| Type |
Site |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Reply
701
|
N/A
|
REPLY TO
#9
from atrapat:
(Drooler's Reply)
I'm not sure which it is, but there must be a reason why PU staff decided reviews and comments would expire after two years and no longer count towards site score. If that user-contributed content has lost part of its value, user points and badges earned from it should also lose part of its value.
What's more, reading what Khan said in the forum, it looks like the original idea leaned in this direction. In fact, I was half expecting to start losing points soon, since I wrote my first reviews about a year ago. This is the forum topic:
https://www.pornusers.com/forum/forum_th...ad.html?threadid=603
When, at my current rate, I eventually get the hardcore badge around the end of 2009, after more than 18 months of reviews, I will feel like those karate black-belt 12 year old kids exotics4me mentions in his post. And I will keep it for as long as PU exists, even if I were to stop contributing after that. If the original PU idea had been in place, there's no way I could ever get the hardcore badge.
|
04-12-09 10:44am
|
Reply
702
|
N/A
|
REPLY TO
#8
from Denner:
(Drooler's Reply)
Once again - I totally agree with the Drooler.
Simply I do not see any point in radical changes here - I think most PUs like it as it is - just a guess, though
At the moment at lot of coorporations are into making changes - just for the sake of "change" - for no reason at all - maybe in some sort of desperation.
PU should never be desperate...and not more complicated.
BTW: The exampel with Teenrotica is just right...
SO: I like the system as it is.
|
04-12-09 09:23am
|
Reply
703
|
Twistys
(0)
|
Reply of
Drooler's Comment
from james4096:
I'm glad somebody said something.
This is something I too hate. I have to remember to give sites bonus points from now on when scoring them if they have no watermarks or small unnoticeable ones.
|
04-11-09 05:54pm
|
Reply
704
|
N/A
|
REPLY TO
#16
from badandy400:
(Drooler's Reply)
I would have expected a few more votes for the single model sites to be honest. I know some of the users here like particular models and chase them down anywhere they can find them (Exotics). That is why I used Eve Angel as the example! :)
I think a lot of the single model sites popping up are people just trying to make an extra buck from home. I would imagine that most girls do not want to travel every time they need money and do a photo shoot. And with all the turnkey website programs out there anyone with half a brain can get a mediocre site running. All a girl has to do is have a friend take a few pictures and make a few masturbation videos and she believes she has a good start.
We are seeing a lot of this and people are being burned on $30 single model sites that were one week things for the girl and she dropped it and left the site running.
|
04-09-09 08:50am
|
Reply
705
|
Denude Art
(0)
|
Reply of
Drooler's Review
from Wittyguy:
Great review as always. I'm guessing by the site name and review that this is pretty soft (no lez, no toys, etc.)? Just wanted to double check with da' man before considering their trial.
|
04-06-09 03:42pm
|
Reply
706
|
AT Kingdom
(0)
|
Reply of
Drooler's Comment
from exotics4me:
I just clicked the comment to post a comment about the full set zips. I haven't downloaded any of them yet, but will be sure to check them with the WinRar software as I download them. I'm starting to think that $20 on WinRar to replace WinZip was one of my best investments!
|
03-27-09 11:29am
|
Reply
707
|
AT Kingdom
(0)
|
Reply of
Drooler's Comment
from Denner:
Read that Drooler-comment again and again, folks at ATK...
"You don't post it until you make sure it's ready! "
And it's NOT only zips - the delays of split videos-files for days and days are a disaster - and sometimes you do not get the last part or parts of a video - a fact this user have complained about before...
Is the word: botch?
|
03-27-09 06:13am
|
Reply
708
|
AT Kingdom
(0)
|
Reply of
Drooler's Comment
from Wittyguy:
"Strip, strip, strip, strip, nude". Sounds like these gals would be great at refinishing furniture ;) Maybe that's why their staying clothed, those chemicals can be nasty.
|
03-26-09 12:07pm
|
Reply
709
|
Only Cuties
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#3
from PinkPanther:
(Drooler's Reply)
You're right - the ability to see updates is something that all sites should decide. I was just quite disappointed in the quality of the updates of this site.
The only site from this company that I like is InFocus Girls - that site draws me back over and over again and is quite consistent with the high quality of its posts, for my tastes.
|
03-25-09 07:35pm
|
Reply
710
|
Only Cuties
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#1
from PinkPanther:
(Drooler's Reply)
In my experience, having very recently had a couple of days trial membership, giving visitors access to the recent updates wouldn't be all that enticing - some days there were no updates at all and the quality of the updates in 2008/2009 were clearly of lesser quality than the 2006/2007 material. That's never a good sign!
|
03-25-09 05:50pm
|
Reply
711
|
Twistys
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#8
from PinkPanther:
(Drooler's Reply)
Now if they can get me on their "IP Address White List" permanently, I'll really be happy - at this point they have to manually unblock me every single time I want to access the site, since some other schnook with a Comcast IP address similar to mine is relentlessly trying to hack their site - so it's block them, block me too at this point. But they identified the problem and Shap proved himself once again to be the classiest of class acts, so I'll just have to look at other sites while they get their Hacker Blocker to selectively unblock my particular IP address.
|
03-21-09 11:21am
|
Reply
712
|
My Sexy Kittens
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#1
from Denner:
(Drooler's Reply)
Hey Drooler - yes, if your mother knew about this, the cookies would stay in the jar, for sure........
And see my review as a bit of a warning to you, especially - the photo-section is not worth - ok, the latest photos are now avaliable in 2000x1333 (approx: 600 kb) - but without zip - they go for movies here and they even have zip for videograbs???? Why bother - instead of doing zip for the sets, crazy.
And: all the photofiles are just named "image" - so if you want to download each photo, you got to rename them in order not to overwrite!
I'd say this site could almost be considered hostile against photo-fans...
Still I give it a 79 - there are some very fine videos solo, bg hc and (too much) lez, - and the quality here is really fine - for the majority.
|
03-16-09 02:06am
|
Reply
713
|
Kim's Anal Heaven
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#14
from jd1961:
(Drooler's Reply)
"Gripping"??
LOL
|
03-14-09 07:39pm
|
Reply
714
|
N/A
|
REPLY TO
#9
from TalonIcefire:
(Drooler's Reply)
Yet to find a flavor I don't like...
|
03-14-09 06:43am
|
Reply
715
|
N/A
|
REPLY TO
#1
from Jay G:
(Drooler's Reply)
Yes, Drooler, the spice of life!
|
03-13-09 05:00am
|
Reply
716
|
Pix and Video
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#1
from Denner:
(Drooler's Reply)
Hi bro...
It's almost embrassing - never expected to go above Ze Droolah in ranking, but what the heck - it's only a game here - so I guess it'll go up and down. And man, been joining a lot of sites lately (seeing it on my creditcard, shit!)
But this thing still comes up like narcotics - wanting more all the time - bet you know...Been doing some close look at your former reviews and been wanting to ask some futher questions - but I'll get back to that.
Like you, I guess:
STILL LOOKING FOR NEW STUFF....
Cheers pal!
Denner
|
03-12-09 09:30am
|
Reply
717
|
N/A
|
REPLY TO
#9
from Wittyguy:
(Drooler's Reply)
Oh, I like the idea of the PU board game. You get penalty cards that say you didn't read the reviews before joining a site or get sent to "PU Jail" by Khan for being a nasty poster in the forum. I assume the ultimate goal would be to amass the most points and win big raffle money and trust scores?
|
03-11-09 11:44am
|
Reply
718
|
N/A
|
REPLY TO
#7
from exotics4me:
(Drooler's Reply)
Check this link out, it is the wiki for DVD qualities including standard and HD and gives the resolutions.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVD
Just click on the linked "standard" in the article or "high definition" link to see the numbers.
|
03-08-09 10:40pm
|
Reply
719
|
N/A
|
REPLY TO
#3
from turboshaft:
(Drooler's Reply)
It's good that you have mentioned them in reviews, but I think it goes over a lot of people's head. Quality can be a very subjective thing, and quantity -- even high quantity with low quality -- is much more objective, especially since it is often just numbers. But bit rate can really determine a video's quality, even if everyone is more concerned with the resolution or length.
Maybe there is just not enough demand by members for sites to post them, though once you download a file you can see for yourself. I worry too many sites will just use high bit rates to claim they have good videos, just like they do with HD resolutions. Just because they captured a shitty scene in HD does not keep it from being any less shitty had it been captured in SD. In fact, higher quality often only reinforces bad lightning, camera work, sound, style, etc.
|
03-07-09 05:27pm
|
Reply
720
|
ALS Scan
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#3
from exotics4me:
(Drooler's Reply)
I found some Mia with Eve content on the defloration site. Seeing the two of them together again was great, but the story was maybe the worst I've ever seen. You'll like the premise, "Both of these ladies are virgins and are going to let us pop their cherries with sex toys". Not for sure but I don't think a sex toy de-virginizes a woman, and the material really doesn't look that old.
Mia was the first blonde in porn that I really liked and started collecting. My comment about the voting on the sets to remaster was mainly about the Mia content on ALS, I have found some content of her on older sites as Illona, never knew she had an alias besides Mia. I was surprised to see her on videobox too, they have several of her boy/girl scenes. Oh and before I forget, on the defloration site, an included loud pop happens and the dildo comes out all red ha ha.
|
03-04-09 10:36am
|
Reply
721
|
Oldje
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#4
from Jay G:
(Drooler's Reply)
Thanks. And, yes, I've had bad experience with McAfee, too. McAfee has a worse effect on program performance than most viruses.
|
03-02-09 05:13am
|
Reply
722
|
Oldje
(0)
|
Reply of
Drooler's Review
from Jay G:
Another very entertaining review. I've been tempted before, but never know how much it will cost since the billing is in euros and there's extre conversion charges on my credit cards when I buy in euros.
Do you know what the approximate cost is in dollars (including conversion fees)?
|
02-28-09 01:16pm
|
Reply
723
|
Oldje
(0)
|
Reply of
Drooler's Review
from mbaya:
Sounds interesting to me. Do you get access to any of the other sites from the same people? How good is the WMV quality? Any statistics as to quality? How long are the videos? Since it is so expensive, how did that affect your evaluation? Thanks.
|
02-28-09 10:29am
|
Reply
724
|
1 By Day
(0)
|
Reply of
Drooler's Comment
from DickH:
I must admit, I have pretty much given up on DDF sites over the past few months for various reasons some of which I can even remember :-)
- lots of duplication as you say including the same sets across various sites for which you're expected to pay seperately
- fake cumshots pretty much everywhere, why why why etc
- women who don't look like they're even remotely enjoying being there. Clearly this is just my perception but there you go !
Don't know what the rest of you out there think but personally I don't think they're quite so hot any more !
|
02-26-09 04:56pm
|
Reply
725
|
Teen Dreams
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#6
from Denner:
(Drooler's Reply)
Drooler, I guess it's the shower-scene with Luciana at 1by your're talking about.
And what I recollect is that the scene with Luciana from january 22 (the lingeri-set) is about the same.
Concerning "replays", "reediting" or whatever at 1by, I got the same notion at the moment - never thought that this site would get tiresome..
Ending my membership this term - and sure, I got the same thing here: It'll take a while before returning...
And, alas - the same goes for Teendreams.
Found some rather special stuff on some british site I'd asked Khan to put on TBP - for a later review. It's mostly with some wellknown ( in Europe anyway) uk-models from the 1990th...WELL, at least it's something new even if it's ten og 15 years old... be back..
Denner
|
02-22-09 05:53am
|
