|
|||||
|
| Porn Users Forum » User Ranks » User Post History |
Post History:
Monahan (0)
|
| 1-12 of 12 Posts | Page 1 |
| 06-22-18 05:33pm - 2374 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
Monahan (0)
Active User  Posts: 348 Registered: Jan 17, '07 Location: SF Valley, CA |
I have been trying to vote in the PU polls but my vote doesn't record. What am I doing wrong? | |
|
||
| 02-19-16 10:25am - 3229 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
Monahan (0)
Active User Posts: 348 Registered: Jan 17, '07 Location: SF Valley, CA |
California stops rule for condoms for porn productions. Believe it or not, protective eyewear was also part of the regulation. Here's a link to the article in today's paper: http://www.dailynews.com/social-affairs/20160218/porn-industry-wins-battle-against-california-regulators-over-condoms-eyewear-on-film-shoots | |
|
||
| 11-05-11 01:38pm - 4795 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
Monahan (0)
Active User Posts: 348 Registered: Jan 17, '07 Location: SF Valley, CA |
I don't know how to communicate apparently inactive sites to TBP/PU management so I'm starting this thread. MFLGirls.com appears to be out of business. | |
|
||
| 11-08-10 08:58am - 5158 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
Monahan (0)
Active User Posts: 348 Registered: Jan 17, '07 Location: SF Valley, CA |
I've had a lingering question that maybe someone here can answer. Most of the top models in porn have created "stage names" for themselves and those names are what we horndogs use to search for new content. My problem is with those sites that use common single first names for ladies who have already created their reputation, which make them hard to locate. Met Art and Young Busty are two sites that do that, but I am unable to understand why. It would seem to me that staying with the "official" name would be more advantageous than creating some alternative name. Can anyone tell me what the thinking behind this is? | |
|
||
| 04-03-09 06:12pm - 5741 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
Monahan (0)
Active User Posts: 348 Registered: Jan 17, '07 Location: SF Valley, CA |
OK, guys, start downloading whatever you can. UpChuck Schumer promised this would happen if Obama was elected when he was on the stump during the Presidential Campaign that fall. Now it looks like it's just a matter of time when our access to the Internet will be limited to whatever the Obama Administration decides we should have.
| |
|
||
| 12-25-08 09:33am - 5841 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
Monahan (0)
Active User Posts: 348 Registered: Jan 17, '07 Location: SF Valley, CA |
This is scary and could easily be the first step to some form of Big Brother oversight of internet porn. Associated Press Published: December 25, 2008 Australia considers "Great Aussie Firewall" SYDNEY, Australia (AP) - Australia is considering an Internet filter that could be one of the strictest among democratic countries. What's being called the "Great Aussie Firewall" would block at least 1,300 Web sites prohibited by the government. The sites in question mostly contain child pornography, excessive violence, instructions in crime or drug use and advocacy of terrorism. The government is not making public the list of prohibited sites. Hundreds protested in state capitals in Australia earlier this month, and critics include consumers, engineers, Internet providers and politicians from opposing parties. A lab test of six filters found they missed 3 to 12 percent of material they should have blocked and wrongly blocked access to 1 to 8 percent of sites. The most accurate filters slowed browsing speeds up to 86 percent. | |
|
||
| 10-17-08 10:43am - 5910 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
Monahan (0)
Active User Posts: 348 Registered: Jan 17, '07 Location: SF Valley, CA |
There have been a few polls on this subject but I'm curious what strategies other have in deciding to join a site from a pricing standpoint. After finding good sites using the reviews on PU and checking out the preview material, and if the biller is either CCBill or Epoch (PayComm), I then look at price. It's my observation that any site that's worth a shit will ask for $19.95 or more but once in a while a small, single model site will go for less. My personal max for a single site is $29.95 on the basis that there are a ton of good sites (I have over 70 in "My Favorites") that are priced at, or below, $29.95 and see no reason to spend more than that even for a totally outstanding site. My budget is set at $90 a month 3 (sites X $29.95). I have found that many (most?) sites offer "stick around" discounts so I now have one site at $5.95 a month, 2 at $9.95 a month, one at $14.95 and one at $19.95, all of which started at $29.95 a month. That lets me join one additional site each month at $29.95 and stay within budget. The strategy causes me to have some sites that I go to only once in a while but there is enough good stuff that I'll hold onto the great price. I've signed up for multiple months on some sites when the 3 or 6 month price is really good, but only after I've signed up for a month to check it out thoroughly. I adjust my budget accordingly. I'm curious what other members do in this regard. How do you factor pricing into your decision process? | |
|
||
| 10-12-08 10:21am - 5915 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
Monahan (0)
Active User Posts: 348 Registered: Jan 17, '07 Location: SF Valley, CA |
The new, just released, version (ver. 9.4) of the VLC alternative to WMP from VideoLan offers a neat snapshot feature that is instantaneous so anyone can make photos from a video that are as good in quality as the video itself. VLC is free at VideoLAN. It's got some great features like the snapshots, a fast aspect ratio correction, and a better operating console. I use Mozilla Firefox and it works just fine. The one negative is that, unlike WMP, you cannot adjust color and/or contrast. I found this alternative in a post on this forum a few months ago so I installed it and have had no trouble at all with pop-ups or email spam. But the new version has added the easy snapshot feature, which is great and motivated me to post a recommendation on this forum. (The old version had a snapshot feature, but it was rather slow and clumsy to use.) | |
|
||
| 07-09-08 10:31am - 6010 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
Monahan (0)
Active User Posts: 348 Registered: Jan 17, '07 Location: SF Valley, CA |
It can be helpful finding more info about a porn star and/or a summary of the content of a porn video. My sources are: Cyberspace Adult Video Reviews (CAVR) EuroBabe Index Internet Adult Film Database (IAFD) RAME (It's actually a part of the IAFD site) My # 1 "go to" source is CAVR because the guy who runs it (Den) responds to emails, answers questions and accepts corrections. I'm interested if anyone else has any good research resources in addition to the above. | |
|
||
| 07-02-08 07:05am - 6017 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
Monahan (0)
Active User Posts: 348 Registered: Jan 17, '07 Location: SF Valley, CA |
I've seen some comments on PU that suggest that Internet Download Manager is a good utility. I checked the site Internet Download Manager and found that there is a current price of $24.95 (a $5 discount) good thru tomorrow. I'm interested in knowing what you guys think about IDM and other download managers and, more importantly, how universal they are. In other words will a certail D/L manager work on any and all sites? Are there factors to consider before buying one? Etc. Thanks for any information you can provide. Edited on Jul 02, 2008, 07:09am | |
|
||
| 06-22-08 08:56am - 6027 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
Monahan (0)
Active User Posts: 348 Registered: Jan 17, '07 Location: SF Valley, CA |
There's a response to today's poll question that prompts a matter about which I've been thinking for a long time. That's the psychological thing. (The poll question has nothing to do with this subject, but the response is from a member who moderates in a psychological forum on the web.) I have always found myself watching the babes and thinking about how the porn business has changed and what effect being in the business has on the female porn performers. Back in the 60's, porn was all under the counter and any female who was even identified incorrectly as participating in porn was scarred for life. Over the counter "porn" back then could only show boobs (any below the waist stuff had to be airbrushed out) and was still available only in the big cities. Back in the beginning of open porn (i. e., when Playboy first showed muff in a photo layout in the 1970's) followed by Linda Lovelace's fellatio performed on Harry Reems in 1972 in Deep Throat, most porn magazine and movie producers with any sense of decency warned the girls that their lives would be permanently changed and that they would probably not get any jobs in the entertainment industry if they were known to have been in porn. Playboy and Penthouse even asked its models to sign statements acknowledging that they got and understood the warnings. These days, however, actresses like Jenna Jameson are A list celebrity millionaires and are established as roll models for today's girls. A graduating senior in a nearby university brags about her success in porn in her yearbook. TV dramas are treating porn actresses as they would anyone who has been successful in any venture. (Little negative commentary, sometimes sympathetic treatment, etc. Law & Order even explores the question - can a porn actress be raped on a movie set when she's decided in the middle of a scene that she's had enough?) So my question is, is participating in the porn industry causing any psychological damage at all to the girls entering the business in the 2000's the way it did in the past as described in the books written by Ginger Lynn, Linda Lovelace and Christy Canyon? Would you accept it as a career path for your daughter? (I'm not asking if you'd encourage it...but how would you react if your daughter told you that's what she will be doing and that she'll be extremely careful in choosing her work and her partners and will take every precaution against STD's.) | |
|
||
| 06-15-08 09:42pm - 6033 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
Monahan (0)
Active User Posts: 348 Registered: Jan 17, '07 Location: SF Valley, CA |
Here's a link to the complete article. MSNBC Part of the article: Consumers in Time Warner Cable's test region will be offered several levels of service. A $29.95 per month plan for slower speeds of 768 kilobits per second and a 5 gigabyte limit would let users send and receive nearly 350,000 e-mails, play 170 hours of online games, or download more than 1,380 digital songs per month. At the high end, a $54.90 monthly fee for a 15-megabit-per-second service and a 40 gigabyte monthly limit would allow subscribers to watch 124 hours of standard-definition videos or download 11,070 songs. Not a wonderful prospect. | |
|
||
| 1-12 of 12 Posts | Page 1 |
|
