| Type |
Site |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Reply
1376
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
If the site has a public forum that is read by the webmaster I'll post a lot of suggestions and comments, but otherwide I seldom do. But it may be a good new habit to get into. Feedback can't hurt!
|
05-29-08 07:02am
|
Reply
1377
|
YouStrip
(0)
|
Reply of
njolin's Review
Very interesting site...a new find for me. I assume that there is no way to expand the videos to full screen or to download any of them, but if there is could you post the method?
Also, what does Xtra buy you? The vids I found are all about 1 minute long and stop before the panties come off. Does Xtra go the "full monty" as they say?
|
05-28-08 09:49am
|
Reply
1378
|
All Elite Pass
(0)
|
Reply of
bjorn7's Reply
Yet another direct scam.
When will PU start a warn list of sites known to be scams...just like this one?
|
05-27-08 08:34am
|
Reply
1379
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Denner's Poll
My activity on Porn sites began in 2002, and the volume of spam back then was rather high already, but has increased over the past few years.
I can't correlate the spam traffic to joined sites so the increase could just be more spammers out there. But yes, spam has risen dramatically.
|
05-27-08 06:58am
|
Reply
1380
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Drooler's Poll
The choices are so simple I always pick the one that matches my actual reason. Can't hurt.
Apart from "Just moving on," my usual reply, I've also clicked download problems and quality problems, if those answers apply.
Danni.com asked these questions when I cancelled in 2006 and I answered "support problems." I got an email from someone asking for more info, so I responded hoping they would pay attention and possibly even get a free month. Instead I got a very defensive and insulting reply from them.
Strange. With the big bucks that can be made with good sites and good customer service it seems like some webmasters are thick and stupid.
|
05-25-08 07:35am
|
Reply
1381
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Vegas Ken's Poll
Did . Don't now. Waste of time.
|
05-21-08 08:18am
|
Reply
1382
|
N/A
|
Reply of
nygiants03's Reply
I like the idea, but not as a replacement of my day job.
I can just see that entry on my resume:
Professional Porn Reviewer - Wrote comprehensive reviews of pornographic websites. Have an extensive database of various sexual activities that I have explored and evaluated as an observer but have only fantasized about doing personally. Have earned more positive trust ratings than negative ratings from Porn Users.
|
05-19-08 12:29pm
|
Reply
1383
|
All Internal
(0)
|
Reply of
exotics4me's Review
Although I have yet to invest in any of Dev8's sites, reviews like this one have me saving up to give one or more of them a go. I just wish these folks would network some or all of their sites...even if at a higher price.
In case you're interested, here's a free site that's updated every week and has short but excellent previews of every video in their 10 (separate) websites. Indexxxed
|
05-18-08 11:32pm
|
Reply
1384
|
Porn Pros Network
(0)
|
Reply of
blaze588's Review
Ditto on the back up suggestion.
Once again, I would like to see PU create a list of all sites that have serious issues like this and/or where the site is a rip-off.
|
05-18-08 07:15am
|
Reply
1385
|
DVD Store
(0)
|
Reply of
feemstd's Comment
I've often wondered if that could happen. Hasn't to me but I believe it's just a matter of time.
That's why I use one credit card for all online porn sites and had the limit set at $80 so that any attempt to blow a lot of charges through would be stopped by the credit limit.
I use my bank's bill pay facility to pay for each charge when it appears so that I won't hit my limit with legitimate charges. (My monthly budget is $60.)
|
05-14-08 08:15am
|
Reply
1386
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Goldfish's Poll
Imteresting perspectives so far, Drooler's is from the delivery method perspective and Goldfish's is from a content standpoint.
In my opinion, the 1970's and 1980's had some wonderful talent and the babes had perrsonalities and a reasonable degree of acting capabilities. They even faked orgasms better.
Who can forget T J Sparxx, Christy Canyon, Aja (what a terrific sense of humor she had), Traci Lords, Amber Lynn, Ginger Lynn (no relation), Seka, Juliette Anderson (Aunt Peg), Angel (oh, what a babe), Desiree Cousteau and my all time favorite, Nancy Suiter.
Can anyone name any of today's porn stars who could deliver real lines, not just moans and "Oooh! Fuck me! Yesss!" etc.?
And the good old days where we'd either watch the entire movie and anticipate the "good scenes" or wear out the fast forward button on the VCR's remote.
And when you had that "taste of the forbidden fruit" feeling while watching a porn (or going to a Pussycat Theatre to see porn) instead of having it instantly available.
Nostalgia is always fun. Thanks for asking this question.
|
05-13-08 06:58am
|
Reply
1387
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Drooler's Reply
I agree with Drooler. There is the initial rush when even I, a weathered old porn fan from the good old pre pubic hair in Playboy days, get a charge out of some heretofore undiscovered babe on a site that seems to overflow with great stuff.
My rule is that a site that looks great and gets a bunch of good reviews goes into my favorites file on PU while I have a 5 day cooling off period. I may check out the site during the period but I won't sign up. After a week if I still have the site on my mind I'll take the plunge and sign up.
As for reviews, I don't feel that I can write an objective review unless and until I have become thoroughly familiar with a site and am willing to renew, or because it's so light in content or poorly managed that I have decided that the site is not worth renewing.
|
05-12-08 08:11am
|
Reply
1388
|
MetArt
(0)
|
Reply of
artnoir's Comment
I totally agree. The videos on Met-Art are awful in many respects; especially that most are merely videos of photo shoots with nothing at all enjoyable about them.
The trend at Met-Art is moving toward more suggestive (sexy) poses away from just figure model poses in various stages of dress but they haven't moved into any insertions of any kind nor have males ever made it into any of their content.
The superior photography and the superior beauty of the models has been enough to maintain this site's success, but it will have to move out of the 20th Century soft core suggestive stuff a' la Playboy to a recognition of the models' sensuality.
|
05-11-08 10:29am
|
Reply
1389
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Vegas Ken's Poll
The score is extremely important. The variance among scores is also extremely important. If one PU scores a site a 50 and another a 95, there's a reason for concern. If there are several scores all clustered closely, the likelihood is that the site is as scored.
But the score must also be coupled with reviews and comments, especially where a problem of some kind may exit. See, for example, the discussions about IncrediblePass.com.
I would like PU to request that the scoring criteria used by TBP also be used by the PU members who write reviews. https://www.thebestporn.com/criteria.html
|
05-11-08 09:54am
|
Reply
1390
|
N/A
|
Reply of
JBDICK's Poll
How about the Olsen triplets, Mary-Kate, Ashley and Bree Olsen?
Now there's something that would get ol' Willy to come to full attention!
|
05-09-08 08:57am
|
Reply
1391
|
Incredible Pass
(0)
|
Reply of
nickdv's Review
I really would like TBP to create a warning list of some kind based on this sort of problem.
|
05-07-08 07:30am
|
Reply
1392
|
N/A
|
Reply of
mrcallen's Poll
I'm with JB. If I am familiar with the arranger and/or the other participants, I might consider saying yes. But other than that my first reaction would be no.
Now if Natasha Nice or Gianna Michaels were there, ain't no way I would ever say no. I might be smothered to death by those four fabulous funbags, but what a way to go!!!!
|
05-05-08 12:01pm
|
Reply
1393
|
Club Anita
(0)
|
Reply of
Drooler's Reply
Yes, but not all of the "Company Sites" are necessarily part of a subscription to one of the sites.
Example - Membership to GlamourModelsGoneBad does not give you access to their Shay Laren site.
Example - GiveMePink is affiliated with many other sites (see indexxxed.com to see the closest this Company comes to cross pollination of its sites).
|
05-05-08 08:29am
|
Reply
1394
|
Club Anita
(0)
|
Reply of
atrapat's Review
Can you list the other sites that you get access to in addition to Glamour Models Gone Bad?
|
05-04-08 11:04am
|
Reply
1395
|
N/A
|
Reply of
badandy400's Reply
Andy makes my point. If a collection like this had a contact name easily visible, my suspicious mind would kick in and wonder if it was a set-up of some kind.
I would call the number very cautiously and do some verbal dancing to be sure it's a legitimate "If Found Please Call" note.
But if there is doubt, I will only go as far as reasonable to track down the owner. Then it becomes a "good find."
|
05-02-08 09:58am
|
Reply
1396
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Vegas Ken's Poll
As they used to say to those of us not as "well endowed" as the sperm jockeys in porn, size isn't everything; technique matters too.
A 30 minute non-stop blow job, a 15 minute solo strip tease or a 10 minute RCG (reverse cowgirl), which one gets more of a rise out of ol' Willy?
Give me a 5 minute scene with a super hot babe with a super nasty attitude over a mechanical pneumatic 30 minute BJ any day.
That said, all else being equal, the longer the scene the better.
|
04-30-08 07:29am
|
Reply
1397
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Drooler's Poll
This thread is great with all the terrific reference sites mentioned so far. I'll add one more, iafd.com.
|
04-27-08 05:34pm
|
Reply
1398
|
N/A
|
Reply of
badandy400's Reply
Needless to say, I agree totally with Andy. (We posted simultaneously. Brilliant minds and all that.)
|
04-27-08 09:32am
|
Reply
1399
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Drooler's Poll
Generic last names are annoying and can create confusion, but not as annoying or confusing as the single name babes.
It annoys the Hell out of me when a site identifies a babe by just her first name and the name is not a weird concoction that is capable of a web search. I'm sure there's a reason for this, like the site has no idea what her name really is, but when I see a babe I like, I want a unique name for reference.
BTW, I agree with Toadsith's idea.
|
04-27-08 09:26am
|
Reply
1400
|
X Movies
(0)
|
Reply of
JBDICK's Reply
Thanks for your compliments.
ZTOD has, I understand, exclusives from Zero Tolerance. That's a big plus for ZTOD, which I have yet to join. The DRM kept me away, and now the price. And the slow D/L speed that you mentioned in your review isn't too appealing either.
The price concessions occurred over a few months. I signed up at the TBP discount for a month, then the "please stay" rate when I canceled the original membership. At $9.99, I decided to hold on for another few months, then decided the redundancy with VideoBox, with its much larger inventory, made no sense.
So I canceled again, and this time was offered the $5.99 price which I accepted and have continued as a member. For 20 cents a day, 1/2 the cost of a first class stamp, I figured that there was no need to cancel.
However I find that, by and large, the redundancy is almost total; I usually can find the same stuff on X Movies already posted on VideoBox. The only benefit to continuing X Movies, if it is a benefit, is that X Movies offers IPOD, MPEG and WMV formats where VideoBox offers only WMV. In two or three cases I've used X Movies D/L for a DVD that didn't load properly on VideoBox.
One last point. In a few cases where X Movies has a DVD that is not on VideoBox, X Movies offers streaming only, no D/L. VideoBox has streaming but always permits full downloads of everything on its site.
Summary. If you sign up at $19.99, cancel in 2 or 3 weeks, and you should get the $9.99 deal. Then stick around for another month and cancel again and you should then get the $5.99 deal.
|
04-25-08 05:16pm
|
