| Type |
Site |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Reply
651
|
Joy Mii
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#6
from cjd2004:
(lk2fireone's Reply)
Interestingly MET-Art is also getting into this area, with their soon to be launched SexArt site.
|
04-10-12 09:55pm
|
Reply
652
|
Joy Mii
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#5
from otoh:
(lk2fireone's Reply)
Thanks for a comprehensive answer :) They are fairly similarly positioned, and your details confirm that; I was trying to figure out why I'm drawn to one rather than the other. I think it comes down to:
* Purely aesthetically, I like the colours and the camerawork I see on Joymii more;
* X-Art seems to be very focused on models 18-20 with very few outside that range; Joymii seems to be slightly broader which again appeals to me a bit more
I'm definitely looking for something with a little b/g material - they both look good sites, but Joymii is the one on my list to join!
|
03-21-12 08:47am
|
Reply
653
|
Joy Mii
(0)
|
Reply of
lk2fireone's Comment
from otoh:
I concur - I'm not generally into hardcore but like it occasionally and this site is high on my list. From what I've seen, I agree with you about the lighting and colours - it has a clean, modern feel which sets it apart from much other porn.
I guess this is similar to X-Art but for some reason I am more drawn to Joymii, it seems to have more character - have you joined both?
|
03-19-12 08:56am
|
Reply
654
|
Joy Mii
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#2
from elephant:
(lk2fireone's Reply)
Yep too right, too concerned with living in the past and with magazine and offline product, they failed to cash in on the online boom and take their product to whole new arenas, they had the cash to be a leader as you say but many of these big name producers from the past failed on the internet to really create anything more than a magazine online, Playboy had the connection and a following that like nudity done with a more softcore fun aspect, I do too, I think the quality of ladies they had there they could of created some amazing porn softcore hardcore niched
|
03-18-12 03:57pm
|
Reply
655
|
Joy Mii
(0)
|
Reply of
lk2fireone's Comment
from elephant:
Yeah these sites are becoming more popular these days which is a good think, they aim to cater for people who like soft hardcore if thats ever a new niche, sex done in a more softer and erotic way, probably please more sexes to watch this type of porn too.
|
03-18-12 03:05pm
|
Reply
656
|
Jurassic Cock
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#2
from mbaya:
(lk2fireone's Reply)
Thanks for the tip. I will try that out.
|
06-29-18 05:20am
|
Reply
657
|
Jurassic Cock
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#8
from careylowell:
(lk2fireone's Reply)
...THE PEOPLE I KNOW WHO WOULD PREFER LARGE-TYPE BOOKS COMPLAIN THAT PUBLISHERS HAVE LIMITED THEIR FONT CHOICES TO JUST TWO, MAYBE THREE, STYLES OUT OF THE 177,012 CHOICES AVAILABLE. AND THESE THREE ARE UGLY.
|
07-04-17 06:50pm
|
Reply
658
|
Jurassic Cock
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#7
from rearadmiral:
(lk2fireone's Reply)
I agree with you. I'm making it a point these days to post positive feedback as often as I can.
|
04-23-17 06:30am
|
Reply
659
|
Jurassic Cock
(0)
|
Reply of
lk2fireone's Review
from rearadmiral:
Thanks for reviewing this site. Back when it was active it was one of my favourite sites because it had a niche I love - old guy, young girl - with American models. I've been dropping in to the tour page but the way it's set up it's hard to tell if there are any new scenes since the last time I was there. Thanks to you I now know that there aren't. you saved me some possible frustration.
|
04-22-17 12:57pm
|
Reply
660
|
Jurassic Cock
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#3
from careylowell:
(lk2fireone's Reply)
By golly, that's the one
excellent reason for using upper case.
I won't release the dobermans...
As for getting old, expect befuddled me
to forget your explanation & post a
similar comment inside of six months.
|
04-20-17 06:30pm
|
Reply
661
|
Jurassic Cock
(0)
|
Reply of
lk2fireone's Review
from careylowell:
Bad news: this review and many of your other ones are in upper case.
|
04-20-17 01:11pm
|
Reply
662
|
Jurassic Cock
(0)
|
Reply of
lk2fireone's Review from lk2fireone:
REVIEW CONTINUED (BOTTOM LINE):
I AM GIVING THE SITE A SCORE OF 79, BECAUSE OF NETWORK ACCESS.
IF THE SITE WAS SCORED AS A STAND-ALONE-SITE, THE SCORE WOULD BE LOWER,
BECAUSE:
1. THE LIMITED AMOUNT OF CONTENT AT THE SITE (80 VIDEOS).
2. THE SITE STOPPED UPDATING YEARS AGO.
3. THE QUALITY OF THE VIDEOS IS JUST OK. NO ATTEMPT IS MADE TO PRESENT THE MODELS AS ATTRACTIVELY AS POSSIBLE. THE SETTINGS AND CLOTHES ARE CHEAP.
|
04-19-17 06:51am
|
Reply
663
|
Just Teen Movie
(0)
|
Reply of
lk2fireone's Comment
from Denner:
It's lousy, all right.
Just looked through Just Teen Site where they brag on the bonus-sites - among them Just Teen Movie - and I was a member here early this year, and yes, lk2fireone is right - no updates for a year, at least....
So what's the big deal with bonus-sites here?
|
10-11-09 07:33am
|
Reply
664
|
Just Teen Movie
(0)
|
Reply of
lk2fireone's Review
from Denner:
I agree with this review - in my own review the score was just a little higher - but that was mainly influenced by the bonus-deal with JustTeenSite - and some older videos of some of my favorite models - but, alas - this site needs SERIOUS work.....
BTW: lk2fireone gets around the the main issues swell here...
|
12-07-08 10:30am
|
Reply
665
|
Just Teen Movie
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#2
from Tree Rodent:
(lk2fireone's Reply)
Yeah I agree, the soundtracks on those things can be absolutely ridiculous at times. I think that most of the people who make these things don't actually like porn at all.
|
12-07-08 09:08am
|
Reply
666
|
Just Teen Movie
(0)
|
Reply of
lk2fireone's Review
from Tree Rodent:
Great stuff - very thorough review. This sounds like the sort of site that leaves me totally cold.
|
12-07-08 08:30am
|
Reply
667
|
Just Teen Site
(0)
|
Reply of
lk2fireone's Comment
from tangub:
I think this site has been in decline for some time. I browsed the tour a few weeks ago when I was browsing my bookmarks for something to join. In the whole of 2012 they only had 30 odd updates which was a far cry from when they were in their prime a few years ago and updating almost daily. Sadly I never got around to joining because with a $35 price tag there was always something else better value to join so it doesn't surprise me if they've gone out of business. Maybe at $20 they might have attracted more members and survived.
Even MPL Studios that I once paid $35 to join seem to have come to the realisation that $20 is a more realistic price to attract members in the current economic climate even more so this side of the pond where porn dollars seem to be getting more expensive week by week with the drop in the exchange rate.
|
03-13-13 04:23am
|
Reply
668
|
Just Teen Site
(0)
|
Reply of
lk2fireone's Comment
from slutty:
Didn't work for me either, nor did their other site.
|
03-12-13 10:44pm
|
Reply
669
|
Just Teen Site
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#3
from Drooler:
(lk2fireone's Reply)
I absolutely detest that ugly treatment of those photos with that super cheesy fake snow bordering. It's got to be one of the most amateurishly failed attempts at "art" or "style" or whatever that I've seen since I tried to make a paper-mache bunny in 2nd grade art class.
Fortunately, there is a silvery lining of a different sort: My growing collection of darling Masha from MetArt, NuDolls, Zemani, and even FM Teens. But as for that JTS "thing," it's "No Thanks." It sure don't jingle my bells.
|
12-28-09 07:13pm
|
Reply
670
|
Just Teen Site
(0)
|
Reply of
lk2fireone's Review
from TrashMan:
Haha, I'm surprised you had space in the cons area for overflow of pros. I'm usually the other way around...I'm more critical of websites so I exhaust my cons space rather quickly. Unfortunately people don't read UP, they read DOWN, so it is not wise to star the cons section in the pros section :-D.
|
01-13-09 03:23pm
|
Reply
671
|
Just Teen Site
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#4
from Khan:
(lk2fireone's Reply)
Because (I'm guessing) it was an email address you got off the site, I left it unedited this time. Some times I will edit an actual address.
Sometimes you may also see them use the format "support [at] pornusers [dot] com" as we often do here at PU.
Like Drooler remarks, I suspect some spam bots have evolved to pick up the alternate ways of listing an address. And myself, I also use a script much like the one he describes to cloak an email address when I code it onto a web page. Still, it's generally considered bad form to post a raw address on a public post ... especially if it's someone else's address.
And no, your post here (nor in the PU Forum) are not considered email. However, spam bots scan web pages to harvest any email address they can find.
Anyway, now you'll know when you see that format for an email address that you need to change it to the correct syntax for your email program to use.
|
11-29-08 10:58am
|
Reply
672
|
Just Teen Site
(0)
|
Reply of
lk2fireone's Comment
from Drooler:
While I agree with Khan about not posting "live" email addresses, I would think that the people who write spam bots could probably write code that would identify soAndso(at)place.dom as an email address, too.
There's a javascript I found once that might do better to thwart the bots. It basically just puts the pieces of the email address into variables and then writes the actual address to the page. Since bots scan the code, they wouldn't recognize it as an email address, but it works the same for a person viewing the page.
But who knows if the bot writers haven't figured that out, too.
|
11-29-08 08:58am
|
Reply
673
|
Just Teen Site
(0)
|
Reply of
lk2fireone's Comment
from Khan:
Well, info(AT)justteensite.com is a format to let you know what the email address is BUT keep spam bots from picking up the email address (as they will when you post it like you did here).
Most know to replace the (AT) with @
It really isn't prudent to post raw email addresses on public web pages as they will (almost certainly) be picked up by spam bots.
|
11-29-08 07:02am
|
Reply
674
|
Just Teen Site
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#4
from Drooler:
(lk2fireone's Reply)
Funny you should mention it, but I got 404's at MetArt this morning. The new gallery thumbs were posted, but once I got to page 2 of Freya, things went nullsville fast. I left the window open for 20 minutes and went back and things worked.
But the solution to MetArt's problem is obvious: Make sure everything is ready lower in the tree, upload that, check it again, and then put the new gallery thumbs on the updates page. That's what sensible webmasters do.
From this, I believe we can draw a certain conclusion about the webmasters at MetArt. ;)
|
11-18-08 02:16pm
|
Reply
675
|
Kara Duhe
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#1
from Drooler:
(lk2fireone's Reply)
I'm the same way about the same stuff. I hadn't been to RH for over 2.5 years. Quite a lot of content had built up, and the updates come more often than they did when I'd last quit -- in more than a little disgust.
But the glossy, shiny, RH treatment showing maybe 2-3 poses per gallery with a Warholesque monotony doesn't exactly crank my shaft. With some of them, you can actually scroll down 2-3 motions of the mouse wheel and it seems as if time is standing still. And that's not an exaggeration.
MetArt, by vast contrast, is a site I can never stay away from. I've been a current member on their yearly plan at least 3 times if not more. And all for the reasons you point out.
At least RH has one thing going for it: Sets that are too dark aren't too common.
|
08-28-09 03:23pm
|
