| Type |
Site |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Reply
1476
|
LSG Models
(0)
|
Reply of
Drooler's Review
from DivBZero:
Thankyou for your review.
The content here is pretty good and very much as described. However this site uses one of my pet hates.
They start their picture sets 001.jpg, 002,jpg etc. Which means if you download any of the images, management becomes a nightmare, because the third time you download 046.jpg, can you remember to call it 046a or 046b 046c etc, and when you come back to a site after a week, how can you remember how far back you got. There's no clue in 046d.jpg !
Anyway, there you are apart from image compression this site is rather good. Drooler thankyou for your review
|
05-13-07 03:19pm
|
Reply
1477
|
LSG Models
(0)
|
Reply of
Drooler's Review
from Jay G:
I enjoyed your review and really like to hear your information. No it's not "being petty," For those of us who join 1 or 2 new sites every month, the petty things are really annoyinbg when they distract from the enjoyment of the web-site. Thanks for the info. I look forward to your reviews.
|
05-13-07 12:55pm
|
Reply
1478
|
Babelicious
(0)
|
Reply of
Drooler's Comment
from Nick C:
Hi drooler, thanks for the comments. I will talk to my techie to see if we can fix things so you dont have to enter your pass for each site, but as I understand because the sites are on different servers this cant be helped, however im not a techie so take what I said with a pinch of salt :)
We have just added a 100% exclusive model to Babelicous and im pretty sure you are going to love her! Her name is Tiffany Brookes and she is a new face that hasn't been seen many times. Her body is fantastic and a personality to match (that always counts right? :D ) For non Babelicious members, please check out a sample of her on the tour www.babelicious.com (scroll down to the TV and click PLAY!)
Thanks again for the comments, would love you to review our site in full if you possible!
BTW, my techie is coding the navigation so it shows 10 max pages at one time IE 1/2/3/4/5/6/7/8/9/10 - hopefully it will be ready soon!
Nick
|
05-08-07 09:32am
|
Reply
1479
|
Alyssa Doll
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#11
from Rick:
(Drooler's Reply)
Anytime!
For those trials, we definitely sign-up and log-in without notice and using names that the pay-site shouldn't be able to identify. So what we see in that case is definitely what you would see also.
Thanks for your support!
|
05-07-07 09:01am
|
Reply
1480
|
Bubble Girls
(0)
|
Reply of
Drooler's Comment
from Denner:
I've run into some of these ripoff-sites once or twice - or maybe even more.
That's why it's importend, that we at this PU give out the warnings.
And by the way - who are their billing-company here. Maybe there's a point too. Some of the billing-companies don't give a rats ass for us users or: our complaints.
And that might be where we at PU can make a difference: Stay away from certain sites with certain billing-companies....
|
05-07-07 08:36am
|
Reply
1481
|
Watch 4 Beauty
(0)
|
Reply of
Drooler's Comment
from kutloch:
Let me answer some questions and announce some facts:
- W4B contains exclusive content, only few very old sets were created in cooperation with different company and these sets are also available on MetArt. 99.9% of W4B content is exclusive.
- We offer 5000px resolution photos shortly. All of our previous photo sets were issued again in high resolution. If they were not available, they are only 2560px (max size). We do not say that all of our sets are 5000px.
- Our downloads are not restricted, you have to login members area and than you can download what you like. You have to login again only if your session expires. We are powered with fast servers and connection.
- We are erotic art magazine so some of our sets are artistic. That is why they seems to be blurry. We do not think it is a mistake - it is a different kind of photography. We are cooperating with prefessional photographers and printed magazines so we know that this style should be allowed to be art. We are different and we are proud of it. We have good suppoort in our members.
|
05-07-07 03:00am
|
Reply
1482
|
Alyssa Doll
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#8
from Khan:
(Drooler's Reply)
Rick has pretty well covered it in his posts above. I just want to add a quick note to again stress that TBP and PU want to maintain as accurate listings as possible. Thus, if you ever find some aspect of a site doesn't match what you read in the TBP, don't hesitate to bring it to our attention ... via a comment here or an email ... and we'll have the TBP editors check it out and update the listed as needed.
While we don't claim to be perfect, we don't fall short from lack of trying. :)
|
05-06-07 04:41am
|
Reply
1483
|
Alyssa Doll
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#5
from SnowDude:
(Drooler's Reply)
Hey Drooler,
I wouldn't go so far as to say that TBP isn't reliable since they have to check so many details at a variety of sites. Quite frankly, it can be easy to miss something like that and I might have missed it myself. And for all we know it's something that was changed after TBP went through to get site facts, which they only claim to be valid as of a certain date.
So, personally I'm not going to hesitate to join a trial if TBP says it's full access, although I may take a closer look at when the facts were verified. TBP has done pretty well so far and no one is perfect. In fact, incidents like these are why they created PU in the first place since we'll catch stuff they don't!
Anway, that's my $0.02, but I can certainly understand your frustration.
-SD
|
05-05-07 03:55pm
|
Reply
1484
|
Bubble Girls
(0)
|
Reply of
Drooler's Comment
from kkman112:
Drooler, I agree. It is a ripoff. I was rather shocked seeing the 'UPDATED WEEKLY' banner on the site, but when I joined the 'updates' section shows no new updates since January 2006. That is false advertising for one thing, so they should have removed that banner if they still wanted to offer old content.
My guess is they packed up shop and left. If I could, I would get my money back as it is probably just sitting in an account somewhere.
Personally, as I said, I wouldn't join unless you just want to try to grab the old videos. They seem pretty popular elsewhere.
|
05-05-07 11:44am
|
Reply
1485
|
Alyssa Doll
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#4
from Rick:
(Drooler's Reply)
Hey Drooler!
See my previous reply to Snowdude. I'll also address a question you had about how our editor verifies trials.
Believe it or not, this is one area where we really do subscribe exactly the same as the users. The cost is can add up after several hundred sites, but in the end our goal is to get it as accurate as we can.
The other issue we run into are the credit card companies not allowing us to sign-up to as many sites as we need to per week. We have about a half dozen credit cards since they will reject a credit card being used too many times for the same day. So this limits us to the number of sites we can cover and also how often we can re-check a site unfortunately.
I don't want to make excuses since we take pride in being as accurate as possible. If our site facts are ever wrong or out of date, know that we'll always make the correction asap.
|
05-05-07 10:26am
|
Reply
1486
|
Pornstar XS
(0)
|
Reply of
Drooler's Comment
from turismo:
I use IE7 and had no problems with the vast majority of the screencaps, although I could not see a couple, specifically with the older content
|
05-04-07 05:46pm
|
Reply
1487
|
Pornstar XS
(0)
|
Reply of
Drooler's Comment
from exotics4me:
I use Firefox v.2
There are several sites that are doing much better with IE 7. The ones that I noticed working better with IE 7 are American Vice and Only3x
I've had more success overall though with Firefox. Not for sure why pictures wouldn't be loading though. The problem I had on American Vice was using the search feature with Firefox. I could type the search words in, but when I would click the submit search button it wouldn't do anything. On Only3x the problem with Firefox was in the registration, it wouldn't take the submit click and was reseting the pay option. Try Firefox on Pornstarxs, it has worked fine so far for me with it. Hope that helps.
|
05-04-07 04:35pm
|
Reply
1488
|
N/A
|
REPLY TO
#3
from Khan:
(Drooler's Reply)
You asked ...
"What would the implications be of having minor children in the house if you're a member of PornUsers? There's SOME sort of connection being drawn, isn't there?"
The only thing that was to be determined from that questions was if those who typically respond to questions here at PornUsers were good ones to ask about typical safeguards implemented by parents. As the majority say they don't have children, then this isn't the best group to seek those answers from.
Really sorry the question put you off so much.
|
05-01-07 04:18am
|
Reply
1489
|
N/A
|
REPLY TO
#1
from Khan:
(Drooler's Reply)
Hmmm ... interesting reaction.
I'll try to address a few of your comments here.
1. Perhaps you missed it but names of the staffer originating the poll question(s) has been dropped for a little while now. We do still show if it's a user submitted poll but having the staffer's name on poll questions served no real purpose so it was dropped. The point being, absence of a name there shouldn't be seen as anything suspicious. While a number of staffers come up with poll questions, a large percentage of them come from me.
2. I've been active in the adult webmaster community for over ten years so, I will only say that if I'm a "wingnut mole", I've been underground longer than many here have been surfing porn. :)
3. Might I humbly suggest that some poll questions might have a reason (and value) even if you do not immediately see what that reason might be? Many of the poll questions are things that webmasters are interested in knowing about those who purchase memberships.
As you speculated, this question was a qualifier with the idea that, depending on the response, it would be followed by one or more related questions. While that may make no immediate sense to you, looking at it from a webmaster's perspective, it might be perceived differently.
Specifically, adult webmasters OFTEN hear (from various private and gov't agencies) what they should be doing to "protect the children" from access to online porn. When those discussions come up it's often asked what parents are doing along those lines or if they (the parents) just think webmaster's should bear the bulk of the burden for keeping children away from porn.
Understanding all that, perhaps now you can understand why the question is quite germane to ask this group. However, as (to date) the majority of respondents have answered that there are no minors in their homes, it makes little sense (at this time) to ask the planned follow-up questions.
Anyhoo ... hope that helps you better understand that even when you don't perceive what it is, there is almost always a method to our madness. You are, of course, free to ignore any poll question that makes you uncomfortable.
As always, thank you for using PornUsers.com
|
04-30-07 10:36am
|
Reply
1490
|
Super Glam
(0)
|
Reply of
Drooler's Comment
from DivBZero:
Actually I agree with this. Superglam has some great content, beautifully posed and well worth collecting.
But it is madness to add 10 pics per day to existing sets *THEN* zip them up. The member has no idea where they are, and as a work of art it just doesn't work. Picture sets are about progression and culminations, not a daily edging forward.
Either do it properly in the first place or accept that memberships will not be renewed.
|
04-29-07 02:05pm
|
Reply
1491
|
Super Glam
(0)
|
Reply of
Drooler's Comment
from King:
The will disappear like dinosaurs if they will stop providing content. Nothing to worry about, same girls can be found at pixandvideo and many other sites. Thanks for the info. I was close to join once but glad i didn't.
|
04-28-07 12:29pm
|
Reply
1492
|
Sexy Cassia
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#2
from SnowDude:
(Drooler's Reply)
Thanks for the reply, but after I read it my first thought was, "Duh, I should have figured that out!" So, no worries. :)
|
04-27-07 01:44pm
|
Reply
1493
|
Sunmod.com
(0)
|
Reply of
Drooler's Review
from bunnypu:
I think that Sanja is a bit worried about her site being ripped off. That is why she has no zips, a 500Mb per day limit and a ban on downloader software. I have been a Member for years now and agree with most of your points. If you like Sanja then you can not get better value for money than Sunmod.com (and I have joined a lot of single-model sites).
|
04-25-07 02:54am
|
Reply
1494
|
Sexy Cassia
(0)
|
Reply of
Drooler's Review
from SnowDude:
What does HC mean?
|
04-24-07 06:15pm
|
Reply
1495
|
FC Nudes
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#2
from Markus:
(Drooler's Reply)
my security code have 4 numbers and work without problems.
i think you have a browser problem
|
04-18-07 01:52am
|
Reply
1496
|
FC Nudes
(0)
|
Reply of
Drooler's Comment
from Markus:
Drooler my login work without problem! :-p
|
04-17-07 02:09pm
|
Reply
1497
|
Mindy Vega
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#2
from juanchopancho:
(Drooler's Reply)
Thanks for the info.
Note to Mindy Vega webmaster: More better quality videos equals more subscribers.
|
04-09-07 08:54am
|
Reply
1498
|
Mindy Vega
(0)
|
Reply of
Drooler's Review
from juanchopancho:
How about videos? How many? All soft-core?
|
04-08-07 02:42pm
|
