| Type |
Site |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Reply
1
|
Cathy's Craving
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#3
from Amanda:
(fiou's Reply)
Different points of view are welcomed and even encouraged on PU, but we ask that you please refrain from put-downs of fellow users. This is stated in our site's Terms & Rules and works to keep our little corner of the Internet a relaxed, positive atmosphere for everyone. Thank you for understanding.
|
04-09-18 07:21am
|
Reply
2
|
Cathy's Craving
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#2
from pat362:
(fiou's Reply)
If you think that calling me names is somehow a productive thing to do than go ahead but please don't think that I am some kind of idiot who post things just for the hell of it without any data to back up his claim because I clearly am not. To prove it. All I had to do is click on the TBP link and visit the site and within about 30 seconds I knew the site hadn't updated since February of 2017 because there as always been an update button on their site for such a purpose and guess what. The last update is Feb 2017.
|
04-08-18 11:38am
|
Reply
3
|
Cathy's Craving
(0)
|
Reply of
fiou's Comment
from pat362:
While I think it nice that you are warning possible customers. I am curious to know why you are still talking about a site that has been dead for a long time. Their last official update was in Feb 2017 and frankly I am pretty sure it was either recycled older material or remastered older material. The last time you posted a comment it was regarding them rebuilding the site and you know that never came to pass.
|
04-07-18 11:29am
|
Reply
4
|
Cathy's Craving
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#2
from pat362:
(fiou's Reply)
Thanks for replying. I see why you said they are updating her site. Can you tell me if she has actually kept on updating with new content in the last four years because it's impossible to tell when you visit her site.
One thing appears clear when you visit her and site and it's that they haven't added anything to the site since February.
|
05-17-17 10:25am
|
Reply
5
|
Cathy's Craving
(0)
|
Reply of
fiou's Comment
from pat362:
I'm not sure where you saw the info regarding a rebuilding of Cathy's site because as far as I know it pretty much stopped updating with new content a few years ago and is mostly re-releasing older video as new stuff. At least that's what I saw in 2013 and nothing I saw when I visited her site recently makes me think that it's any different.
|
05-15-17 05:28pm
|
Reply
6
|
Bangbros Network
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#8
from malikstarks:
(fiou's Reply)
Good to know about the up-sells, although to be fair all of the major networks have them at this point (I haven't been to Bangbros in at least a decade, maybe theirs is more egregious). The ripoff stuff is another story though that is inexcusable.
As an aside, one thing I've noticed with the trick is it is better go with only a few months after the expiration date on the card. Going to far ahead can sometimes produce another general decline.
|
12-27-16 07:51pm
|
Reply
7
|
Score Videos
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#2
from malikstarks:
(fiou's Reply)
Yeah you're right, although I don't think she made more than one or two from what I saw. She probably had a change of heart sometime back then right before she retired.
|
10-31-16 10:46pm
|
Reply
8
|
Old Spunkers
(0)
|
Reply of
fiou's Comment
from Amanda:
Hi fiou!
We've spoken to the sponsor and they say there isn't a download limit. Has anyone else run into this issue with the site?
|
10-20-15 10:13am
|
Reply
9
|
Old Spunkers
(0)
|
Reply of
fiou's Comment
from Amanda:
Hi fiou!
Thanks for the head's up. We'll look into it.
|
10-20-15 05:14am
|
Reply
10
|
Score Videos
(0)
|
Reply of
fiou's Comment
from malikstarks:
Via Paxton was a model from the late 90's that refused to do video. I remember reading about it in the magazine. Something about her thinking that posing in magazines were glamorous but appearing in a video, even soft core, made her a slut.
Makes no sense but it was also a slightly different time. Back then, Score was still mostly about the magazine with the website being secondary.
|
03-27-15 03:28pm
|
Reply
11
|
German Goo Girls
(0)
|
Reply of
fiou's Comment
from Scottie2300:
Do you think you could give me the guy who you spoke with on the phones number I got billed and my brothers did this with my card and now im trying to cancel
|
02-06-14 06:17pm
|
Reply
12
|
XX Cel
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#2
from pat362:
(fiou's Reply)
If we were talking real life than you'd be correct that 80% is a high score but you have already done a review so you must know what each score means when it comes to the way TBP/PU scores things. If you didn't pay attention when you did your review than here it is. As you can see 80% is a borderline score because the reviewer would have relegated this site to a might recommend by removing one single point from his/her final score. As toy can see sites scored in the 70's a site that are 50/50 when it comes to the finish prodcut
100 Perfect Site is perfect, could do little to improve. Top recommendation.
90-99 Excellent Site is near perfect, best in it's class. Highly recommended.
80-89 Very Good Enjoyable site, but could improve in key areas. Recommended.
70-79 Average Does some things good, some things poor. Might recommend.
60-69 Needs Work Does more things wrong than right. Low recommendation.
50-59 Poor Site Offers very little, needs serious work. Not recommended.
|
02-04-14 11:48am
|
Reply
13
|
XX Cel
(0)
|
Reply of
fiou's Comment
from pat362:
I don't know why the reviewer gave the site an 80% score but you can always check out his review and see where what he wrote is incorrect.
I'd say that 80% is not a high score since it's really a borderline moderate score. Upper 80 or above is a high rating but as it stands this site was only one point away from being in the 70's and those sites must be joined knowing that it does quite a few things wrong.
TBP/PU offer quite a few sites with a higher score than this one so maybe you could look at those.
|
02-03-14 04:47pm
|
Reply
14
|
The Classic Porn
(0)
|
Reply of
fiou's Comment
from pat362:
I agree that the quality on a lot of their movies is not very good but this is one of the few sites that offers them for download. I'd also like to add that many of them are 20 years and older so it's no wonder that they haven't aged well.
|
06-07-13 06:15pm
|
Reply
15
|
Mandingo Mama
(0)
|
Reply of
fiou's Comment
from pat362:
There is not a single site owned by these crooks that is worth it. I know because I joined a couple of them last year and they are so bad that 50 is still too high a score.
|
03-18-13 06:38pm
|
Reply
16
|
Mandingo Mama
(0)
|
Reply of
fiou's Comment
from gaypornolover:
I guess with little content and poor quality, $29.99 for a year is actually not as good value as a good site at $29.99 for a month! Pity.
|
03-18-13 01:59pm
|
Reply
17
|
Plumper Pass
(0)
|
Reply of
fiou's Comment
from pat362:
This is a very small niche type of porn so variety may be a big problem for them. The fact that a lot of the content is older makes sense since the more popular types of porn started suffereing a few years ago so any kind of porn with a smaller fan base would have suffered faster and harder than the other types.
|
03-17-13 05:27pm
|
Reply
18
|
Pornstar Network
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#3
from lk2fireone:
(fiou's Reply)
Thank you for the follow-up and the explanation.
I guess you were caught by mistake in their security system for anti-fraud whatever-you-call-it.
|
03-14-13 05:54pm
|
Reply
19
|
Pornstar Network
(0)
|
Reply of
fiou's Comment
from lk2fireone:
I don't understand why you are being refused service.
At least a few PU members in Canada have joined this network, without any problems.
|
03-14-13 09:58am
|
Reply
20
|
Rodney Moore
(0)
|
Reply of
fiou's Comment
from mr3633:
Thank you for posting your comments on the RodneyMoore site. I joined the site years ago and thought it was bad. I too remember feeling like I was cheated out of my money. I was hoping that the Webmaster would recognize that changes would need to be made and that the site would be brought up to par. I really enjoyed Rodney Moore's content (especially his scenes with Shanna McCullough), but I won't have this site on my list to check out.
|
12-13-12 01:36pm
|
Reply
21
|
Rodney Moore
(0)
|
Reply of
fiou's Comment
from rearadmiral:
I like some of Rodney's work but given how old much of his stuff is I guessed that the site would still reflect a ten year old design. Thanks for confirming that. Surely they could put some effort into the site and improve it to make this classic porn better. JM Productions has the same problem.
|
09-24-12 06:17pm
|
Reply
22
|
Homegrown Video
(0)
|
Reply of
fiou's Comment
from danibbler:
I wish I had read the comments before I signed up for six months. Quite a few of the videos are simply taken from DVDs and I have yet find (after looking over the site for almost half an hour) a true amateur video. And the download speed is atrocious!
Save your money, folks!
|
02-05-12 10:46pm
|
Reply
23
|
Homegrown Video
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#4
from pat362:
(fiou's Reply)
I don't think you and I can a have a cordial discussion so I will leave you alone. Have a good life fiou.
|
02-04-12 10:05am
|
Reply
24
|
Homegrown Video
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#2
from pat362:
(fiou's Reply)
Sorry but I don't get your statement. I was only replying to your post. You are the one who mentioned that the site was piss poor and that it was amateur stuff. I just corrected your error on the amateur content. Hopefully you will do a complete review with hard facts. The last PU review goes back to 2008.
|
01-31-12 12:35pm
|
Reply
25
|
Homegrown Video
(0)
|
Reply of
fiou's Comment
from pat362:
Mind you it's hard to complain when you can get a one day full access for a dollar. I'd also like to add that the term amateur is definetely not the correct one to use when discussing the performers because I recognize many of the girls appearing in many of the videos and these were never amateur but actual ponr performers from day one.
|
01-31-12 07:51am
|
