
The photosets are different from the original spreads that were published in the print magazine.
If you ever joined a newsgroup and collected the playmate photosets, you would have a better understanding of what I mean.
The site structure could be laid out much better.
To try to find a playmate, you can either enter her name in the search box, which gives her photos and videos, plus any other matching name. Like I said in the review, if you enter the search term "Christine Maddox", the results include any model named "Christine", and any model named "Maddox". So you get results that don't include "Christine Maddox", and you have to search (open) each file to see if that model is in that file, or use some other way to exclude files that are not what you want.
Trying to collect all the photosets for each playmate is a time-consuming process.
The site stucture does not make it easy.
The Playboy Plus site has the following categories:
(But here again, searching through each category is a time-consuming process. It would have been much better if they organized the contents based on the date the playmate-model-cybergirl was first published in the physical magazine or on the internet site).
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros:
-Discount through PU. $14.95 instead of $29.99/month.
-Easy login. No captcha.
-Can view photosets as slide show or download the zip set.
-Long time before site timeout.
-Good download speeds. I'm getting 1.3 MB/sec, my max download speed.
-DownThemAll download manager works at this site.
-Choice of download version quality: Many videos have a WVGA480, HD720, and a HD1080 version.
Cons:
-Uncheck pre-checked cross-sell.
-Search could be better. Search term "Christine Maddox" returns any photoset with the name of "Christine" as first name or last name, instead of specifically returning only photosets with the name of "Christine Maddox" included.
-Also, either they are missing photos of past playmates, or the search does not return all the photos of those playmates. For example, the annual photoguide of past playmates of the year photos are sometimes not included in the search result. There are other past photos of playmates and models that are either not on the site, or not returned by a search of the model's name.
-Some bugs in the navigation or site structure. You play a slide show of Susie Scott, and it only plays a few of the 24 photos in the set, then stops. Can't get it to play/show all the photos in the set.
-Photoset of a playmate does not include the data sheet.
Bottom Line:
-Back in the 1960s and 1970s, Playboy was the premier "gentleman's magazine". Penthouse was a close second. Both those magazines were renowned for their nude photography, as well as their articles and fiction and interviews. They were money-making machines that brought their founders vast wealth. Those days are history. Both Playboy and Penthouse have flirted with bankruptcy in recent years.
This is supposed to be a softcore glamor photo and video site. Given the Playboy name, you would expect to find superior, high quality photos and videos of their models.
-I don't know why, but there are superior copies of their onsite photos available elsewhere. Years ago, I belonged to a newsgroup, and I collected the photos of most playmates.
You look at the photos at this Playboy Plus site, and the photos just don't have the same impact as the photos that I collected. The basic image is the same, but the images I collected from the newsgroups were more striking.
-Some photos are mis-labeled. You play a slide show of a photoset, and instead of identifying the model(s) in each photo, the label shows the title of the photoset. So you have to know from other sources (or your own special knowledge) who these models are.
-No choice of download version quality for zip photosets. This is surprising. For a photo-oriented site, the only option I see is for one definition of a zip file download, not the standard 3 definitions that many photo sites have of low, medium, and high quality.
-The quality of the "high definition" video files can be poor. For example, the video for "stacy-fuson-paymate-of-the-month-vid-01.mp4" is 1920x1080, total bitrate is 6049 kbps, which would seem to indicate a high quality, high definition video. But the frame rate is 7 frames/second, which might explain why the video is a poorly defined video picture. I've seen the DVD which this video is made from, and the video is much sharper than the video you download from Playboy Plus.
Let me be clear. Watching the downloaded video is like watching a shitty version of the video you should be watching.
The streaming version of that video is better quality, but nowhere near the quality of Metart, Diesel Access network, or other fine sites. The video quality of a streaming video at Playboy Plus is actually below the quality of the Teen Mega World videos.
That is amazing to me. Don't the people running this site realize the video quality of their videos is so poor, compared to the better sites on the internet?
Maybe they are blind to the poor quality of their photographs, which is not as bad as the quality of their video downloads. But the obvious degradation of their video download files is pathetic, for a site that is supposed to empasize the beauty of the female form.
The site does not use DRM. But the poor quality of the video files I have downloaded, in effect, means you can not save a high quality video file. And I am going to sign up for a new membership to a newsgroup, because I believe I will be able to find better quality photos of past playmates from a newsgroup than I can find at this Playboy Plus pay site.
I don't believe my expectations for this site were too high. But what I've found at this site, in terms of photo image quality, and video image quality, is a massive disappointment.
Not all videos are as bad (poor definition) as these 2 videos of Stacy Fuson. The videos of Erika Eleniak are better. Not great, not as good or defined as high quality sites like Metart or Diesel Access, but still better than the Stacy Fuson videos.
Giving the site a score of 68. I believe the quality of the photos at the site is inferior to what you will find at high-quality sites like Metart and MPL Studios and Femjoy.
And the quality of the videos is even further below what you will find at those other sites.
Comparing the photo and video quality of this site to high grade sites on the internet, you begin to realize the Playboy brand has really fallen from its former quality standards.
I am surprised the video quality is sub-par, because that should be one of the great strengths of Playboy, along with expert softcore photos. But my biggest knock against Playboy is the plastic women: over the last 15 years, there were very few Playmates I found attractive. I think the Playmates from the 1960s and 1970s were much less plastic.
I used to read most of the Playboy articles, as well as look at the pictures. So I know at least 1 person was reading those articles. Haven't seen an issue of Playboy in many years, but back in the 1970s, when I was subscribing, I really did enjoy the articles, as well as the reviews on music, films, books, etc.
I do admit, however, the main interest was in the pictures. Especially the centerfold section.
I used to go over my limit for cons much more often. I tend to ramble and use a lot of words where other people are more succinct. I've given up trying to write really nice reviews. Though I do appreciate reading good reviews from others.
If the quality of the videos was upgraded to high resolution, I think at least some of the videos would be worth keeping, because there are some very attractive models in these videos.
There is one model in particular that I really like. I've seen her in a very few videos at different sites. And she's in one video at this site. If the definition was only better, it would be a nice video, because I find her very attractive. I don't know her name.
But the chance of this network upgrading these videos is close to zero.
Regarding subtitles: I think for most porn sites that have subtitles for their videos (mainly Russian or Eastern Europe), most of what the models say in these clips where the model and stunt cock are "acting", the conversations and subtitles are far below the standards of even a grade B movie. I enjoyed the idea of reading subtitles in a porn clip, but after reading the subtitles of a few clips, most of what was said was either stupid or boring or almost meaningless, and I did not worry about the accuracy of the translations.
Check the subtitled videos at the Teen Mega World network to see what I mean. Tricky masseur has a lot of subtitled videos. Or this Policeman site has subtitles, which helps to explain the words the models are using. But after reading the subtitles, you can turn your brain off and try to enjoy the sex action, because the conversational part has little to hold your interest.
There are softcore films where the conversation can add interest and humor and flavor to the video/movie. But not the sex porn clips found at networks like Teen Mega World, Devils Film, or Diesel or Nubiles.
Current Member for over 2 months (at the time of review).
Pros:
-Easy site log-in.
-No DRM.
-No download limits.
-Zip file for each photoset. (The site has 2 photosets total. That is not a joke.)
-Small amount of site contents. With a fast Internet connection, you can download the entire site contents in 1 day. And then review the contents at your leisure.
-Some attractive models.
Cons:
-Archive site. No updates since 2006.
-Small site.
-The site has only 2 photosets, which are a low-quality photographic record of a video shoot. Even though you can download a zip file for each
photoset, I don't know who would want to keep a zip file of these photosets.
-Site contents are not dated, except for the two photosets, which are from 2006. Apparently the last update for the site was in April, 2006.
-Most videos have only one download option, a low-quality WMV file. A few videos have a choice of download as low-quality WMV or low-quality MPEG file.
-The default option for filename of each video downloads as 001.wmv, which means you have to manually rename each file, to avoid overwriting with the next download. And also to separate the files from one another, because a bunch of files with the filename of 001.wmv are hard to distinguish from one another.
-No bio for the models. They don't even bother to name the models.
Bottom Line:
CONS (continued):
-Navigation is basic. You get a list of the videos, in apparent chronological order (but no date is listed). That's it.
-No search feature.
BOTTOM LINE:
Site contents:
This is a small archive site that has not been updated since 2006. It has 25 videos, and 2 photosets.
The 2 photosets are a photographic record of 2 video shoots. The photosets are poor quality photographs, more like screen captures (or maybe they are screen captures).
videos: 25
Sample video file size: about 250 MB, for a runtime of 34 minutes.
Total bitrate: 1017kbps (very low bitrate, indicating poor quality of video).
Frame width x height: 400x300.
photosets: 2
photoset 1 has 115 photos.
photoset 2 has 100 photos.
Individual photos have a file size of about 60-80 KB, 1024x576 pixels.
This site is supposed to be a reality porn series. The site theme is 2 cops who play practical jokes on women who are applying for a driver's license. The two cops, one who is dressed as a doctor, make the women applicants undress and then have sex as part of the medical exam. This is a very stupid idea, and the two "cops" are sort of acting like an updated
version of the three stooges. But the women go along with the idea, and have sex with the two cops: bj, vaginal, maybe anal, whatever. At the end, because the women had sex with the two guys, the women are told they passed their medical exam needed for a driver's license.
One model asks: What does a gynecological exam have to do with a driver's license?
The cop dressed as a doctor answers: We have to make sure you don't wiggle around on the seat when driving.
(There are subtitles, because the models are speaking whatever European language they use.)
Some of the models are attractive. I wish the quality of the videos was better. The camera-work is ok to good, the lighting is ok to good (these
are indoor scenes shot in a small room), but the definition/clarity of the videos could be greatly improved.
This is part of the Diesel network. If you joined this site by itself, you would feel that not only the models were getting screwed, but that you had been screwed as well.
But if you get this site as part of the Diesel network, then the site is worth glancing over. Many of the models are cute. I only wish the videos were better quality (higher definition, mainly).
After cancelling my 3-day pre-checked unwanted membership to Porn Access, I got a confirmation email that my subscription had been cancelled. They also included a coupon code that entitles me to rejoin Porn Access within the next 3 months for the reduced price of $14.95 for 30 days membership.
I was a member of Porn Access over a year ago. I thought the site was a waste of time because of the horrible navigation and massive amount of duplication and low-quality vids.
I am more than willing to give my coupon code away free to some deserving PU member. But any PU member (and non-members), can use the PU/TBP link to join Porn Access at a lower price than the coupon code allows.
So what do you call a coupon code that has a negative value, to a site that I believe is basically a waste of time?
Note: the site is not a scam. It has a massive amount of videos, many of poor quality. And the navigation is terrible, and there is massive duplication of their videos. If someone wants to spend the time, there is probably good material to be found. I just don't have the patience or time to wade through all the garbage videos at the site.
Going to the Porn Access site, I see the $5.00 for 30 day membership offer. I don't know how long this offer will last.
But I also don't know if the site is even worth it. There's a ton of vids, most low quality, and the search and navigation of the network sites is very poor, with massive duplication of the videos at different sites. I prefer paying a little more, for sites with easier navigation and good material that I can more easily find.
But if you use the PU/TBP link to go to the site to sign up, you see the regular PU/TBP discount of $14.95 for 30 day membership (once you go to the signup page and start the signup process).
So maybe PU/TBP can contact the pornaccess site and make the $5.00 offer available through the PU/TBP link.
I had a 30-day membership, which I got for $5 on a special offer. I had no problem cancelling, and was not charged any extra fees. I'm not sure why you had a problem with an automatic renewal. If you had a 30-day membership, or a 1-month membership, and you were renewed before the 1-month was finished, you should be able to get the site to reverse the renewal charge. I've been a member of sites belonging to the company that runs this site (they also run the netFameSolutions network of 19 sites), and they've always been very fair and easy about billing.
Unless there is some special reason why you want to belong to this site, I'd suggest cancelling your membership, and using the money for a better site.
Here is a link to a special $5 membership to the netFameSolutions network of 19 sites at PU, that gives you full membership to all 19 sites for 30 days. Some of the sites are very worthwhile, such as Devils Film, SilverstoneDVD, roccosiffredi, and peternorth. There is good quality DVD clips at all these sites (as well as a bunch of junk), but the good stuff is much easier to find there, and there is a lot of good DVD clips. There are also other sites in the network that are less attractive, but that you might find something if you hunt thru the junk. What you might like depends on your personal tastes, but the sites I listed have a lot of what I think is good material, that is good (but not great) video quality.
Click the link above, you get a special offer of $5 for 30 days full membership in the netFameSolutions network of 19 sites, which includes Devils Film.
Remember to uncheck the special offers that are part of the sign-up process, or you will probably be re-subscribed to PornAcess. Lol. You have to specifically uncheck the special offers when signing up for any of the sites run by this company, but they have some very nice offers: a special low price for membership to a bunch of nice sites.
But you have to remember to cancel the 30-day membership before it renews, because the renewal price is much higher than the price you can get thru PU/TBP, or thru some special offer that might be available.
Regarding site score: You said you "stumbled into some really great stuff", and that's the problem. Either you get lucky, and find some clips you really like, or you stumble around in the poor-quality junk and lose patience to keep looking. My problem (one of them) is that I get frustrated easily. If I see one lousy clip after another, I just stop searching for the good stuff that might be there.
The site has a huge amount of content. If they organized it better, the score (value) of the site could increase dramatically. But they really need to delete the massive number of duplicate links to the same video clips, because that adds to the difficulty of searching thru the clips.
They also need to give the clips some simple descriptive title.
They also need some way to highlight the better quality clips, to make them easier to find.
The current structure of the site is like a garbage dump, where they just toss all the junk (and good stuff) into a common yard, then write up an inventory listing that is almost worthless to try using.
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros:
advertise:
-1,535 Porn Sites Available
-15,668 Porn Movies
-5,351,505 GB of Content
-4,901 Hours of Porn
-35+ Niches
-some vids (small percentage) are nice and clean: nice lighting, nice setting, good focus, good colors.
-simple system to cancel subscription on the internet.
-easy log on. Useful to get onto site, useful if disconnected from site.
-occasionally a very low membership fee is offered. I got a 30-day full membership for $5
-huge amount of vids (a lot with low quality)
-no DRM
-no download limits
Cons:
-navigation is extremely poor.
-to search for specific models is terrible.
-to search for specific videos is terrible.
-video clips are duplicated at many different sites. This makes navigation more difficult and
confusing, because the video clips are named by numbers, not by a simple descriptive name. So you
have to remember which clips you have already looked at if you don't want to keep checking some of the same vid clips over and over again.
-many of the sites are tiny, just a handful or more of videos, with poor-quality vid-caps to show what the video is. They should combine many of the sites to make a much smaller number of sites, to make it easier to find what there is, and delete the hundreds of duplicate clips.
-update schedule: no idea. The videos are not dated as to when they were posted.
-no simple listing of video title (just a number)
-no simple listing of what models are in the video.
Bottom Line:
Cons (continued):
-the screen shots are really poor quality, and small, so it's hard to see clearly what the video
they represent is supposed to be like.
-some links are misdirected. Instead of taking you to the clip that is described, it takes you to a different clip.
-lack of different formats. All the vid clips I've seen are in WMV format.
-poor quality of many vids. Vids are unattractive because models are not good-looking, lack of plot, poor lighting, poor soundtrack, etc.
-large size of videos: the higher quality videos can be 433 MB or more for a 29 minute clip. The
quality of the video is not that good, I don't understand why the size is so large.
-for many videos, if you want to download or watch the video, you can get an error message:
"SORRY, the video you requested is temporarily unavailable."
-there is no sense in having a lot of sites with 4-5 videos that are the same videos that are at other sites in your network, except for the false sense that your network has much more content than it really does. It just makes it harder to look thru all the junk on your network trying to find any good videos that you might like.
Bottom Line:
-I've said many times that I'm more into photos than vids. There are many reasons for that, the
primary reasons being it's easier to find good/interesting/erotic photos than videos, because of time needed to examine the photo versus the video, download the item, photos are easier and faster to make (therefore easier to make well), etc.
Trying to look thru the junk at pornacess takes a lot more patience than I have. I think this site is not worth even a reduced membership fee of $10-$15/month. I would rather hunt thru free sites, which are easier to look thru, and which have videos that are smaller in file size, that have at least a few videos that I might really enjoy or find interesting.
-This is not a photo site. The only photos are screen shots to illustrate the vids, and the screen shots are small, poor quality pix.
-most of the vids I saw are poor quality: models not attractive, lousy lighting, lousy sound track, fake moans and groans, little to no plot,
-The people who award the razzies for poor acting in a motion picture should watch some of these
porno clips. They would get a new appreciation for what terrible acting really is.
I am giving this site a score of 70. It is not a scam, there is a huge amount of vid clips here,
most of poor quality, but there have to be sites/networks (videobox or videosz) out there with easier navigation, better quality clips. Even if those sites charge more, the extra money would be worth it to most PU members. Few PU members would have the patience to search thru the junk here to find the worthwhile clips.
There is a huge amount of the network I did not examine, because I did not have the time or
patience or interest. I've been a member for 3 weeks, but to see all this site has to offer would take many months. I've got better things to do.
Merriam-Webster Dictionary: stinger, one that stings.
"Float like a butterfly, sting like a bee," quote by Muhammad Ali.
Stinger sounds like a wannabe boxer/fighter. But as the great one also said, "My toughest fight was with my first wife."
So how good is Stinger in a clinch?
My guess is Vegas Ken and Stinger are 2 separate people. Vegas Ken is just passing along the news of the special $5 membership offer that Stinger (from Porn Access) is telling us about.
If you were just making a joke, sorry, sometimes I can be kind of slow on the uptake.
Just checked my email, and I got a confirmation on my membership.
It says:
"You ordered the following product:
30 days Membership at 5.00 USD that will automatically rebill every 30 days at 29.95 USD.
Site URL:: http://www.pornaccess.com"
Also, remember to uncheck the special offer when you give your credit card information, unless you want to join whatever site they are currently promoting when you join the porn access site.
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.
