|
|||||
|
| Porn Users Forum » How can we improve the reviews at TBP? |
| 1-50 of 57 Posts | Page 1 | 2 | Next Page > |
| Thread Nav : Refresh Page | First Post | Last Post | Porn Forum Home |
| 03-27-10 11:22am - 5291 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
Rick (0)
Suspended  Posts: 401 Registered: Jan 05, '07 Location: Las Vegas, NV |
How can we improve the reviews at TBP? A recent Hegre comment got me intrigued about what other input you guys might have about our reviews at TBP. I think most of you find the info/facts to be fairly good and worth it's weight. Pushing that to the side for now, I'd love to hear your candid opinions about the "scores" and "pros/cons". Do they focus too much on vids? Do they overrate or underrate certain types of sites? When do the reviewers get it right and when do they not? Don't hold back either... if we can dish it, we better be able to take it! Give me general opinions, detailed analysis, constructive or non-constructive. We're all ears, so let's hear your mouth! p.s. A little ass smooching doesn't hurt before I open the gates. The reviews at PU have helped us tremendously become better at our own job. Your reviews/comments are almost always a secondary reference when reviewing a site. Our reviews based on a simulated members-area experience will never touch actual user impressions and experiences. Thanks to this community for all your contribution. It means more to us that you may realize. The Best Porn - Ultimate Consumer Guide to Porn Porn Users - Porn Review by the People Ranks.com, Inc., Chief/Founder | |
|
||
| 03-27-10 11:38am - 5291 days | #2 | |
|
Tree Rodent (0)
Active User  Posts: 708 Registered: Oct 29, '08 Location: UK |
Bugger it, that means I'm going to have to be nice. First thoughts are there is too much emphasis on quantity rather than quality. I don't just mean picture quality, I mean the care it takes to shoot scenes, the camerawork and how they make the girls look. Those things like bad camerawork where all you get to see is two groins, or the guy's ass or continually looking at the guy's face rarely seem to be taken into account. When sites do that sort of thing it's quite often symptomatic across the whole site. Not enough, in fact hardly any emphasis seems to be on genuine customer service. Too many of the older sites seem to be getting the same marks, and producing fewer updates, or updates which are really recycled old stuff. Not enough emphasis on trickery - for instance the porn.com thing where you get the pre ticked box on the cancellation page, which signs you up to the same site under a different name, only you pay four times the amount for the same material that you are trying to cancel. That sort of stuff. Genuine trickery. Smaller or newer sites don't seem to get much publicity, and maybe there should be a way of marking an individual site with an individual style in a way that gives it a chance to grow. How about an ebay customer feedback type of thing? I know that is what PU is for but maybe just a quick consumer mark for various qualities or lack of them, without the big review or overall score. Edited on Mar 27, 2010, 11:49am | |
|
||
| 03-27-10 12:17pm - 5291 days | #3 | |
|
Denner (0)
Active User  Posts: 1,217 Registered: Mar 03, '07 Location: Denmark |
Another way to be nice - no problems... TBP makes a hell of a lot of reviews - each week - and they're all subjective? I believe so. By 'subjective' I mean honest (you can not make 'objective' criticism) - and with no regards to site-owners 'pressure' on TBP. Like quite a lot of different scores made by PUs there's got to be some differences in what PUs and what the staff at TBP end up with - no big deal. The deal here is - however - the possibility of having a dialog between PUs - and between PUs and TBP-staff about these reviews. I've always 'loved' Maggies reviews, for instance - but had some disputes about scores - and that's the way it ought to be... So if possible: An even closer dialog between members of the TBP staff and the PUs regarding - maybe only - more special/totally new, major site reviews could improve thing (not all reviews - it would be out of hand). "I don't drink anymore - I freeze it, and eat it like a popcicle" Edited on Mar 27, 2010, 12:28pm | |
|
||
| 03-27-10 01:24pm - 5290 days | #4 | |
|
larss (0)
Disabled User Posts: 50 Registered: Mar 20, '10 Location: London |
I wonder if some sort of template may help. A yes/no and rating system over a set of specific questions - just as an initial part of the review. This may help get over some objectivity problems that reviewers may have. Having been through these more factual questions, the reviewer could then go on to the more subjective part of the review - ie what the reviewer actually thinks of the site and why. | |
|
||
| 03-27-10 02:00pm - 5290 days | #5 | |
|
Miss Hybrid (0)
Active Webmaster Posts: 77 Registered: Mar 21, '10 Location: England |
This is a real issue for me. I have set out to do the best I can. There are no tricks. I deleted half of my blog yesterday because a recently signed up member was having a problem with accessing the site. At the end of the day the issue was down to DNS, (we think) and is now resolved. I got so carried away multi tasking , one click and half my blog was gone. I would love the review to try somehow and reflect the effort and dedication that goes into the site. There are no tricks. I would rather refund, than someone feel they had been conned. How do I get that across? Its my hobby business and passion. I have spent the last few days working on new video formats which will be launched tomorrow. I dont do mass produced but just my own stuff. I hope that some format can be devised to reflect passion from mass profit x | |
|
||
| 03-27-10 02:15pm - 5290 days | #6 | |
|
Tree Rodent (0)
Active User Posts: 708 Registered: Oct 29, '08 Location: UK |
Sometimes it's hard to define what a site is like. Sites with girls you have seen a hundred times, with fake breasts, tattoos, and poor camerawork almost seem to end up with the same marks as a site with great looking newcomers, and original ideas. It's hard to explain it, but I'd like to see some sort of attempt at describing the sort of site you are signing up to. Some sort of way of knowing what the subjective experience of the site is like. Okay, I'm not describing it very well. | |
|
||
| 03-27-10 02:45pm - 5290 days | #7 | |
|
yadayada321 (0)
Active User Posts: 19 Registered: Jan 29, '10 Location: Las Vegas, NV |
Most solo model sites (though I wouldn't call your site a solo model site) do not rate as high the larger sites such as 21sextury and nubiles, which have both quality and quantity. Your site, while somewhat interesting, has neither quality or quantity yet (please don't take offense). But you're working on it so it's all good. I killed 30 some bucks but I don't feel the least bit conned. I think a review template is also a good idea. | |
|
||
| 03-27-10 04:07pm - 5290 days | #8 | |
|
RagingBuddhist (0)
Disabled User  Posts: 893 Registered: Jan 23, '07 |
A refund policy is virtually unheard of with porn sites. If you actually went ahead and instituted one, like allowing people to submit compelling evidence why they deserve a refund, that could be a selling point. But it could also have a negative effect if people feel that their reasons are being summarily dismissed. Sarcasm is a body's natural defense against stupidity. | |
|
||
| 03-27-10 04:51pm - 5290 days | #9 | |
|
Miss Hybrid (0)
Active Webmaster Posts: 77 Registered: Mar 21, '10 Location: England |
yadayada321 Send me your user name on my site and I will refund you immediately. Please do not log in again. I am sorry that you feel my site lacks quality and quantity. You are welcome to your opinion, as that is what it is , yours. Quantity I can understand, compared to older sites. Mine is limited to about 9 hours of video 2000 screen grabs and 12000 photos. Miss Hybrid | |
|
||
| 03-27-10 06:00pm - 5290 days | #10 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User  Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
Miss Hybrid, yadayada321 was not asking for a refund. He specifically stated that he did not feel conned (cheated). What he did say was that your site, because it's young, has a smaller amount of content than most of the established sites that have been adding content for years. That's just the nature of the beast: young sites that are just starting add content over time, as they continue to update. That is a healthy site. Many sites, for financial or other reasons, stop updating or adding content, and they become a type of archive site, where a member might join for a month, and then move on. The hope of a site that is actively updating is that members will stay or come back over time to rejoin the site because of the added content. But you state that you are not only adding new content, but are actively trying to improve the quality of what you are offering. Edited on Mar 27, 2010, 06:09pm | |
|
||
| 03-27-10 06:33pm - 5290 days | #11 | |
|
yadayada321 (0)
Active User Posts: 19 Registered: Jan 29, '10 Location: Las Vegas, NV |
No. I have downloaded your stuff, I have enjoyed it, I would like to see more, and I OWE YOU for that. And I mean that from the bottom of my little perverted heart. So I will not take a refund; though thank you for offering :-). In fact, thanks to your site, I think I am going to subscribe to another site that I found from your site; I would have not have found it had I not joined your site as well. I am also looking forward to your video quality update you said you are going to make tomorrow. I was disappointed to see the Penelope Heart videos only in 640x360, but I still enjoyed it. I do have some suggestions for your site, that is, if you even want to hear them in the first place :-P. -- GOOD POINTS * Nice looking, physically fit model. * Some cute co-stars *Penelope Heart* *DROOL* *DROOL* * Varying themes (hand jobs, a little co-star hardcore, pissing, femdom). * Newer videos at 1280x720 (older videos at 640x360). * Image sets are zipped, but you have to navigate far away from the video to the photos section where the same shoot is named differently. You can also go to the all updates section and there at least the photos page link is next to the appropriate video page link (which is what I do). -- BAD POINTS * On the expensive side. * Navigation is poor: For the same shoot having to go to separate pages to get the videos and the photos is kind of eww. * AJAX picture navigation: The AJAX-based lightboxes for photo navigation is kind of eww and I couldn't click to save those images. * Not enough closeups: Hiring a better cameraman/woman who isn't afraid to get a little closer to you would be nice as well (I really liked your set of rings down there, where's the closeups? :P). * Large video watermark: And in a cryptic, distracting font too. * Not much bonus content. Grade: B Edited on Mar 27, 2010, 06:54pm (yadayada321: Oops, spelling errors.) | |
|
||
| 03-27-10 06:37pm - 5290 days | #12 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
The TBP reviews present a professional review by following a template. The reviews give a lot of site facts, then give a score summing up the professional reviewers judgement. Some PU members follow a somewhat similar approach in that the reviews spell out the site details with both technical and ordinary details. They can also explain the major pros and cons of the site. They can also give opinions of the site, based on the pros, cons, and overall impression. They can also give an interesting insight into the site (adding humor or some other personal flavor to the review). Other reviewers might skip most of the technical details which some PU members focus on, and concentrate on their subjective opinion of the site: their likes and dislikes. We have all kinds of PU members, and the reviews are very much a personal statement, that does not follow any specific template. There is already a thread, started by Wittyguy, that specifically addresses how to write a PU review. The thread is titled: "What should a PU review include?" The thread includes 1 post by Toadsith that is truly outstanding: -The Toadsith Porn Users Cheat Sheet There is also a "Revised Toadsith Cheat Sheet" that was actually written by Wittyguy, that is Wittyguy's personal version of the Toadsith cheat sheet. The cheat sheets are written as suggestions of what site details many PU members would like to see included in a site review. The thread is found at: https://www.pornusers.com/forum/forum_thr...&showPost=49#_49 I honestly believe that all PU members should be required to read this thread. Very few people will actually include all or even most of the points covered in the two cheat sheets, but just reading the two cheat sheets is an education in how to write a truly outstanding site review. Edited on Mar 27, 2010, 07:09pm | |
|
||
| 03-28-10 05:50am - 5290 days | #13 | |
|
Tree Rodent (0)
Active User Posts: 708 Registered: Oct 29, '08 Location: UK |
I honestly think the biggest negative about PU reviews is the high overall mark, and think the whole system needs a total overhaul. 95 or whatever for VideoBox and middle 90's for some of the other sites is to me ridiculous. Most sites deserve about 10 less than they are awarded. To me, the marks awarded are totaly meaningless. Start all over again. LOL, no chance of that! | |
|
||
| 03-28-10 06:50am - 5290 days | #14 | |
|
mbaya (0)
Suspended  Posts: 891 Registered: Jul 07, '08 Location: new jersey |
Hey Squirrel, I agree that there are too many scores in the 90's, but I think there is no other way. How people feel is how they feel. I would not overhaul the review system either. The score represents a total overall impression that summarizes all the individual pros and cons. We need that and we need opinions. By the way, I thought that maybe I have been too hard on a lot of sites when I review, but you may have a point. It may be that too many of us give higher scores than are actually deserved. | |
|
||
| 03-28-10 06:52am - 5290 days | #15 | |
|
Denner (0)
Active User Posts: 1,217 Registered: Mar 03, '07 Location: Denmark |
Have to agree with the essence of this input from TheSquirrel. And again I think it's got a bit to do with 'veterans' and newer PUs - or maybe more accurate 'newbies' joining paysites. 'Veterans' here are generally a bit more aware of the market - whereas - like I remember in my 'porn-schooldays' - you might get a little overwhelmed at the start - that could be the reaon why we see so high scores from some newer PUs. On the other hand - I think we got a lot of new PUs here who is quite capable of seeing and judging those shitty sites - we've got some low scores here, too! Not sure how to change the system in reviews - and even not sure if it's necessary. I still like that review-link at PU - but any suggestion of making it even better is welcome... After all: This is a site, a forum where the main thing is the hunt for good porn-sites - and in so a mutual help... "I don't drink anymore - I freeze it, and eat it like a popcicle" | |
|
||
| 03-28-10 06:56am - 5290 days | #16 | |
|
Tree Rodent (0)
Active User Posts: 708 Registered: Oct 29, '08 Location: UK |
OOPS I meant PU reviews AND TBP reviews. For TBP to change means the PU marking system has to change. Wish we could start all over again but it's totally impractical. I know I have said this before too, and I do harp on about the same old thing, but Rick did ask the question. I even hesitated before bringing up that same point again. FTR I think TBP reviews are even worse than PU reviews especially with regard to ridiculously high marks. Okay I've said it. Burn the squirrel BURN THE SQUIRREL! | |
|
||
| 03-28-10 07:39am - 5290 days | #17 | |
|
larss (0)
Disabled User Posts: 50 Registered: Mar 20, '10 Location: London |
I think that most newbie reviews are done in the first place because they are either blown away be a site, or extremely disappointed - hence wanting to do the review in the first place. That's why I did one, and that is probably why you will not find many newbies scoring in the middle - either we loved the site or hated it. | |
|
||
| 03-28-10 08:20am - 5290 days | #18 | |
|
pat362 (0)
Active User  Posts: 3,575 Registered: Jan 23, '07 Location: canada |
I always have a hard time with the score part. I almost never join sites that I consider horrible so my scores are rarely below 80. I do have a few in the 70's and I can't say they were terrible as much as disapointing. I may have given sites a higher score than they might have deserved but hopefully the actual review gave some good points. Long live the Brown Coats. | |
|
||
| 03-28-10 08:25am - 5290 days | #19 | |
|
Capn (0)
Active User  Posts: 1,740 Registered: Sep 05, '09 Location: Near the Beer! |
I always thought it odd you weren't allowed to score a site at under 50. It might as well start at zero & go up to fifty, it would probably make more sense. That said I see no real benefit in changing the scoring system. It is well enough defined. Cap'n. :0) Admiral of the PU Hindenburg. 2009 PU Award Hilarious Post of the Year 2010 PU Award ( I would have preferred it to be Helpful Post of the Year for Guys who Hate 'Retail Therapy' ) :0/ Sanity is in the eye of the Beholder! | |
|
||
| 03-28-10 09:52am - 5290 days | #20 | |
|
messmer (0)
Disabled User  Posts: 2,582 Registered: Sep 12, '07 Location: Canada |
I find that many sites are being highly praised and rated because of their technical excellence or because of the large contents of material found on the site, yet every time I subscribe to a site like that in response to a review in its eighties or nineties the boredom factor tends to creep in very quickly. (Just two examples: Naughty America because of its repetitious scripts for the various fantasies, 21sextury because of all its dead sites.) It would be nice to have notations like: photo shoots seem to be done in a passionless, routine way, videos imitate each other too much, scenes are the same only the faces change, or in the case of the biggest farce when it comes to top scores (Video Box): updates are plentiful but one looks the same as the other because niche content is being ignored. One other thing that really bugs me is that MILFs, on many sites, can be as young as in their twenties. There should be a notation in a review that this is deceptive advertising. In defense of TBP reviewers this fact is quite often mentioned but maybe it could be stressed a bit more yet! To return to niche content, I find far too few reviews of niche sites. If a faithful TBP and PU user cannot find one single review of a site that features mature (really mature) ladies, wearing nice, slinky underwear, who gradually strip down to the buff then there is something wrong somewhere! :-) | |
|
||
| 03-28-10 09:53am - 5290 days | #21 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
I'm not sure how much benefit there is to burning the squirrel. When Nicolas Cage in the Ghost Rider movie as Johnny Blaze burns, he doesn't even scream, or go away, but he just continues to fight the forces of evil, even though he is supposed to have a contract with the devil. Somehow, Johnny Blaze is able to ignore the contract with the devil, who is not just any devil, but Lucifer himself. So I think we will just have to put up with TheSquirrel and all his foibles. Lol. | |
|
||
| 03-28-10 09:56am - 5290 days | #22 | |
|
yadayada321 (0)
Active User Posts: 19 Registered: Jan 29, '10 Location: Las Vegas, NV |
I know some MILFs in real life who are even younger than 18 ha ha ha. *Edit: Not MILF for me, but to high school students :P. Point is, MILF just implies mother, not old age, does it not? | |
|
||
| 03-28-10 09:59am - 5290 days | #23 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
I had a major problem with trying to give sites an accurate score at first, then I realized that scores were very much a personal subjective matter, and then I figured, what the heck, any score I give is what I give it, and what's the sense in trying to agonize over giving the "correct" score? Just give it a score, and get on with the next thing. Hopefully, a score will give some indication of a site's value, but the value of a site is very much a matter of personal taste as well as other factors. | |
|
||
| 03-28-10 10:00am - 5290 days | #24 | |
|
Tree Rodent (0)
Active User Posts: 708 Registered: Oct 29, '08 Location: UK |
Sorry to waffle on again, but also there seems to be little allowance for sites that are part of a big network. If you subscribe to the site you get the whle network. The sites seemed to be marked individually. I think there should be some sort of distinction between network sites and stand alone sites, because there does not seem to be that at the moment. I know these replies by me are close to impossible to implement, even if Rick and co wanted to. So they are next to useless. Come on everyone where are you? More suggestions. FTR I think PU and TBP are head and shoulders above the opposition. It's as close to satisfying what most members want as it can get without badly disappointing anyone. It's impossible to satisfy everyone 100 per cent. These sites get as close as possible. | |
|
||
| 03-28-10 10:01am - 5290 days | #25 | |
|
messmer (0)
Disabled User Posts: 2,582 Registered: Sep 12, '07 Location: Canada |
LOL. True, but no one thinks of teens or looks for teens when they search the category. | |
|
||
| 03-28-10 10:01am - 5290 days | #26 | |
|
Tree Rodent (0)
Active User Posts: 708 Registered: Oct 29, '08 Location: UK |
My partner has threatened to cut off my foibles on more than one occasion. | |
|
||
| 03-28-10 10:06am - 5290 days | #27 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
Roasted squirrel nuts. For Christmas? | |
|
||
| 03-28-10 11:05am - 5290 days | #28 | |
|
hodayathink (0)
Active User Posts: 312 Registered: Mar 27, '09 Location: Illinois |
I don't think there's really a problem with the numerical scores, either on PU or on TBP (except possibly not being allowed to go below 50). The problem most people seem to have with them are simply that they don't care about the same thing that the reviewer cares about. Which is why the most important thing is the text, not the score. Most videophiles aren't going to mark a site down if its picture quality/quantity isn't excellent. Same with most picture lovers and video quality/quantity. And some people don't care about 20-something year old MILFs (*cough*Brazzers*cough*). And, believe it or not, some people don't care about repetitive content, as long as it's executed well (here is where I admit that I am one of those people. I haven't seen much originality in porn that didn't shock/disgust me in at least 5 years, so I don't care if it is repetitive as long as the people shooting it are enjoying it ). What people are essentially asking is for other people to review a site based on not the reviewers idea of what is good or bad, but the reader. And since every reader is different, I just don't see how that would work well. Also, the reason I actually like TBP reviews is because they review the amount of content and technical qualities of the site, and try to stay away from reviewing the content. Most of the sites I want to join, I can take the tour and judge for myself whether or not I like the content, I just want to know whether it's worth it to join to get it (easy to navigate and find what I want, how much content, formats, etc.). | |
|
||
| 03-28-10 11:57am - 5290 days | #29 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
You bring up some very good points. But one simple solution, probably the best one available, would be to base all reviews on what I personally like. That way, I could easily read the reviews, and decide on whether that site is really worthwhile for me to join or not. The rest of the PU members would have to decide on their own, which is what they already do anyway. | |
|
||
| 03-28-10 12:52pm - 5289 days | #30 | |
|
Rick (0)
Suspended Posts: 401 Registered: Jan 05, '07 Location: Las Vegas, NV |
Thanks for the input so far everyone. I read them all and made a list of pts made so far... -Not enough focus more on customer service, signup/cancel trickery, other deception, etc. -Bias toward older sites even though they are outdated and fewer updates. -Not enough niche site reviews. -Not enough credit given to sites within networks. -Not enough emphasis on scene setup/originality. -Too much credit given for site technicalities. -Too much credit given for content quantity. -Too many sites in the 90's. -Need more dialogue between reviewers and PUers. -Consider an objective review template (yes/no q's). I may have missed a few minor details, but so far those were the ones that stuck out to me. Some notes in response... -We've tried to put more focus on the content this time around (2.0), but it's not enough and might not ever be satisfying for some. I want them to strive to learn about what users generally find appealing and what they don't about a scene, and consider them in the review. I know we can do better here. -The reviewers job is to represent the general audience. What would an average user signing up to this type of site want? This is where user reviews/comment really help them. They can't get too subjective with their own personal tastes, although they are invited to do so to an extent. The fact is that most of the sites they review aren't necessarily sites they would personally signup for. This is the toughest part of their job. -I'd also like to improve on communication between users and the reviewers. It might be more valuable to ease the large # of reviews they do per week and get them more involved in the community. There's benefit to keep them somewhat separated, but I do believe they can learn a lot by being more involved. -I agree that our reviews focus more on technical aspects over anything else. This is partly based on the time limitations for each review. The reviewers will spend between 30 min and 2 hrs experiencing the site and it's content. I'd say an average of 1 hr, then another hour (or two) writing the review. They spend more time on a higher quality site versus an average site in the 70's. With so many things to judge within this time period, it's really challenging. -We will be addressing billing, customer service, misleading advertising, cancel process, etc. I can't get too much into it yet because it's in the early stages, but we have a new concept to address the trust, service, and overall friendliness for each site. It will take time and will be combined with a huge slew of other improvements and releases. It's great to get inside the minds of our audience, I love it. The Best Porn - Ultimate Consumer Guide to Porn Porn Users - Porn Review by the People Ranks.com, Inc., Chief/Founder | |
|
||
| 03-28-10 01:51pm - 5289 days | #31 | |
|
Capn (0)
Active User Posts: 1,740 Registered: Sep 05, '09 Location: Near the Beer! |
I would add, don't list 'exclusively video' or 'exclusively pics' as a pro or a con. Give the information, yes, but as to whether it comes out as a pro or a con is up to the reader. Cap'n. :0) Admiral of the PU Hindenburg. 2009 PU Award Hilarious Post of the Year 2010 PU Award ( I would have preferred it to be Helpful Post of the Year for Guys who Hate 'Retail Therapy' ) :0/ Sanity is in the eye of the Beholder! | |
|
||
| 03-28-10 07:56pm - 5289 days | #32 | |
|
Rick (0)
Suspended Posts: 401 Registered: Jan 05, '07 Location: Las Vegas, NV |
Oh right, this was brought up in the Hegre thread. This is an interesting one that I think is up for debate. The question is, is there a situation where a certain type of site should be called out for not having pictures or videos. Let's take a solo girl site for example. To me it would be a pretty big negative if that type of site didn't provide videos or images. Other type of sites might be different. DVD sites might contain only DVD ripped scenes and that would make sense. A site like Met Art, it would be acceptable if they focused only on images. To me, it comes down to the type of site and whether users would expect to see certain content. This debate also applies somewhat to sites that don't have hardcore (especially when the tour doesn't clearly state either way). I'd love to get more input from you guys on this subject. The Best Porn - Ultimate Consumer Guide to Porn Porn Users - Porn Review by the People Ranks.com, Inc., Chief/Founder | |
|
||
| 03-28-10 08:15pm - 5289 days | #33 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User  Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
x Edited on Apr 20, 2023, 02:13pm | |
|
||
| 03-28-10 09:21pm - 5289 days | #34 | |
|
RagingBuddhist (0)
Disabled User Posts: 893 Registered: Jan 23, '07 |
I don't see how you can take the lack of video or pictures out of the equation for most sites. Unless it's billed as a photography site, I think in the broadband age, most people expect video. In the early days of the Internet, before there was broadband speed, porn meant pictures and that was more than fine. But now, with the ability to download gigs at a time, I'm pretty sure most people are looking for video, or at least a good mix of the two. Most PUers have been fair with their reviews on this subject. There aren't too many people knocking photography sites for their lack of video and strictly video sites, like Videobox, for their lack of pictures. As for all the other sites, I guess it'll continue to be Team Pictures versus Team Video, making it hard for the TBP reviewers to put up a review that satisfies both sides. Sarcasm is a body's natural defense against stupidity. Edited on Mar 28, 2010, 09:47pm | |
|
||
| 03-29-10 07:45am - 5289 days | #35 | |
|
Cybertoad (0)
Disabled User  Posts: 2,158 Registered: Jan 01, '08 Location: Wash |
As a consumer I am used to puffery in the buying of a car. However often the sites are " NOT " what they seem. As far as the scores go. One thing that has always kinda chaffed me a little was that PU gives a grade on the review, better review more points. The problem is that its not as black and white as we are told. I think a review should either get points or not. As setting level of points makes one turn their review to fit what PU wants not what they may always want. I have to admit sometimes I made my review longer on a crappy site just because I already got screwed at the site, so the review needed to earn some points. And it did even though I really felt the cheap ass site deserved little opinion other then it sucked. I think its a good system, not perfect, but nor are the reviewers so the best we can hope for is a good review. And to get some points. I give a review so others can take advantage of the money I spend. I get Porn and others get kudos and complaints and may either join or at least think about why in hope I play a part. I like the part someone liked what I saw at the site and actually joined. Thats satisfying. I do wish the site offered more to ppl like me who spend money on a site and time and the sites and they get free advertising at my expense. Oh well in a perfect world reviewers would get discounts. Since 2007 | |
|
||
| 03-29-10 09:15am - 5289 days | #36 | |
|
Capn (0)
Active User Posts: 1,740 Registered: Sep 05, '09 Location: Near the Beer! |
This is true, although I have seen 'No / few videos' regularly listed as a con in TBP reviews. What I am putting forward is that a lack of video or photosets should not be put as a con per se, as that really should be left to the judgement of the reader. I think the place for info like that is in the Bottom Line. Cap'n. :0) Admiral of the PU Hindenburg. 2009 PU Award Hilarious Post of the Year 2010 PU Award ( I would have preferred it to be Helpful Post of the Year for Guys who Hate 'Retail Therapy' ) :0/ Sanity is in the eye of the Beholder! | |
|
||
| 03-29-10 10:34am - 5289 days | #37 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
I usually note in my reviews if the emphasis of a site is more on photos or videos. But I don't mark down the site score because the value of a site is mainly videos or photos. What I do mark down the score for is if the videos are low quality or boring, or if the photos are low quality or boring. I'm much more team photo than team video, but I don't see where I, or most other team photo members, mark a site down because it emphasizes videos over photos. If a site has low-quality photos, I put that in the con section, or the bottom line. The same for if the site has low-quality vids. I honestly don't remember where I put it, I just usually try to stick the information somewhere, because some members want to know if there are good quality photos, or good quality vids, or both. I don't really understand the recent "team photo" versus "team video" antagonism. I thought that whatever a PU member prefers, that's just what he prefers, and if he makes that preference clear in his review, so what? The personal likes and dislikes of a reviewer can add flavor to the review, and meaning. Is there some war breaking out that I should have been aware of? Do I need to buy some automatic weapons, because I've already been outed as a member of team photo before I knew the antagonism between the two tribes? Maybe PU should be split into 2 sites, where team photo won't have to mix with team video. Rick seems like a nice guy, maybe he won't mind the extra work of 2 sites if it means less friction between the membership. | |
|
||
| 03-29-10 10:37am - 5289 days | #38 | |
|
RagingBuddhist (0)
Disabled User Posts: 893 Registered: Jan 23, '07 |
But, like Rick said, there are expectations of a certain amount of content, be it video or pictures or both. If we took those amounts out the pros and cons, a site that updates daily and has three times the online content as another similar site wouldn't get any credit for it, while a site that only updates weekly and doesn't have as much to offer wouldn't get deductions. To me, the only exception to this is when a site's material is so unique that it stands out within it's niche. Other than that, a site's rating has to be influenced by how much they have to offer, and that means it's either a pro or a con. Sarcasm is a body's natural defense against stupidity. | |
|
||
| 03-29-10 11:32am - 5289 days | #39 | |
|
Capn (0)
Active User Posts: 1,740 Registered: Sep 05, '09 Location: Near the Beer! |
Yes, but that doesn't alter the fact that 'No / Few videos' is not a 'con' to a photo lover & vice versa. Cap'n. :0) Admiral of the PU Hindenburg. 2009 PU Award Hilarious Post of the Year 2010 PU Award ( I would have preferred it to be Helpful Post of the Year for Guys who Hate 'Retail Therapy' ) :0/ Sanity is in the eye of the Beholder! | |
|
||
| 03-29-10 11:45am - 5289 days | #40 | |
|
Drooler (0)
Disabled User  Posts: 1,831 Registered: Mar 11, '07 Location: USA |
I know this is probably a tough one, but the matter of exclusive content needs attention, too. Sometimes the reviews say that the content looks exclusive, but that's not quite the trip to home plate. It seems that only way the reviewer can be sure about it is whether or not s/he gets deja vu when reviewing the site, or sees relevant comments made at PU before or after the review. But it is a pretty important point. What to do? I wanted something new, so I left England for New England. | |
|
||
| 03-29-10 11:51am - 5289 days | #41 | |
|
Rick (0)
Suspended Posts: 401 Registered: Jan 05, '07 Location: Las Vegas, NV |
The other question might be... is there any such thing as too many cons? Even though a specific con may not matter to every reader, as long as it's useful and applies to a certain audience shouldn't it be included? I can see webmasters being defensive to such a con, but it's surprising to me that some users would want us to hold back in that regard. With that said, I've instructed the reviewers to be more forgiving with image sites that are intended only as image sites. The Best Porn - Ultimate Consumer Guide to Porn Porn Users - Porn Review by the People Ranks.com, Inc., Chief/Founder | |
|
||
| 03-29-10 12:06pm - 5289 days | #42 | |
|
Rick (0)
Suspended Posts: 401 Registered: Jan 05, '07 Location: Las Vegas, NV |
In response to the great WG... Thanks for your smart input as always. Here's a reply to some of your suggestions: 1. Do an actual join and cancel... In the future plans and is definitely needed. Want to plan this one carefully and do this right. 2. Subjective input... They are given all the freedom to give their subjective opinions. It's up to them on what to comment on, but it's not always as easy as it sounds. 3. Scoring... The total score is based on the overall greatness of a site, so it's taking everything into consideration. You mention scoring based on things like search, video features, etc. These should all be factored already and should be outlined in the facts or details of the review. I think maybe an additional "more info" section for misc site features that may not factor as a pro or con might be a good idea. Spencer and I were talking about this earlier. He's going to make an appearance in this thread shortly as well and give his take on some things brought up. The Best Porn - Ultimate Consumer Guide to Porn Porn Users - Porn Review by the People Ranks.com, Inc., Chief/Founder | |
|
||
| 03-29-10 12:12pm - 5289 days | #43 | |
|
Rick (0)
Suspended Posts: 401 Registered: Jan 05, '07 Location: Las Vegas, NV |
Totally agree. One of the most important aspects of a site and continues to be the most challenging to judge. You'd think we'd have it down, but we have to be careful to make a clear judgment. Sometimes when we make an educated guess one way or another and get it wrong, we catch major flack from the site owners. I wish web-sites would be more honest and clear about their content. Tons of sites mix exclusive and non-exclusive with no labels which I never understood. You guys usually do well to identify things like exclusive content or recycled updates and this helps tremendously. We will sometimes use that info in the review if the user is credible and info looks confident. The Best Porn - Ultimate Consumer Guide to Porn Porn Users - Porn Review by the People Ranks.com, Inc., Chief/Founder | |
|
||
| 03-29-10 12:20pm - 5289 days | #44 | |
|
Spencer (0)
Active User  Posts: 118 Registered: Jan 08, '07 Location: Denver, CO |
Interesting read for sure! I wanted to touch a little on the subjective scoring and info on the content scenes themselves. I can only speak for myself, but how fun or interesting the content is always comes into play in a review. At minimum, I always try to describe what type of content they offer (nude? non-nude? hardcore, softcore?), if the models are hotter (or uglier) than usual, or anything else interesting. However, if you look at the number of sites reviewed per week, there are quite a few of them. In any given week or month, there are very few unique or original sites or scenes to comment on. It's difficult to get excited about a site that offers the same type of content as 90% of the other sites we look at. As I said, I do my best, but more often than not, there's just not a lot to say. The other 10% always get special consideration and info give, within reason of course. From there, it's tough to even know what to comment on really. One guy might get turned off by fake boobs, while another doesn't mind them. The same goes for MILFs, Latina girls, Russian girls, girls who don't talk, girls who talk too much, camera men who ask too many questions, cumshots in the wrong place, etc. There are way too many personal tastes to comment on all of them. On top of that, so many people's interests are opposite of each other. I have a friend who loves to see cum all over a girl's face and in her mouth, and another friend who never wants to see it at all, period. Which side should I write about? Usually, the scenes are so middle of the road that nothing really gets mentioned either way. I guess I just wanted to let you know that it's always on my mind at least, even if there's not a lot to talk about at times. | |
|
||
| 03-29-10 12:34pm - 5288 days | #45 | |
|
Capn (0)
Active User Posts: 1,740 Registered: Sep 05, '09 Location: Near the Beer! |
Too many cons?...Possibly. That was why I was suggesting it should be moved into the Bottom Line, as it were. To be even handed, the other side of the coin would be to berate video sites for not providing decent photosets, which doesn't happen & nor should it IMO. I am not saying the information shouldn't be supplied, of course it should. I am just saying that the lack of either video or photoset being a plus or a minus should be more in the mind of the reader than the opinion of a reviewer. Cap'n. :0) Admiral of the PU Hindenburg. 2009 PU Award Hilarious Post of the Year 2010 PU Award ( I would have preferred it to be Helpful Post of the Year for Guys who Hate 'Retail Therapy' ) :0/ Sanity is in the eye of the Beholder! Edited on Mar 29, 2010, 12:55pm | |
|
||
| 03-29-10 01:26pm - 5288 days | #46 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
x Edited on Apr 20, 2023, 02:14pm | |
|
||
| 03-29-10 01:33pm - 5288 days | #47 | |
|
Capn (0)
Active User Posts: 1,740 Registered: Sep 05, '09 Location: Near the Beer! |
I like that idea. Sounds really interesting & entertaining. Cap'n. :0) Admiral of the PU Hindenburg. 2009 PU Award Hilarious Post of the Year 2010 PU Award ( I would have preferred it to be Helpful Post of the Year for Guys who Hate 'Retail Therapy' ) :0/ Sanity is in the eye of the Beholder! | |
|
||
| 03-29-10 04:32pm - 5288 days | #48 | |
|
Tree Rodent (0)
Active User Posts: 708 Registered: Oct 29, '08 Location: UK |
TBP reviews have become irrelevant to me, I rarely read them. What I do check out are the tech aspects on TBP. TBP reviews look as though they are done by professionals in a professional way. They look at the site for a few hours then type out the review. The tech aspect of TBP is an ideal complement to the fan aspect of PU. I therefore think Spencer is right when he infers that TBP should stick to the technical aspect of sites. Some of us have made some suggstions, but I am not sure TBP is capable of handling much extra. Been thinking about the photos v videos thing. If it's a video site like American Vice or VideosZ the lack of pics are a negative, but you don't expect to see pics on a video site. You don't expect a white girl on an ebony site, or a MILF on a teen site. It's a negative in a way, but that's the drawback of overall marking. Should the site be marked only for living up to what it says it is? Trashman I think it was, who gave Naughty America 100 and Brazzers 98 purely for the reason they lived up to being exactly what they said they would be, and how they would appeal to a generic user. He reviewed 10,000 sites in 2 months, then disappeared off the face of the planet, never to be heard from again. Have to admit his reviews were very good though. Given that we on PU seem to be out of synch with what 99 per cent of the porn public is buying or wants, my advice to Rick would be this. Note down everything we say and then do exactly the opposite or risk financial ruin. For my part I have decided to still contribute despite my feelings about free material. I consider pirated and free material is linked to the health of not only TBP, but also porn users, free speech, porn producers, and freedom and health of the internet. I still believe in free speech but understand why there is censorship here. The place does need some rules and good management, especially in the light of the recent attacks. It would be easy for the place to be taken over by people with ulterior motives. I hope that never happens. I have also decided to be nice. This was never my strong point. So I intend to be much more positive in future. There has been too much negative stuff lately. Therefore I say well done to the owners, management, and bosses for getting most of it right most of the time. PS - I totally agree with the Drooler exclusive content comment. Edited on Mar 29, 2010, 05:20pm | |
|
||
| 03-29-10 10:37pm - 5288 days | #49 | |
|
mbaya (0)
Suspended Posts: 891 Registered: Jul 07, '08 Location: new jersey |
I have been deliberately hanging back on this thread. I agree with Ruck that it is a good idea to improve TBP reviews, but I seldom care what they say. Honestly, I feel that the best reviews are written by those of us who care about a site one way or another. Most TBP reviews sound mechanical and uninvolved and read like a checklist. I am sure we all have favorite reviewers who we feel comfortable with. I for one trust Denner and Drooler's opinions the most, although they are not the only ones I would say that about. As far as the fab four of TBP, they are not on the list in my opinion. I am glad we have them as regards site facts, but to me their opinions are quite irrelevant. I do like the idea of guest reviewers though. Variety is the spice of life. | |
|
||
| 03-30-10 02:26pm - 5287 days | #50 | |
|
Vanessa (0)
Active User  Posts: 46 Registered: Jan 09, '07 Location: Las Vegas, NV |
Wow - what a read! There is so much to comment on and I don't even know where to begin. I do have to say, I agree a lot with many of TheSquirrel's observations. However, I also come from the same perspective as Spencer (of course). For myself, I know I could do a better job at describing the quality and effort put into a sites' content, at times. And when I blatantly see it, I do! But I'm sure there are some aspects that I miss, or don't touch on enough, and maybe even others that I give too much credit to. I am certainly not perfect, and my tastes are ultimately personal. After seeing so many sites, so much porn, I tend to enjoy a little more kink and typically prefer hardcore scenes more than soft. It's not easy to be a well-rounded reviewer, yet try for expertise at different niches. I also know I tend to be "nicer" in terms of scoring than some of the other reviewers, which was different when all our scores were combined to an average. I don't think we have too many sites above 90, do we? :) The curve has to start somewhere, right? There is no easy answer but I do appreciate Rick for getting the discussion going. Many of you make good points, and the passion from Porn Users is one of the things that motivate me to consistently put 100% effort into my job. I also think the combination of TBP & PU is the best of the best in terms of gaining perspective from all angles. | |
|
||
| 1-50 of 57 Posts | Page 1 | 2 | Next Page > |
| Thread Nav : Refresh Page | First Post | Last Post | Porn Forum Home |
|
