| Type |
Site |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Reply
751
|
N/A
|
Reply of
roseman's Poll
The bad part is that I suspect it can get rather nasty when dealing with content providers unless I'm creating my own content, and the process for establishing good contact development must be difficult. In other words, it takes a lot of hard work and one must be ready for the crap that must go on behind the scenes, but once established, the notion of making a nice buck and having access to all manner of stuff is attractive.
|
06-18-08 10:54am
|
Reply
752
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Denner's Poll
I found TBP quite a while ago and used it always before signing up. On the few occasions where I signed up on a site not reviewed by TBP, I was disappointed.
When PU was set up, it only added to the mix because I am now able to carefully evaluate a site knowing what I can expect.
PU also provides a great way to warn others when a lousy site or rip-off wembaster practices are discovered.
The two resources are must reads before I'll even think about a site.
|
06-16-08 06:55am
|
Reply
753
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
Is masturbation healthy? Damned right.
Frankly I am really into masturbation videos in a big way. I enjoy watching babes doing themselves with whatever is available including baseball bats, pool cues, panties, dildos, cucumbers, zucchinis, carrots, pearl necklaces, even fingers. Babes who are into self pleasuring sure beats the Hell out of looking up a guy's butt while he's doing the dirty.
And you know it's much more healthy for the babes if the objet's d'penetration are fresh veggies and not some tattooed dude's sausage because no STD's can be transmitted via a celery stick.
Oh? What's that? You say the question is about men jerking off? Sorry.
|
06-06-08 01:36pm
|
Reply
754
|
N/A
|
Reply of
badandy400's Reply
On that note, I have been told about pretty good sites by people on here rather than reading a review I will have someone actually suggest a site, Aniazi.com for example.
I'll betcha you meant Aziani.com. And that is a good site!
|
06-04-08 05:58pm
|
Reply
755
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Reply
Because you refined the question so that nit includes any website, I changed my vote to Often.
I keep a small pad in my wallet where I jot down sites mentioned by colleagues and friends, that I see published in newspapers and magazines, and that are mentioned on radio and TV. I also check out links mentioned here on Porn Users, some of which (porn and non-porn) have been most useful.
|
06-04-08 12:58pm
|
Reply
756
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
But men should also have the right to stare at their unadorned mammaries without fear of being accused of molestation or any other crime.
|
06-02-08 12:13am
|
Reply
757
|
N/A
|
Reply of
nygiants03's Poll
I think Hillary would be most likely because the feminists view porn as misogynist exploitation of women and are the leaders at attempts to close or restrict porn shops and "gentlemens' clubs" in most cities.
Obama is my second choice because he has shown a preference for government controls over almost everything.
McCain is least likely to meddle in that arena because his base really doesn't care that much about passive issues like porn (on the web, in clubs or in stores). His base is much more interested in activist issues such as teaching condom use to 3rd graders, encouraging gay studies for 6th graders, bans on gay marriage, etc.
By the way, it's a real kick to see political philosophies being argued when the question was a very simple one about who would most likely restrict porn.
|
05-31-08 12:47pm
|
Reply
758
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Wittyguy's Reply
Thanks. Interesting site...for sure. And his success at communicating with the webmaster has me thinking about doing a lot more myself.
|
05-30-08 08:36pm
|
Reply
759
|
N/A
|
Reply of
mr smut's Reply
"Even better was/is the correspondence with the Crazies who run AO30."
What's AO30?
|
05-30-08 12:54pm
|
Reply
760
|
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
761
|
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
762
|
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
763
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Vegas Ken's Poll
Did . Don't now. Waste of time.
|
05-21-08 08:18am
|
Reply
764
|
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
765
|
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
766
|
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
767
|
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
768
|
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
769
|
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
770
|
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
771
|
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
772
|
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
773
|
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
774
|
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
775
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Vegas Ken's Poll
Let's look at this analytically. The operating costs of a website are small relative to the fixed costs. (Variable costs are those that change based on the volume of business and fixed costs are the same regardless of the volume of business.)
The variable costs are the upload bandwidth and the credit card discounts. The fixed costs are the content development and maintenance costs.
That means most of the price of membership flows to the site's profits (bottom line) so the site that you wouldn't join at $29.99 but will join at $19.99 using the TBP discount yields close to $18.00 in profits, which would not be there without the discount.
|
04-24-08 05:50pm
|
