|
|||||
|
| Porn Users Forum » User Ranks » User Post History |
Post History:
asmith12 (0)
|
| 51-79 of 79 Posts | < Previous Page | 1 | Page 2 |
| 10-07-08 04:39pm - 5920 days | #3 | |
|
asmith12 (0)
Active User Posts: 79 Registered: Oct 17, '07 |
It's an attempt to charge more because you don't live in US. If I understand it correctly, normally it's IP-based. BTW, did anybody try to use anonymizer service (like anonymizer.com) to bypass it? With differences of $15+ per subscription, yearly cost of such service can be returned in savings from just two site subscriptions (and maybe there free alternatives, I don't know). Just an idea, not sure if it will work. Motto: "All niches except for boring one!" | |
|
||
| 10-01-08 08:48am - 5926 days | #3 | |
|
asmith12 (0)
Active User Posts: 79 Registered: Oct 17, '07 |
As I understand (and it was mentioned by webmasters) it is an OPTION which Epoch provides to them, so it is their choice. Also even if this would be Epoch without any choice for webmaster, webmasters can always complain to Epoch or switch to CCBill. At this point I'm still pretty sure that lowering rating is a right thing to do, I'm just not sure how big this "penalty" shall be. Motto: "All niches except for boring one!" | |
|
||
| 10-01-08 05:55am - 5926 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
asmith12 (0)
Active User Posts: 79 Registered: Oct 17, '07 |
I'm REALLY sick and tired of all the PRE-CHECKED upsells arising recently all over the place, and want to propose a way which MIGHT help at least a bit. The idea is that reviewers when notice it on the site, shall put it PROMINENTLY on the review AND deduct some number of points off the rating just because of it, also CLEARLY stating that points were deducted for PRE-CHECKED upsell on "join" page. While it won't prevent sites from doing it, they will get less exposure and it MIGHT be a factor help them to come to the right decision. On the other hand, fellow porn lovers will have less chance to run into such sites. What do you guys and girls think? If you like the idea, how much would you suggest to deduct (personally I think that 10 points shall be an appropriate number). Motto: "All niches except for boring one!" | |
|
||
| 09-18-08 01:50pm - 5939 days | #5 | |
|
asmith12 (0)
Active User Posts: 79 Registered: Oct 17, '07 |
Suggestion for PU: what if you'll add a kind of "vote" to each site so members will be able to say "I would appreciate review of this site"? Plus obviously a ranking of top voted unreviewed sites? IMHO it would help to see which reviews are most needed, and maybe some of Big Reviewers will take it into account when choosing the next site for review. And for "votes" I see 2 options how to do it: Option 1. to give everybody ability to cast one vote per site. Option 2. to give everybody certain predefined number of votes, and ANY number out of these can be cast for ANY site (say, if everybody will get 20 votes total, he can cast them for 20 sites one vote per site, or all 20 for one site). Motto: "All niches except for boring one!" | |
|
||
| 09-18-08 01:43pm - 5939 days | #14 | |
|
asmith12 (0)
Active User Posts: 79 Registered: Oct 17, '07 |
There is no really need to say "thanks", because I did it not to make you happy, but to make my conscience happy :-). I'm a selfish guy after all (who isn't? :-) ). Motto: "All niches except for boring one!" | |
|
||
| 09-17-08 06:46am - 5940 days | #19 | |
|
asmith12 (0)
Active User Posts: 79 Registered: Oct 17, '07 |
Isn't it even WORSE from safety point of view to put all the data into some database which can be corrupted itself at least just as easily (I don't remember when it was last time filesystem which I worked with got corrupted, but 3rd-party application databases get corrupted on frighteningly regular basis)? And to make it even worse, to put it into some software which is new, untested and can disappear in a few months? Personally I would NOT touch such a thing exactly because of risks of losing of all my precious data, at least not before I make a full backup (but if I have full backup anyway, why would I care about filesystem corruption?). With all due respect to innovation, I would VERY MUCH prefer to have it stored in COMMON formats and be viewable by ANY application; database with indexes/search is fine, as long as it exists "in addition" to these common formats. Motto: "All niches except for boring one!" | |
|
||
| 09-17-08 06:32am - 5940 days | #75 | ||
|
asmith12 (0)
Active User Posts: 79 Registered: Oct 17, '07 |
I'm not disputing this (and never did). But my ranting wasn't about this statement (which is fairly obvious), my ranting was about the "right" of somebody to see your (mine, whoever else) reviews as "boring" or "the same", and tell it on PU without replies like "nothing but bullshit", that's it. As a side note - personally I don't think that your reviews are "the same", but (referring to famous Voltaire's quote) I'm defending right of williamj to say it.
Can't help but recall of Lewis Carroll here :-). Motto: "All niches except for boring one!" | ||
|
|||
| 09-17-08 06:11am - 5940 days | #11 | ||
|
asmith12 (0)
Active User Posts: 79 Registered: Oct 17, '07 |
Yes, it is (didn't you recognize yourself in "an obviously honest guy who I disagree with and therefore personally I won't trust his ratings much"? :-) ). With all the recent events I've got not so easy feeling about this no-trust rating, and decided to see how community thinks such situations shall be handled. From this discussion it looks that most people think that no-trust is mostly for obvious shills and alike, and another thing which was mentioned is that it is more about trusting INFORMATION, not trusting RATINGS. So I'll change it right away.
I know, and appreciate it, thanks. Motto: "All niches except for boring one!" | ||
|
|||
| 09-16-08 12:49pm - 5941 days | #69 | |
|
asmith12 (0)
Active User Posts: 79 Registered: Oct 17, '07 |
But if looking at it from this perspective, don't you feel that there is no one single "proper" judgement? Some people will think (and tell) one thing about your reviews, some other will think and tell something different, so who's a "proper" judge for them? As all the people have personal and subjective opinions, my own (personal and subjective) answer to this questions is the following: there is no such "proper" universal judge "for everybody", everybody shall judge for himself. Motto: "All niches except for boring one!" | |
|
||
| 09-16-08 10:46am - 5941 days | #26 | |
|
asmith12 (0)
Active User Posts: 79 Registered: Oct 17, '07 |
Ditto. Motto: "All niches except for boring one!" | |
|
||
| 09-16-08 10:40am - 5941 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
asmith12 (0)
Active User Posts: 79 Registered: Oct 17, '07 |
Is there an agreement what exactly it shall mean? Is it only reserved for outright shills? Or it's ok to say that I distrust somebody just because I think he's using "wrong" criteria for the review? Or even further - because I don't agree with his likes and dislikes (I've seen somebody telling in distrust comment that he doesn't share obsession with big boobs or something like that)? In other words - if there is an obviously honest guy who I disagree with and therefore personally I won't trust his ratings much, what shall I do? Motto: "All niches except for boring one!" | |
|
||
| 09-16-08 10:34am - 5941 days | #64 | ||
|
asmith12 (0)
Active User Posts: 79 Registered: Oct 17, '07 |
Hat off to you. I'm not sure if I would be able to do it in your place, but I'm pretty sure it's the right thing to do. Nonwithstanding :-) ...
You have your own opinion, he has his own opinion, I agree with you, somebody else agrees with him, it's all about different people having different opinions, isn't it? All such "read the same" comments shall be read as "read the same to the person who's writing it", and IMHO that's his right to read it "the same". Motto: "All niches except for boring one!" | ||
|
|||
| 09-15-08 03:25pm - 5942 days | #8 | |
|
asmith12 (0)
Active User Posts: 79 Registered: Oct 17, '07 |
Thanks a lot. Motto: "All niches except for boring one!" | |
|
||
| 09-14-08 08:48am - 5943 days | #53 | |
|
asmith12 (0)
Active User Posts: 79 Registered: Oct 17, '07 |
That's exactly what I've meant (I've never meant to ask PU administrators to revoke users' ratings, sorry if I was unclear). Motto: "All niches except for boring one!" | |
|
||
| 09-14-08 08:24am - 5943 days | #5 | |
|
asmith12 (0)
Active User Posts: 79 Registered: Oct 17, '07 |
Thanks. BTW, I'm still wondering why you've decided that it's free site (except for amateurish design). Personally I wasn't able to get any free stuff there (besides thumbnails of updates which is a standard for paysites these days), so maybe you can advise me how to get some free stuff? :-) Motto: "All niches except for boring one!" | |
|
||
| 09-14-08 08:10am - 5943 days | #3 | ||
|
asmith12 (0)
Active User Posts: 79 Registered: Oct 17, '07 |
That's ok, but when I click on some video there, I get to the following page, pointing to ccbill: http://www.zenra.net/join.htm I think it qualifies as a paysite, doesn't it?
Thanks, will try to do it this way next time. Motto: "All niches except for boring one!" | ||
|
|||
| 09-14-08 07:57am - 5943 days | #25 | |||
|
asmith12 (0)
Active User Posts: 79 Registered: Oct 17, '07 |
Just run into this reply of yours, sorry that answering that late :-).
Correction: I don't defend it or attack it (what's the use?). I'm just trying to understand mechanics and based on it predict how it will be.
Maybe, but only as a temporary measure, as they can easily enforce this for all new contracts, and in just a few years majority will start paying :-(.
I've just meant that something which looks "universal" from customer perspective is not really universal at all, and as such can change quite easily. Motto: "All niches except for boring one!" | |||
|
||||
| 09-14-08 07:44am - 5943 days | #51 | |
|
asmith12 (0)
Active User Posts: 79 Registered: Oct 17, '07 |
Wow, so the government pays for porn with one hand while trying to prohibit it with the other? It's an interesting twist :-). Motto: "All niches except for boring one!" | |
|
||
| 09-14-08 07:39am - 5943 days | #50 | |
|
asmith12 (0)
Active User Posts: 79 Registered: Oct 17, '07 |
BTW, guys, what about revoking mistrust reviews which resulted from this thread (from both sides)? If I get it correctly, trust rating shall be about trusting reviews, not posts on forums. Clarification: I didn't mean to ask PU administrators to do it, I've meant to ask williamj , Drooler, roseman, badandy to revoke their negative trust comments as long as they're based on this thread only, not on reviews. Motto: "All niches except for boring one!" Edited on Sep 14, 2008, 08:51am (asmith12: Clarification added) | |
|
||
| 09-14-08 07:27am - 5943 days | #49 | |
|
asmith12 (0)
Active User Posts: 79 Registered: Oct 17, '07 |
You shall consider several things: 1. About membership fees. Most of such "mass" reviews are made within the same network, so per/site cost is minimal. 2. It is common for somebody to write review on his "past" sites soon after joining. So 10-20 reviews are fairly common in the first month or so. Doesn't apply to top reviewers, but can easily explain 5 sites in a week for the others. 3. Most of the sites are indeed very similar. That's not a PU problem, but problem of adult industry as a whole. And if writing a review for not so unique site, it will be inevitably close to the other reviews of similar sites. P.S. Just curious - do you count me personally among those guys who's reviews fall into "A lot of nothing" category? Motto: "All niches except for boring one!" | |
|
||
| 09-14-08 07:05am - 5943 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
asmith12 (0)
Active User Posts: 79 Registered: Oct 17, '07 |
I don't think zenra.net is listed on TBP/PU, but maybe I've looked in the wrong place? Or TBP has reasons not to list it? Any info will be appreciated. Motto: "All niches except for boring one!" Edited by Staff on Sep 15, 2008, 07:45am (Khan: Corrected URL) | |
|
||
| 09-14-08 07:02am - 5943 days | #3 | |
|
asmith12 (0)
Active User Posts: 79 Registered: Oct 17, '07 |
What if we'll follow concept that as it is ok "if and only if" it is between consenting adults? Then child porn will be banned for obvious reasons, and bestiality will be a borderline case. Yes, it will open things that most (myself included) consider really disgusting, like coprophagia, but on the other hand why should government care as long as nobody's hurt? In other words, allowing some community (myself included) to enforce it's own moral views can (and as history shows, usually will) lead to horrible things. As Voltaire have said: "I do not agree with a word that you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it", so yes, I don't agree with coprophagia, but I will defend right of those who think it's the way to live, to say it (reserving the right to criticize them, but not prohibiting them to say it). Motto: "All niches except for boring one!" | |
|
||
| 07-11-08 03:34pm - 6008 days | #7 | |
|
asmith12 (0)
Active User Posts: 79 Registered: Oct 17, '07 |
I'm with you on it, let me know if you can find something (I'm glad that there is somebody here who don't share "this is Japanese law" vision - why should we care about Japanese laws outside of Japan?). Motto: "All niches except for boring one!" | |
|
||
| 06-27-08 01:45pm - 6022 days | #35 | |
|
asmith12 (0)
Active User Posts: 79 Registered: Oct 17, '07 |
Wait. Wikipedia ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extreme_pornography ) gives a bit different description, which looks much less restrictive, it says: -------------- * (a) an act which threatens a person's life, * (b) an act which results, or is likely to result, in serious injury to a person's anus, breasts or genitals, * (c) an act which involves or appears to involve sexual interference with a human corpse, * (d) a person performing or appearing to perform an act of intercourse or oral sex with an animal (whether dead or alive), and a reasonable person looking at the image would think that any such person or animal was real. -------------- While it's still definitely a BAD THING to introduce things which border with "thought-police", it looks that IF it's worded the way stated in Wiki it will affect MUCH less people (among other things, kink.com sites won't be affected). Does anybody has an idea how it is worded in reality? Motto: "All niches except for boring one!" | |
|
||
| 06-27-08 05:19am - 6022 days | #14 | |
|
asmith12 (0)
Active User Posts: 79 Registered: Oct 17, '07 |
On the second thought, I was wrong, and there is still one more step ahead in that direction: the next thing coming will be to put me to jail because jury in SOME county decides that my post defending Max is disgusting too. It's not going to happen any time soon, but current trend looks way too dangerous. The line between going to prison for making video which SOMEBODY doesn't like and for writing something which SOMEBODY (or even majority) doesn't like is VERY thin. Motto: "All niches except for boring one!" | |
|
||
| 06-26-08 03:26pm - 6023 days | #12 | |
|
asmith12 (0)
Active User Posts: 79 Registered: Oct 17, '07 |
As Voltaire have reportedly said: "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it". And it's exactly "right to say", not something else: Max was prosecuted NOT for DOING something wrong, but exactly for SAYING (showing) it in the way SOMEBODY considers disgusting. When I don't like what Max (or whoever else) is saying, I won't visit his site. Or I can rate his site low here at PU. Or I can start discussing here how disgusting his movies are. All of those are reasonable reactions to somebody SAYING something. But to put somebody to jail just for SAYING something is as far from democratic ideals as it can possibly be. Motto: "All niches except for boring one!" | |
|
||
| 06-20-08 07:33am - 6029 days | #13 | |
|
asmith12 (0)
Active User Posts: 79 Registered: Oct 17, '07 |
I think that it's a pretty big chance it will be there. The reason is simple: ISPs are looking a way to increase their profits, and eventually they came out with quite an obvious question: "we're ok when "some Grandmother" who uses 1M/month paying $30, it makes us a lot of money, but why we can't charge more from the guy who uses 1000G/month?" And personally I would even pay them more if it would reduce oversubscribing and provide promised 15MBit/s all the time (which obviously isn't going to happen). And for those who says "we'll come back to DSL": if it will become "industry practice", DSLs will likely follow the suit (they just won't be able to pay for all the traffic if ALL high-volume users will switch there). And IMHO it has quite good chance to become "industry practice" especially if ISPs will drop prices for "some Grandmother" a bit (face it: number of high-volumers is very low compared to number of "some Grandmothers", so it is Grandmothers where the next wave of price wars will be concentrated on). PS Did you know than in Europe they're still paying fees per minute of LOCAL phone call and nobody's complaining? Motto: "All niches except for boring one!" | |
|
||
| 05-20-08 07:24am - 6060 days | #11 | |
|
asmith12 (0)
Active User Posts: 79 Registered: Oct 17, '07 |
My 2 cents. Whoever thinks she's doing it for money only: IMHO it could be, but I strongly prefer to give her benefit of doubt. Is there a chance that this site is honest? IMHO yes, and it means (for me personally) that I will consider it honest and take it with respect until proved otherwise (and if she'll start making money out of it, that will be completely different story). Motto: "All niches except for boring one!" | |
|
||
| 04-17-08 08:06am - 6093 days | #26 | |
|
asmith12 (0)
Active User Posts: 79 Registered: Oct 17, '07 |
SickoGames tried to do similar thing once (they even were originally named FearFactorFuck), but it was WAY too disgusting IMHO. Motto: "All niches except for boring one!" | |
|
||
| 51-79 of 79 Posts | < Previous Page | 1 | Page 2 |
|
