| Type |
Site |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Reply
1
|
N/A
|
Reply of
GCode's Poll
I tend not to believe any of it on most sites but some are obviously more acurate (FTVGirls is a perfect example). If the girl is one of my favourites I tend to at least investigate her real name, age and where she comes from.
I agree with the others - who cares what her favourite colour is as long as she can take three dicks at once?!
|
08-26-09 03:46pm
|
Reply
2
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Ace DDF's Reply
How would the re-billing work with this based on a 3 month sign-up?
|
08-20-09 11:18am
|
Reply
3
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Duante Amorculo's Poll
I don't think that I could handle the thought of my mates going home and whacking one off over her videos and pictures. No....I'd keep it to myself.
|
08-20-09 11:14am
|
Reply
4
|
N/A
|
Reply of
GCode's Poll
If a website says exclusively teens then yes - it really should only feature 18-19 yr olds. Personally I'm not bothered and am very happy look any girl naked as long as she's hot.
|
08-18-09 02:38am
|
Reply
5
|
N/A
|
Reply of
GCode's Poll
Porn should be about appreciating the female form. Implants ruin the natural line of a woman's body and yes...it also shows a lack of confidence in ones own body and low self-esteem. Both a big turn-off.
|
08-15-09 11:28am
|
Reply
6
|
N/A
|
Reply of
messmer's Poll
I chose other - simply because I like anywhere except outdoor scenes generally. This is because I tend to find outdoor scenes not to be lit as well. Massive generalisation but I certainly find it's often the case that the clearest, sharpest videos are made on an indoor specifically lit set.
Once you're inside - I don't care where it is as long as the titties bound and the lips get spread :-P
|
08-08-09 04:23pm
|
Reply
7
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Colm4's Poll
I'm going through a war movie phase at the moment but otherwise - all the above.
|
08-06-09 09:47am
|
Reply
8
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Drooler's Reply
hehe - OK...to be slightly more lucid:
I never look at the jpg content of a site online if I can help it. In fact - I often turn off image display in my browser to speed up pages and keep my cache nice and clean. Simply download the zips and look ath thumbnails using ACDSee. As the meercat wouldsay - "simples" (sorry - it's a UK thing)!
|
08-05-09 06:44am
|
Reply
9
|
N/A
|
Reply of
atrapat's Poll
There are things I care about less but...right now I just can't think of any
|
08-04-09 03:53pm
|
Reply
10
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Drooler's Poll
I've a feeling this will be a resounding NO. What's the point?
Maybe some webmasters will read this and learn from it.
|
07-19-09 01:29am
|
Reply
11
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Drooler's Poll
I joined suzenet back in 1995 (ish...I think). Can't say I've gone back there and looked recently though to be honest.
|
07-09-09 07:23am
|
Reply
12
|
N/A
|
Reply of
fortherecord777's Reply
Woah - 65"!!! I didn't know you could get LCD that big! Man I'd love to see some of those MetArt girls on that! You're a lucky man!
|
06-19-09 04:58pm
|
Reply
13
|
N/A
|
Reply of
asmith12's Poll
Full screen on my 26" TV mounted on the wall as a second display.
|
06-19-09 07:41am
|
Reply
14
|
N/A
|
Reply of
GCode's Poll
Use an Onkyo 7.1 system here which I'm very happy with. Detached house means I can turn it up as loud as I want but it does keep my daughter (who sleeps above the TV room) awake sometimes. Oh well - we all make sacrifices for others sometimes ;-)
|
06-06-09 10:41am
|
Reply
15
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Duante Amorculo's Poll
Much as I agree with GCode that the creators of the art should be most deserving of recognition, I said musicians, mainly as I don't put writers in the "celebrity" box. Celebrities are people who seek adulation and recognition. Being a muso myself and knowing how damn hard it is and would much rather create something worthwhile and know in my heart it was good rather than stand in front of an audience and get their opinion.
|
06-04-09 02:45pm
|
Reply
16
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Colm4's Poll
Errr....12Tb and counting!
|
04-14-09 04:40pm
|
Reply
17
|
1 By Day
(0)
|
Reply of
Ace DDF's Reply
Thanks Endre - good to know it's not a permanent thing. Looking forward to HD eye candy!!
|
08-14-09 03:40pm
|
Reply
18
|
1 By Day
(0)
|
Reply of
dracken's Reply
Thanks Draken. Please be aware that the rolback server is now off - for good. But a site admin commenting here in PornUsers has stated that the timout issue regarding download managers IS being looked into...so....watch this space.
The updates are currently still only 1 per day although there are occasionally secondary photo only sets from a sister site. A welcome addition recently is also a backstage video in addition to the main video but this is only available in relatively low-res wmv format.
Enjoy!
|
08-10-09 04:32pm
|
Reply
19
|
1 By Day
(0)
|
Reply of
Ace DDF's Reply
Great news that you're trying to fix it. That really would be a great example of web admins listening to their userbase - very impressed.
Don't suppose there's anyway of having the rolback server back until you'vegot a fix is there?!?!?
|
07-07-09 04:11am
|
Reply
20
|
1 By Day
(0)
|
Reply of
Ace DDF's Reply
Thanks for the response Endre,
The use of the download manager isn't really the problem. The issue is with being able to schedule downloads. FDM still works fine to multithread download and resume from 1byday.
I (like many I suspect) are limited by our ISP's to certain download limits. My ISP lifts those limits between midnight and 8am. If I was always awake at these times there'd be no problem. I've used managers to schedule downloads to get around this issue.
The use of session timeouts and more importantly the web form requiring a physical presence at a PC breaks the scheduled downloads.
I've spent the day looking at various download managers and can find none that auto login to your site unless you have already used a browser to pass the web login form.
Please - if you've got any advice on how to get GetRight, DTA or any other manager working with sessions and web forms I (and I'm sure many others here) would love to hear. Until then I still believe form based login sites are to be avoided.
|
07-06-09 08:37am
|
Reply
21
|
1 By Day
(0)
|
Reply of
monty2222's Reply
Hi Monty222 - DDF is the production company.
http://ddfprod.com/2257.htm
Stands for Denys DeFrancesco the photographer
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denys_Defrancesco
Thanks for reading,
Z
|
04-26-09 02:14pm
|
Reply
22
|
CD Girls
(0)
|
Reply of
doomsday's Review
Thanks Doomsday - I've been thinking about rejoining CDGirls as I was a member about 2 years ago. When did the video quality get better and what's res/format these days?
|
08-20-09 11:21am
|
Reply
23
|
Erotic Beauty
(0)
|
Reply of
nutcrackr's Review
Nicely informative. I'm a big fan of Met-Art and always wondered what extra Met Models had to offer.
|
06-06-09 10:46am
|
Reply
24
|
MetArt
(0)
|
Reply of
Monahan's Reply
Totally agree Monahan. I'm a video guy too but joined MetArt because the photos are just so damn good. I see the video content on MetArt as a bit of a bonus really - not why I joined but occasionally nice to have a vid of a girl you've been admiring the photos of. Uma B was a good example for me - major hot babe with about 5 photo sets and all of a suddden 2 or 3 vids appeared - a nice addition.
I agree with you regarding the model names but at least the names are unique. I'm currently writing a database/website to act as a central model "lookup" for as many popular websites as possible and will let the PU community know as soon as I have a beta sit ready to test.
|
05-11-09 02:05am
|
Reply
25
|
MetArt
(0)
|
Reply of
Jeffrey99's Reply
I'ts a bit of a mix. I'd say 8 out of 10 sets start off fully clothed and gradually strip. On average about 40% of a set of photos will be totally naked and most get progressively more explicit - although none get to spread pussy shots.
|
05-11-09 02:00am
|
