|
|||||
|
| Porn Users Forum » Scoring, criteria and more |
| 1-20 of 20 Posts | Page 1 |
| Thread Nav : Refresh Page | First Post | Last Post | Porn Forum Home |
| 07-26-08 09:54pm - 5992 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
exotics4me (0)
Active User  Posts: 664 Registered: Jan 12, '07 Location: USA |
Scoring, criteria and more I have been meaning to post this for awhile, but rarely get the time to post anything that requires much thought. Just recently, I was on Teen Dreams, and the webmaster Andrea asked on their forum if anyone had reviewed Teen Dreams on Porn Users. I mentioned that I had, and a couple of other members seemed interested in becoming Porn User members, but they both mentioned that their favorite site, Teen Dreams, had several cons, and they didn't know how to grade those cons, or maybe I should say, "How much to take off for those cons". As an example, my first review here was also my highest for over a year. So, since the threads are slowing on here and we have never really discussed scoring of sites, value of pros, negative effect of cons, I thought this might be interesting to discuss. I will start by saying that I know one thing that has been complained about several times about my reviews, "Too high" on the scores. We can look at the scoring scale that comes up on each review we write and see that 90-99 is "Best in Class". Thing is, not even the TBP reviewers can stay within that definition, with 8 softcore niche sites scoring over 90. The first thing I would say is when reading a review on PU, check the reviewers average rating. You can do this by clicking on their name and looking over to your right, where you will see their average score of all of their reviews. Mine is pretty high at 84.7. In comparison, wittyguy's is in the 82 range, Drooler is around 78 and Denner is around 76. Sorry guys, mean no offense using you all, but was trying to show a pretty broad range of scores. I will explain that my scores are usually going to be high. I've been joining sites since probably 2003, at an average of 3-4 sites per month. So, most of the sites I review are sites I generally like and have gone back to. Where as Denner and Drooler are known for joining sites that have no reviews. Lets call those the obscure sites. I think a big part of my porn viewing is based solely on the models. I have my 10 favorites, and a few more that I will also search for, but I'm not going to expand my taste, just so I can join sites that I will grade low and get my average down. I've seen some criticism of other reviews that have scored a site in the high 90s, but give 3-4 cons too. I will explain my grading criteria. Exclusive content - This is huge to me. And I am going to score these sites higher than ones with no exclusive content. When you have a set group of models you like, exclusivity becomes #1 or #2 on your importance list. Quality - Here is a good one. We can't seem to agree on what is and what isn't HD in movies. I see 1,200 high end with a 2000+ bitrate as HD, while someone else may believe 1,200 high end with 4000+ bitrate is HD. It still means I am going to grade the videos as HD. Same with pictures, I am pretty satisfied with 1600 high end pictures, some want bigger than that, but I'm not taking points off a site for not going bigger than 1,600. If the pictures were 800, that would be a whole other story. Ease of Use - I will say that the easiest site for me to use is Teen Dreams. You find your favorite model, all of her sets are listed on one page and there is a zip icon and a movie icon. All you do it click it to download all the sets. Twistys also offers a similar zip icon download system, though the movies require a click to get to the screen to download. These little touches are nice, and these to me are very important in the scoring. When I can join a site that I don't have to put a lot of effort into to download the content, that is a major plus. On the other hand, those sites that make me download 5 different zips to get one set, ahem ATK, I'm taking points off. I get paid to work. And shouldn't have to work while paying for a site. Connectivity - To me this one isn't as important since I seem to connect to almost all sites at good speeds. Plus, I am not sitting at my computer waiting on the downloads to finish, so the time it takes to download isn't a big issue for me. Sites with more things than I need - This is one that I have talked with a couple of members about recently. I never use Flash movies, so if the site is hyping their great streaming Flash videos, it means nothing to me. I download about 90% of my collection while at work to an external hard drive, take the drive home and transfer the content to my main hard drives. As I joked a few months ago, I can see the day that I tell a client, "Excuse me, I have to watch this Flash streaming porn movie"! Most of all and I think this is one of the most confusing parts about Porn Users. We aren't TBP reviewers. I'm not for sure if the TBP reviewers receive a membership for a week to review a site or not, but either way, I'm a normal guy that has to pay the full price of a site, unless we get a TBP discount, so I'm not joining My Favorite Granny Trannies. See what I mean? If I write a review for a site, there is a very good chance that I am already familiar with the content before joining and at worst, would give it an average score. I did a little research of my reviews, I have 140 reviews, and out of those, I counted 1 site that I scored in the 50s and 1 that I scored in the 60s. If nothing else, that shows my unwillingness to part with my money to join a site that I might not like. The thing I look at the most in the scoring scale is at the end of each one, "Might recommend" is 70-79. I don't remember which member I told this to, but it was, "I have already been to most of the sites I review, before joining again, when I do the review. That means it was good enough for me to come back to a second time, so why wouldn't I recommend it?" My 70-79 sites are usually niche sites that I recommend to fans of the niche, but not to just general porn fans. Also, a 70-79 could be a particular solo model site that doesn't have a ton of content, but I recommend it to fans of that model. My 80-89 sites are generally very good sites that I would recommend to most anyone, and my 90-99 sites are sites that I don't think any porn fan should go without joining at least one time. Some of the members have different opinions of what these scores mean, and I think that is what makes the site Porn Users. I've read some reviews that score sites fairly low, In Focus Girls, comes to mind. I personally loved the site, all that exclusive glam content was great to me. I'm wrapping up here. Way back when PU first started, I remember talking to, I think Snow Dude and we talked about how the points shouldn't be debated, since that is the only thing about the review, that really is OUR opinion. What should be discussed is the facts, max pic size, max resolution of videos, because those are more misleading than a number on a 50-99 scale. Out of my 140 reviews, I honestly don't remember one time that I didn't have to go back and shorten it because it was over the character limit. Which is my advice for those just starting out, don't put a lot of weight in your scoring. For example, if I had never been on a porn site and someone rates Twistys a 75, that isn't going to stop me from joining it. I'm just going to figure they don't have the same taste in models than I have. Since I could see from the preview that they have dozens of models that I like. Just a thought as well to the longtime members. While my scores and Drooler's vary a great deal, we both post facts in the actual review that can lead you to join a site. We've also talked about the TBP scores, and how the PU reviewers rarely agree with the TBP reviewers. They review more on a quality/quanity/ease/ scale, where as we are more likely to grade by the actual content, namely the models. I will end by showing two examples in my reviews. I scored Eve Angel's solo site a 96 and Mya Diamond a 90. Both of those reviews are pretty old now, but at that time, both sites were updating daily, both sites were 100% exclusive, both had great picture resolution and very good video resolution/bitrates and the same low price of $15. So why the difference in scores? Because I prefer Eve Angel. Where as, I don't think the TBP reviewers would pick Eve's site as 6 points better just because they liked Eve. I scored Pix and Video a 92 and Club Sandy a 90. Both sites have the same quality content, same update schedule and same price, but I preferred Pix and Videos larger selection of models, where as someone who really likes Sandy, would probably prefer it. So to end, I think we all have to remember that we are trying not to be too partial, but we are also paying out of our pockets to join these sites. That alone shows partiality on our part. I hope that was at least pretty clear and will get some of the other members talking about their scoring criteria, and their understanding of the scoring system. I know we had a poll once that asked if we pay attention to the score or not. And hopefully this will explain that maybe you shouldn't pay as much attention to the score as you do the facts and the thoroughness of the review. Phew. I need a drink now! Or a secretary to type for me in a thigh high skirt and glasses. My first time I jacked off, I thought I'd invented it. I looked down at my sloppy handful of junk and thought, This is going to make me rich. - Chuck Palahniuk | |
|
||
| 07-26-08 11:20pm - 5992 days | #2 | |
|
badandy400 (0)
Active User  Posts: 869 Registered: Mar 02, '08 Location: ohio |
Exotics, great post here. You bring up a good amount of points that I have never considered before. It makes sense that I would join a site that I have interest in therefor I would be more likely to score it a bit higher. I would not join a site that has unshaven girls and if I did I am sure it would have a slightly biased score since I strongly prefer shaved. Fortunately though I look at the whole site before scoring because I have scored sites that are not my "thing" before. What has to be kept in mind is facts and did the site deliver what it promised. I can get pissed at a hairy site if it delivered all hairy girls, but I can get pissed at ALS if they show hairy girls! One of the biggest things I look at is ease of downloading. I do not want to spend a lot of time on a site trying to get the content ready to be downloaded. Videobox is extremely easy and and plays a huge role in my 100 score to them. The ability to use a manager is important since many of us do not want to site with the computer while it is simply downloading. ALS has awesome content and great media quality, but their site is a pain in the ass to get around and download and they lost a points over it. Rachel Aziani lost points because you have to sign in a lot and this screws up download managers. Reality Kings sites keep losing points over download limits. Important as well is how the files are named. Nothing is more annoying when a site has 20 videos that are all named "Full". That really tells me nothing about the video. Many sites I join now I end up at least partially renaming everything so that I have some sort of clue what it is a month later. For example, "Amy Reid - Red Dress" is much more informative and I might actually remember what it is. The niche it self is important as well. A nice looking teen is very easy to come by and does not make a site stand out. now for example, a nice looking pregnant teen that is slim and does not have stretch mark and yet is 8 month along and lactating is much hard to come by. A site with this content will score better that a site with exactly equal content of the girls look alike that is not pregnant simply because it can be found everywhere. But as Exotics said, you join what you like. It would make no sense for a straight man to join a gay site then give it a 50 because it had no women! As Exotics said, quality is important as well. I strongly prefer higher bitrate videos. Personally I do not concern about size. I can let my computer download 24/7 and I understand it is a compremise between quality and quantity. I would rather join a site with 100 4 MBit/s videos than a site with 1000 400 KBit/s videos just because the videos would be more pleasing given the same content. ALS, Rachel Aziani, FTV, and Videobox get points for great looking videos while Reality Kings and other continue to lose because of lower quality. One thing to keep in mind though is if a video is an hour long it can become rather large at high qualities, but again file size does not concern me. As for picture I agree almost completely on the pictures. Although, large is nice when you wish to zoom in. The biggest thing for pictures is to have Zips. Actually, well named zips for the same reasons as the same reasons as the videos. Another thing to be considered is the payment processing. We all have our preferred processors. I like ccbill for example, but someone else might hate them for whatever reason. Where this might not actually affect the score I give a site, it may deter me from joining a site simply because they use a payment I am not familiar with. I am great full the TBP has a search option based on payment. The size of the site is important at well. A small site is obviously worth less than a large one. But again, people may be less likely to join a smaller site unless it cover a particular niche in which case they are great full for any amount of content. A site with typical content but very little of it will score lower. Fellow reviewers are important as well. I like to be able to read a review by a trusted reviewer before joining top dollar sites. A site with one review of 100 will not stand out though, unless it is the review is accompanied by a wealth of detail and reasons supporting the score. Otherwise the review is worthless. The score eventually give is based on all of these factor and more. I am generally willing to forgive short comings in one of the areas so long as others are kept up. Also, I ask myself when scoring if the reason for a lower or higher score is simply because of something I myself am paranoid about or is it something that others will be concerned about as well. We all have our own preferences and i try to keep my personal preferences out of the score, but I will mention them in the review it self. I am not going to knock off 20 points for not have perfect names, but I will call it out if the names really suck. It really is based off of the big picture and little things do not have much affect on my scores until they enter the big picture and become a bug deal. Lastly, 100s are a touchy topic it seems like around here. A 100 site is not actually perfect, but is the best damn thing that user has found. A 100 has to be the site that a user would be willing to stay at indefinitely and be willing to say that no other site matches it. If they can do that and find no major issues with the site than a 100 is fine. That said, can a person give a 100 to two different sites? One would have to be better than the other in someway, thus making it slightly inferior to the other and thus deserving less than a 100. I know some users believe a 100 is impossible and to some degree they are right since no site could possibly please everyone and every site could be improved in some way. They are night too, no one is wrong. Point here is that sometimes the score do not even makes sense and it really is best to read a few reviews and decide for yourself, or just join the site and see for yourself. "For example, badandy400 has taken it upon himself to become the one man Library of Congress for porn with a collection that surely will be in Guinness Book of World Records some day." ~Toadsith~ PU Interview | |
|
||
| 07-27-08 02:34am - 5992 days | #3 | |
|
Drooler (0)
Disabled User  Posts: 1,831 Registered: Mar 11, '07 Location: USA |
Hey Exotics, I don't mind your discussing my scoring of sites here. I know that you and I differ by quite a wide margin on scoring sometimes, but I think it's only natural that different people will have different viewpoints and score accordingly. Scoring at PU is not like other situations where consistency or near-consistency in scoring among reviewers is necessary as proof of validity. Instead, I think it's important to include enough objective facts to help a potential subscriber make a decision about whether or not to join a site. The rest is going to be subjective. Even then, I try to be fair and imagine a user with a different point of view from mine, and I always use the scoring guidelines here at PU, but my score will be mine nonetheless. I don't usually take issue with another's score unless it seems really extreme -- way too high or low -- and then only in certain cases where there's reason enough to suspect that the user is in a conflict-of-interest situation (my euphemism for a shill, positive or negative). That's because I think there are intrinsic factors at work as well. It's possible that a user wants to achieve a presentation of self as "positive" overall and will score way up into the 90's. And the reverse can be true, too. One constant intrinsically motivating factor for me is to not mislead a user into thinking a site is better than it really is -- to that user. Even then, scoring sites as I think others would see them is not a guarantee. I've been given something of a trouncing for scoring HegreArt in the 90's and singing its praises. My critics just don't see the site the way I do. Should either they or I be at all surprised? I don't think it speaks well of them to be so reactive to the obvious truth that different people are going to see sites with different eyes. About the "obscure" sites, as you call them, that Denner and I have reviewed, I know you meant us as examples of long-time active users. Anyway, here's a point of information. Definining "obscure," as you did, as sites that have one review means the current 845 singly reviewed sites here out of a total of 1268. That's 66%. Some of them have been rather "obscure," I would agree. Sanja Matice's site sunmod comes to mind. Seems that most people here didn't pay much attention to it. And now it's gone for all practical purposes -- getting even more obscure by the day. It will shut down by the start of next month. The irony is that I (and probably Denner, too) pick these never-before-reviewed sites because we want to take them out of obscurity here, at least by a notch, so potential users who may wonder about them will have at least one review to make a decision from. And sometimes they're sites that have been in existence for years, like MishaOnline (which I first reviewed) and Czech Babes (first reviewed by you). It's nice that they're finally in the stream. In closing, I'd just like to say that one thing I like about PU is the overall civility of communication here. Sure, there have been a few times when things got nasty, and sometimes Drooler was on the scene, too, but it doesn't happen often. It's not like YouTube, where there you get called a "moron" or worse just for having a different opinion of something. Here, we can respectively disagree and discuss at length without devolving into hooligans. I wanted something new, so I left England for New England. Edited on Jul 27, 2008, 02:44am | |
|
||
| 07-27-08 03:33am - 5992 days | #4 | |
|
jr2375 (0)
Active User Posts: 21 Registered: Jul 23, '08 Location: North America |
Nice posts. There are certain things about user reviews that are exceedingly helpful. I tend to like to see what a user's experience has been with customer service. We all know that we each have different preferences of what we like to see for content; some list softcore content as a con, others a pro - it's obviously a matter of one's own preferences. However, it is useful to know how far a site's staff will go to remedy problems or assist users. A reviewer may hate a certain site's content, but had a glowing opinion of customer service. If it's content that I might like, those comments on customer service may make the sale. The customer service aspect is where I find user reviews exceedingly important, and not paying attention to them has bitten me in the ass. My suspicion is, although unproven, of course, is that official reviewers may be treated by site staff with kid gloves. After all, who wants to annoy someone you know is going to review your site to the masses? It's how they treat the average user that really counts. | |
|
||
| 07-27-08 07:23am - 5992 days | #5 | |
|
pat362 (0)
Active User  Posts: 3,575 Registered: Jan 23, '07 Location: canada |
I enjoy reading all the reviews on PU because unlike most other review sites, you get a good sampling of most of the available porn on the net. As well you get those less known sites that might otherwise never be reviewed. I agree with Drooler that the only time I have a problem with a review is when the score seems rather high or low or the information given is barely 2-3 lines long. I still read the review, but with a grain of salt added to it. I think the strenght of PU is that most, if not all of us are here to help others in choosing or avoiding sites. I hope that reviewers that bring those rare little gems that they've disovered to the light keep right on doing just that. Long live the Brown Coats. | |
|
||
| 07-27-08 11:23am - 5992 days | #6 | |
|
Monahan (0)
Active User  Posts: 348 Registered: Jan 17, '07 Location: SF Valley, CA |
This is very interesting. I've always viewed the "quality" element to be reflective of the content, not the technical aspects. A site that has super high definition photos or videos of fully clothed babes sipping on their Latte's when they advertise themselves as a porn site, or that has 500 HD pics, 400 of which are almost the same doesn't have the quality of content that I would expect. Twistys, to me, is a higher quality site than, say, its sister site Annette Dawn, for that reason. | |
|
||
| 07-27-08 01:11pm - 5992 days | #7 | |
|
Toadsith (0)
Active User  Posts: 936 Registered: Dec 07, '07 Location: USA |
The numeric score has been thorn in my side for as long as I've been reviewing sites here. I enjoy picking out all the little pros & cons, and writing the bottom line, though time consuming - I find it to be an art in efficiency - covering all the important topics while staying under the character limit. The part I dread, is that numeric score. This got me to thinking. For all intents and purposes this should be the quickest and easiest part of the review - two key strokes and I'm done. Yet sometimes I review will sit waiting for hours before I finally decide what to score. Then another user will call me on that score and I'll go through the whole rigmarole again. My final conclusion is this: A 50 to 100 score option with increments of 1 is 44 more options than I need. I'm also a member of Netflix - and while I don't bother writing up reviews because their character limit is ridiculous - I rate movies all the time. I've scored well over a 1000 movies with that site, and all because they have a 5-star rating system. It is blunt and easy. I don't have to decide why I might score Zatoichi as a 92 and Delicatessen as a 97 - both are a simple 5 stars and can I go along my way. So the solution I thought I might implement - though I haven't as yet - is to treat the scoring system here in the same manner. A 50 equals no stars. A 60 equals one star, and so on until 99. As long as the numeric score stays in place, I will not score a 100 - 99 is my Mary Poppins score and in my opinion that is high as it gets. I have never come across a site with no flaws and no room for improvement. People see this opinion as cynical, but in reality it is hopeful. Hopeful in the manner of always seeing room for progress and never content with the status quo. I returned to VideoBox again recently and must admit they are dangerously close to perfection - their streaming video with the film ribbon of screen caps indicating content at various times is genius. The site has massive amounts of content and a good search system - but still, there is room for improvement. They should expand their niches, their model searching isn't perfect and their streaming video still doesn't look quite as good as DVD quality (though the technology exists - see Hulu). Compared to many sites, they might seem like perfection - but the reality is that every site has its blemish and I believe it is our duty as reviewers to remind them of that blemish. If we stop giving sites a kick in the pants when they fall down, they'll just relax in the mud and progress will grind to a halt. It might take a damn long while for that to happen - but the basic points are that critics are a necessary evil. So it remains a symbolic gesture on my part to never give a 100 - but it also stands that I don't believe I'm doing my job if I can't find a blemish in the site. It is there, it is always there - if you haven't found it, you haven't searched hard enough. Let us return to the original topic though. Having even 10 choices for scoring can be difficult - upwards of 50 is mind-numbing. Sure, you can take into account many of the different factors and try to weigh and balance the site accordingly. I myself always check for about 30 different specs while reviewing a site. For me it is this vastness of choice that makes the score so difficult. There are too many factors and too many options. Consequently, I think the scoring debate will continue ad nauseum as long as we have that much choice. One of these days I do plan on switch my scores over to my 6 option system for simplicity's sake. Undoubtedly this will annoy a few, but I find most people ignore the numeric score anyway - so perhaps I'll stop avoiding writing reviews if I can avoid the numeric score thusly. "I'm not a number, I'm a free man!" Second Grand Order Poobah in the Loyal Order of the Water Buffalo | |
|
||
| 07-27-08 08:12pm - 5991 days | #8 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User  Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
x Edited on Apr 19, 2023, 01:53pm | |
|
||
| 07-28-08 02:56am - 5991 days | #9 | |
|
Drooler (0)
Disabled User Posts: 1,831 Registered: Mar 11, '07 Location: USA |
Well, said, Toadsith. Criticism does not necessarily equal negativism. If there were no hope, why would we bother to criticize a site other than to warn other users of its flaws? And there have been hopes fulfilled, from webmasters who have responded positively to criticisms made here at PU and went to work to make their sites better. So when people here rate really high, I think they're excited newbies, "nice people," users whose brains are mometarily drenched in serotonin, or shills. I wanted something new, so I left England for New England. | |
|
||
| 07-28-08 02:43pm - 5991 days | #10 | |
|
turboshaft (0)
Active User Posts: 1,958 Registered: Apr 01, '08 |
This is a problem with me as well, though I don't spend hours trying to decide I still spend way too long on two digits that may have very little impact on those who read all of a review. I am a Netflix member too and their five star system is great for quick and easy scoring though I still end up reading some reviews and writing a few myself. Granted it seems a lot easier to find people simply being offended by certain films rather than trying to give a more objective review like the ones here. I have only reviewed a few sites so far and most of those I have given pretty high scores, but I have sites like PornUsers to thank for it. The more I learn about a site before ever paying a cent the more I usually end up only joining what I like and eventually giving a good review. The fact is I don't want to pay for something too low quality or too far out of range of what I enjoy. A good example would be something like Hegre Art, or possibly Met Art; I have read some very favorable reviews here and they look like good sites with quality content but they are probably too glamorous for me. I am just using these as examples, I am not saying they are bad sites but I probably wouldn't be interested enough to ever join, and therefore will probably never review them. I am sure we have all been disappointed by porn, even if we didn't pay for it, but particularly let down when we did. This sucks because we feel like we wasted our money but it also helps to warn potential users about sites they should avoid, or at least reconsider before joining. I find it helps to learn about what a user prefers to really understand his or her score and review. If someone is really into girl-girl then I might expect a somewhat honest review if a site is totally lacking in girl-girl content, but I would also expect some bias towards girl-girl themed sites in general. For me a site like ALSScan is easily my favorite. I have been a fan and frequent member for a long time and so I when I finally wrote a review I gave it a very high score (97) and probably won't change it anytime soon. I love this site, but I also understand that their content may not be for everyone so I tried to mention the stuff -- like all the pissing and speculum scenes they do -- that many members wouldn't want to pay for. I think it's important no matter how good or bad a site is, or how much you love/hate it, to make a note of what kind of content they are really offering and how they are offering it. Is a site only videos or just photos? Is a site all-girl? Does it only offer exclusive content, and is it all archived? There are many other important things to consider but generally users shouldn't be in the dark after reading a review. This why I don't like super short "I hate this site! It's the worse ever!" or "Oh yeah, this rocks!" reviews that tell you more about the reviewers' emotional states than what they are reviewing. Maybe it would be best to score sites in ranges rather than exact numbers, since a one or two point difference really doesn't say much. The five star system is probably too simplistic, but maybe giving a site an "80s" instead of an 83 or 84, or "90s" instead of 96 or 97 is as adequate as the current system. Like everyone else has pretty much said it really is the review, not the score that judges the site, so I don't think it is too much of a problem anyways. "It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hardcore Commie works." - Gen. Jack D. Rippper, Dr. Stranglove | |
|
||
| 07-28-08 06:33pm - 5990 days | #11 | |
|
WeeWillyWinky (0)
Active User  Posts: 243 Registered: Jun 03, '07 Location: Havasu City, AZ USA |
I'm like Toasdith: the score is sometimes the hardest part of the review, since adult media is catering to the highly subjective tastes of individuals. One man's treasure could easily be another man's junk, and often is. Objectivity is important. For example, I would give VideoBox a high ninetees score even though I can't watch 90 percent of the material on offer there. The site does what it does extremely well, and at budget price. The fact that I don't care for hardcore porn is my problem, not theirs. This is the essence of objectivity. The only reason I haven't done a review of VideoBox is because I don't have anything to say about it that hasn't already been said fify times. My score would most likely be around 96. I mostly try to adhere to the criteria set down by TBP, but you still have a ten-point range at each particular level, which invites a lot of caprice and randomness but which can also indicate significant differences within each level. For instance, an 89 is decidedly more recommended than an 80. An 89 suggests that the site is right on the cusp of being the best in its class, but that there is something fairly crucial which keeps it from getting that one extra point. As examples, I gave LV Panty and College Uniform both an 89, because I thought they were both outstanding sites within their niche, had plenty of material, and because they were both primarily picture sites and offered very high quality pictures. What kept them both from getting a 90 or higher was the fact that their video sections did not match the quality of their photos, in fact no where near it. If these sites had opted to exist as picture sites only they would have both gotten a 90 or higher. LV Panty would have gotten over a 95. It was the existence of a sub-par vid section which drew the score down. As an opposite example, I gave Panty Amateur a 95 because the videos there are top-notch, there are tons of them, and they do not stray from the niche they put themselves in. If they opted to include a picture section and the pics were sub-par, too few, too small, or in some way lacking, the score would have dropped below 90. Sites in the ninetees are outstanding sites which remain outstanding despite cons. I don't think a certain mumber of cons ought to detract much from a site's score if they are negligible in comparison to the pros. In the Crack has an annoying piss-fetish, often disorienting camera angles, and a lack of variety, but because the pics and vids are both of outstanding physical quality, and because there is a lot of material to go through, I couldn't see any reason to let the cons dag down the score too far. The ATK sites have several problems such as lack of organization in regard to vids, smallish pics until recently, and multi-part zip downloads, but because of the enormous amount of material, exhaustive search functions, a plethora of photogs, plus thousands of models from ugly to splendid, a score below 90 didn't seem reasonable to me: except for Premium, and this was mainly because they sell that site as "premium" and very often the material is less than that. If you're going to call yourself "premium" be premium, in every area. Sites that score in the low to mid eightees, from my point of view, are those which offer quantity and quality in equal measures which is above average yet not close to being the best in class in regard to either. Anything under an 80, I determined that there was something keeping the site from being above average. A lot of times, as in the Teen Stars/Teen Charms sites, the problem was dishonesty: selling dead archives without indicating to the buyer that there will be no further updates. Or there might be a dreadful lack of organization, despite loads of quality content, as in Club Seventeen. There could be any number of factors contributing to this merely-average score-range, and such factors ought to be brought to light in the review. If a site gets a score below 70, then there were some major problems which resulted in a decidedly below-average score. Full Bush was not only a site using old and borrowed sets as updates, somethimes as much as four years old, the browse features were non-existent, the photo quality was sub-par, and the videos were also sub-par. Anything below 70 means, DO NOT spend your money here. Not exactly a scam or a rip-off, but definitely NOT recommended. Rip-offs and scams should get a 50, or no score at all, plus an official warning from TBP. ** sorry for switching tenses all the time. I have this nasty habit in spades. You know what I hate the most about selfish people? It's that they don't think enough about MEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!! | |
|
||
| 07-28-08 07:28pm - 5990 days | #12 | |
|
Goldfish (0)
Active User  Posts: 265 Registered: Jan 19, '08 Location: Boston, MA |
On the topic of the numeric rating system my philosophy is the rating should be how I feel about the site overall according to what I like and how much I enjoyed it. My rating is totally subjective. Though this may seem a bit selfish it's really not. When I'm reading reviews I try to get a sense of what the reviewers like. If I see they share the same preferences in porn sites I know a high rating from them on a site I haven't visited is a good bet. Conversely if I know the reviewer does not have the same preferences, a high review may indicate this site is not my cup of tea. In the pros and cons I tend to be a bit more objective. I point out facts and features of the site along with performance, content quality, etc.. | |
|
||
| 07-29-08 08:43pm - 5989 days | #13 | |
|
exotics4me (0)
Active User Posts: 664 Registered: Jan 12, '07 Location: USA |
Nice job you all. I didn't know how well this thread would go over, but it looks like there was a lot of interest in this topic. There is no way that I can go through and reply to each, time and my wife won't understand, and it is almost college football season. One thing Drooler, that was probably a misused word by me. As a trilingual person, I sometime gets my sentences and usage out of whack. Mainly what I was saying by using the word, "Obscure" was the less mainstream sites, like those you mentioned. Where as, my out of the mainstream sites are just a handful or so. I'm glad you and Denner both join those sites since I wouldn't have even heard of most of those. And see, that then asks what is mainstream? So, I'm going to say the sites that the average porn fan has never heard of. I feel similar to Toadsith when giving a score. I used to review a lot of products on Amazon.com, and they to only have the 5 stars to work with, with no half stars. The way I look at my reviews, with 2 under 70, 138 over 70, it is almost like I have reduced my scoring scale to 70-100, which if you notice, my average rating is 84.7, or right in the middle of those numbers. On monahan's reply, I usually consider the quality to be the technical aspects. For example a site advertises HD Quality video. But I have ran into the same thing you are talking about where I end up saying something like this, "The pictures though technically not high resolution are high quality, nice colors and settings." This is why I wouldn't be a paid reviewer! Unless of course, I could meet Eve Angel, then I would do it for free. Thanks for the replies you all. My first time I jacked off, I thought I'd invented it. I looked down at my sloppy handful of junk and thought, This is going to make me rich. - Chuck Palahniuk | |
|
||
| 07-29-08 09:16pm - 5989 days | #14 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
x Edited on Apr 19, 2023, 01:53pm | |
|
||
| 07-29-08 09:42pm - 5989 days | #15 | |
|
Drooler (0)
Disabled User Posts: 1,831 Registered: Mar 11, '07 Location: USA |
Oh, OK. Maybe Spanish or Italian? And while the usage might seem "out of whack," it's also a good thing because sometimes you can say things that are interesting in ways a pure "English only" person wouldn't think of. I wanted something new, so I left England for New England. | |
|
||
| 07-29-08 11:15pm - 5989 days | #16 | |
|
Toadsith (0)
Active User Posts: 936 Registered: Dec 07, '07 Location: USA |
Is obscure really that obscure of a word? I know we all dabble in the fine art of Logorrhea occasionally but I just never thought obscure would garner so much attention as a word. Perhaps I'm being persnickety myself; I'll just scuttle back to my haunt and discontinue my interruption of the etymological foray. "I'm not a number, I'm a free man!" Second Grand Order Poobah in the Loyal Order of the Water Buffalo | |
|
||
| 07-30-08 12:10am - 5989 days | #17 | |
|
exotics4me (0)
Active User Posts: 664 Registered: Jan 12, '07 Location: USA |
If it is okay to post a college football thread, I would be glad to. My first time I jacked off, I thought I'd invented it. I looked down at my sloppy handful of junk and thought, This is going to make me rich. - Chuck Palahniuk Edited on Jul 30, 2008, 12:45am | |
|
||
| 07-30-08 12:18am - 5989 days | #18 | |
|
exotics4me (0)
Active User Posts: 664 Registered: Jan 12, '07 Location: USA |
I prefer Spanish, you will notice that some of my sentences end up with the noun at the end, verb at the beginning. My wife speaks Spanish/English, but at home, she mostly speaks Spanish. Similar to what Toadsith is saying, when I first said "obscure" I was thinking of the very literal meaning, but shouldn't have said, "Sites with no reviews" since that is where the screw up on my part came into play. Like the site you just reviewed, I had never heard of it either, but am going to check it out. I really liked the one Denner reviewed, "My 18 Teens", but had never heard of it. My first time I jacked off, I thought I'd invented it. I looked down at my sloppy handful of junk and thought, This is going to make me rich. - Chuck Palahniuk | |
|
||
| 07-30-08 05:19am - 5989 days | #19 | |
|
Khan (0)
Suspended  Posts: 1,737 Registered: Jan 05, '07 Location: USA |
Sure it is. We'd just ask that you make it a new thread. Former PornUsers Senior Administrator Now at: MyPorn.com "To get your ideas across use small words, big ideas, and short sentences."-John Henry Patterson | |
|
||
| 07-30-08 01:35pm - 5989 days | #20 | |
|
Drooler (0)
Disabled User Posts: 1,831 Registered: Mar 11, '07 Location: USA |
I think it's a very fine line sometimes, what is obscure vs. what has simply not yet been reviewed, and I think that applies to the site I've just reviewed, Radiant Nude, which has until now lived in PU obscurity. Kind of a metaphorically challenged little web site it is, given the name. I wanted something new, so I left England for New England. | |
|
||
| 1-20 of 20 Posts | Page 1 |
| Thread Nav : Refresh Page | First Post | Last Post | Porn Forum Home |
|
