|
|||||
|
| Porn Users Forum » User Ranks » User Post History |
Post History:
Wittyguy (0)
|
| 501-550 of 1139 Posts | < Previous Page | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 10 | Page 11 | 12 | 14 | 16 | 18 | 22 | 23 | Next Page > |
| 12-02-09 01:12pm - 5499 days | #8 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User  Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
x Edited on Apr 20, 2023, 01:35pm | |
|
||
| 12-01-09 04:40pm - 5499 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
I happened to come across a little article at AVN where a "porn middleman" site was crowing about how four of it's sites hit scores of 90 or better on TheBestPorn. The sites include Onlytease, Onlyopaques and Onlysecretaries. Here's the link to the article: http://business.avn.com/company-news/33679.html. There is a quote from TBP's Vegas Ken at the end: "[W]e only have 22 sites that are rated at 90 percent or better. Out of those 22 sites, 4 are OTCash sites, ... As you can imagine, OTCash sites have an excellent conversion ratio as well. If you are not promoting OTCash sites, you're leaving money on the table!" Obviously that last sentence sort of woke me up a bit. Is Vegas Ken implying that TBP is trading scores for cash flow? Looking at the OTC website they promise a 50% return on all subscription fees from sites that forward traffic to these sites. Edited on Apr 20, 2023, 01:35pm | |
|
||
| 11-16-09 03:30pm - 5515 days | #19 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
x Edited on Apr 20, 2023, 01:33pm | |
|
||
| 11-16-09 11:50am - 5515 days | #9 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
I don't necessarily agree that porn prices are on the rise, I think they've fallen over the last year or so if you were to look at the number of special discounts and full access trials listed at TBP. However, regardless of pricing, I would say that I'm also a pic person and I don't have a real problem justifying $30 for a HQ photo site since I tend to mostly keep the pics from the lesser sites anyways. I look at it this way: if a site is pushing it's photos as the primary sales focus, then it's probably pretty good. Most sites try and toss out how many billions of pics they as an afterthought after 6 tour pages focused on the videos. The photos that most sites offer either lack in quality, size or quantity or, usually, some combination of these three. If a site pushes it's pics that tells me that it's run by someone who actually knows that the hell they're doing with a camera, that the quality will be good and the size will be great. Thus, given our porn rich PU world, I'm more than happy to pay for the prime rib versus the huge trough of gruel that the rest of the world feeds at. My only concern is that I would expect some sites to be charging more for their hi-rez pics in the future like some sites charge more for their HD vids. That would be a major bummer in my book. | |
|
||
| 11-09-09 02:27pm - 5522 days | #15 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
Given that the average american adult from 40 years ago weighs about the same as a modern average american 10 year old, you have to expect that the whole big ass burger butt trend will simply spill over into porn (just kidding on the factoid but you it's probably closer to reality than we'd like to think). The King tells us to have it "Your Way" and apparently most of us interpret that as "Your Weigh" meaning it's a race to top of the obesity / diabetes pyramid ... the food pyramid has gone the way of King Tut. The result is more people sporting "mud flaps" (thanks Spinal Tap for that song), jeans that would shelter an Ethiopian family of 6, an economy centered around growing food that can't be eaten in it's natural state (soy and corn -- just process it for the sugar), and entertainment in form of the " The Biggest Loser", diet books and countless daytime talk show diatribes. America relishes it's obsesity and we are proudly exporting it to the world. I say "Stand Up America" and proudly display your g-stringed / thonged Burger Butt's sagging out of those super elasticized sweatpants and proudly sing "God Save the King" the next time you get up from the couch for that refrigerator run just before kick off of the next game. (Rant concluded; your regularly scheduled programming will now continue already in progress). | |
|
||
| 11-09-09 02:04pm - 5522 days | #2 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
Knowing very little about how the Canadians treat their porn and obscenity issues, I'll toss in a few observations. First, the Canadian system is a bit outdated in the sense that the still seem to operate on a blacklist basis. Let's face it, porn is fast and cheap commodity. By the time it hits the official blacklist it's probably been out for a long time and thus it's not really stopping the flow of "obscenity" via the mail, not to mention the internet. It's one of those things that keeps bureaucrats employed and gives the general public a feel good tingle knowing that customs agents will be eyeing those shiploads of dvds coming in from Detroit while forgetting that dvds are rapidly going the way of the 8 track. Second, the internet makes policing porn sites almost impossible. Look at Videobox for example. You can find everything from vanilla to some more fetishy hard stuff. The categories of porn are often blurred more than they were in the past so unless you start monitoring all websites and all types of porn you simply can't stop it. I had mentioned in the "Free Speech and Porn"thread a while back that the Canadians were thinking about passing an internet law that would essentially let the government track just about everything people did. I sort of doubt anything of substance happened with it but that's sort of the idea you were getting at: the only to stop "obscenity" is tightly control internet access to websites and/or monitor what everyone is doing. You're unlimited internet privileges that you have now will slowly start to disintegrate over time because "national security" will be the mantra under which democratic governments will push internet restrictions or monitoring programs. My advice, hit the GagFactor series now instead of waiting for your gag reflex to kick in when you see what's coming down the road. | |
|
||
| 11-03-09 03:54pm - 5528 days | #17 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
x Edited on Apr 20, 2023, 01:31pm | |
|
||
| 11-03-09 03:19pm - 5528 days | #92 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
I usually go through life looking for evidence that denies the existence of God. Things like my inability to win the lottery, those damn clamshell platic packages that everything gets packaged in, when your tv signal cuts out during the most important part of the game ... if there was a benevolent god, he simply would not be doing these to me. However, last week at one bright glimor of hope did appear. A federal appeals court (not the Supreme Court) actually ruled that when it comes to obscenity cases involving the internet or email, national and not local standards should be applied. As noted several times here, in the U.S. the Miller Test is the legal formula for determining if something is obscene. One part of that test requires a jury to determine that an average person applying contemporary community standards would find the work, as a whole, appeals to prurient (aka - sexually arousing) interests. Many prosecutors who live in the Bible Belt or similarly conservative areas have been trying obscenity cases using only the local community as the standard, not a nation wide standard. This is a big leap forward for porn people and those who dislike 70 year old Jesus Jumpers who have never seen anything beyond their churches website on the internet telling adult Americans what they can see in the privacy of their own homes. It will probably serve to slow down some of these obscenity trials (most of which are brought to score political / "tough on crime" points). It also opens the door for people accused of obscenity to bring in statistics and comparative websites showing how pervie America really is when it's on-line. This decision only applies to federal courts mostly on the West coast. However, it increases the likelihood that the Supreme Court will actually have to address this issue soon and it probably won't be long before courts start adopting this standard. So, I actually have something decent to talk about here for a change as opposed my usual gripe fest. Yeah. | |
|
||
| 11-03-09 03:05pm - 5528 days | #3 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
There's no national laws on strip clubs and what they can serve being in direct proportion to how much skin you see. It varies from state to state and sometimes city to city. You happen to live in a more prudish part of the country. RagingBuddhist and me will continue to live life up with a full bar and full nudity. Save your money and spend it on internet porn if it bugs you. | |
|
||
| 11-03-09 11:42am - 5528 days | #25 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
x Edited on Apr 20, 2023, 01:27pm | |
|
||
| 11-03-09 11:16am - 5528 days | #8 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
Basically my point is akin to Moore's Law: that the pace of technology will grow exponentionally while laws and our notions regarding civility and privacy take much longer to catch up. The end result, at least from the perspective of someone living in 2009, is that we're going end up living a pseudo Mel Brook's movie role in "High Anxiety" because while it will be much harder for everyone to hide information you'll always be left wondering if people are treating you the way they do because of who you are or because of what they've found out about you on a data mining expedition. Oh, and by the way, here's the latest I-Phone app that tells you where your friends are, which businesses are near by and what the reviews of those businesses are -- http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/03/techno...net/03local.html?hpw. | |
|
||
| 11-02-09 05:09pm - 5528 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
While on my PU hiatus, I've come across some articles and conjured up some ideas that I thought beared a thoroughly long and boring post here. Namely, the idea that regardless of our preferences and any number of laws that might get passed that within a generation the concept of "personal privacy" will be radically smaller in comparison to how we think about it today. The underlying theme for all of this is that technology is growing so fast and so large in scope that anything that's digitized can and will be subject to being found. London, England leads the world in its use of public security cameras operated by police. There are thousands of them currently in use. It recently has come out that the police were monitoring one family because the local school district wasn't sure if they were truthful about their home address and, thus, if their kid should be enrolled in the local school. Turns out that over 200 government agencies and entities can request that the police follow people without notifying the subject for almost any reason. What makes the public cameras so helpful is facial recognition software which is still in its infancy. However, the technology already exists where using a G3 or G4 network and GPS I could hold up, for example, an I-Phone's camera lens and display in real time a picture of street. Using "an app", in turn I could get real time feedback that shows me what reviews the restaurant I'm displaying has received, advertisements for the store on my display and information about who lives above the store fronts if I want it. Soon, the technology will exist that will allow me to turn on my phone and photo recognition software will tell me the names of the the people walking by me. In turn, they may be programmed through my app to give me their digital business card and other information. What drives these "apps" is better technology. It's time consuming, expensive and the results aren't always the best when doing facial recognition today. That will change and it will become faster, better and cheaper. The same will be true for data mining. Currently, digging through a Googe search and long and painful. As time goes by, you will be tightly hone in on a specific person or subject without getting three million results. Data mining really becomes the key to all of this for one simple reason: "cloud computing". Cloud computing is where we're all headed. For example, if use Google Docs, your documents are not stored your own hard drive (though they can be). They're digitally compressed and stored in the digital cloud of servers and hosts. And then because of liability concerns over lost content, Google backs up that data on some other server, which backs up that data somewhere else, etc., etc. Soon you have a situation that whatever gets put into the cloud will remain in the cloud or leaves a "residue" for decades afterwards. As data mining gets better and better, it becomes easier and cheaper to track down these fragments and assemble them into meaningful facts and fictions about individual people. [As an aside, you might be curious to know that if the government conducts a search of your email that your ISP / Email provider is not required to let you know if your email was subject to a search warrant. By unleashing your message into the cloud you can be deemed to have placed your email into the care of a third party custodian and the government may only have to notify the custodian of the records, not the creator of the message, about a search. If you store stuff on Google docs, assume the same. I can't even imagine what could happen when your 17the level of backup docs stored on some server in Russia that Google doesn't even know about might interest the state police there. In other words, if you store your porn collection or sensitive information in the "cloud" at this point in time, you're an idiot.] Finally, we end up with the demise of the newspaper. Soon most of our media will be delivered on line. In an effort to stay relevant and generate revenue, papers or their sucessors will try to find and publish everything local since the national news is already territorialized. From who got traffic tickets, who got divorced, who helped out at the local nonprofit fundraiser, to who signed a petition to recall the bozo mayor; all will appear online. As everyone and every organization gets more digitized more information will get generated in an attempt to provide more content in an effort to create a successful business model. Businesses and search services will be created just to provide deep data mining on people, places and things because there will be so much digital noise to sift through. The result is that just about anything good or bad you have done that ends up in the digital world will stay there and be searchable. Got arrested for theft at age 19 but never convicted? At age 50 your prospective employer will know that. Went down and protested the opening a garbage inceration plant? Anyone who shot digital video of it with your face on it will expose your part to the world. Got a divorce and your ex said some untrue and nasty things about you in some court papers? One click of a button will reveal that info to a potential girlfriend doing a background check on you. Don't forget that your medical records are currently being digitized. Don't be shocked if some hacker contacts you and asks for $10,000 to not reveal your sexually transmitted disease or psychiatric history to everyone you know. Redundant backups of data just create more portals for the unsavory criminals to potentially access and steal all this information. The end result is a world where once you leave the confines of your home or do anything digitally then you've left a foot print behind that can be analyzed and probably tracked back to you at some point and at some level. It will be a different world when people can track just about everything ever done by you if they wanted too. Like the movie "The Invention of Lying", the world will be different but everyone will be in the same boat except for those leading a Taliban level of existence. On one level I can see that it would be refreshing and would force people to be more accepting of each others sins and shortcomings. On the other hand, to a person living in 2009, it scares the crap out of me. Big Brother from 1986 is coming, he's just going to be a few decades late. Edited on Nov 02, 2009, 05:14pm | |
|
||
| 10-28-09 08:38pm - 5533 days | #37 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
Glad to see that Rick and the gang came up with some "reward" for the heavy duty posters here ... and, please god, let someone cartoonize Ragingbuddhist so our suffering will end ;) As for me, Mr. Ass is perfect in his current form and has no plans on letting anyone stick a pencil/pen up his woo-hoo. This is actually my first trip back here in quite a while so I'll use this post as an opportunity to drop a quick howdy off to all. Things are still hectic on the home front for me so my AWOL status will continue for a while. I'm going to try and work up the '09 Forum awards over the Turkey Day holiday so don't expect to see much of me around here until sometime around then. Keep on posting y'all. | |
|
||
| 09-18-09 02:41pm - 5574 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
x Edited on Apr 20, 2023, 11:32am | |
|
||
| 09-15-09 06:45pm - 5576 days | #171 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
x Edited on Apr 20, 2023, 01:47pm | |
|
||
| 09-15-09 06:24pm - 5576 days | #90 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
What is the community (2009 edition)? If you recall, the Miller Test is the 3 part standard used to decide whehter or not something is obscene: 1. Whether an average person applying contemporary community standards would find the work, as a whole, appeals to prurient (aka - sexually arousing) interests; 2. Whether the work in question depicts or describes in a patently offensive way sexual conduct as defined under State law; and 3. Taken as a whole, the work lacks serious artistic, scientific, literary or political value. In some recent obscenity trials, such as Max Hardcores, defense lawyers have been arguing that in the age of the internet the community standards test really shouldn't apply or that the community should be considered what the internet has to offer, not the local neigbhorhood. This has lead to cases involving lots of statistics about porn useage by adults in a judicial district and talk about the other nasty porn sites out there. Realizing that admitting such evidence doesn't help the government's case, the Feds trying a new tactic in a New Jersey obscenity case. The case involves some rube who mailed hard bondage sex dvds to some undercover suits (and, yes, the government looked this guy up and paid for the dvds, he didn't just mail them out for free). The government is trying to twist the community standards test in a new way according to some recent court filings. Whether than asking the jury to decide for themselves that the sex acts are sexual arousing / prurient, the government wants the jury to speculate if the dvds would appeal some "deviant group" even if the jury panel doesn't find it sexually gross or arousing. In other words, the government wants to limit the "community" to mean those who might like bondage sex. The government wants this definition used so that the jury can just assume that because someone made a bondage sex tape that it must be sexually appealling to someone no matter how bad (or good) it might be because it must appeal to some hypothetical person. Then the government does an about face by wanting to take the "deviant community" out of the equation. The feds are requesting that no comparable S&M videos from local adult stores be allowed and that no expert testimony be allowed. The reasoning there is that the feds want to restrict the definition of "community" to what a local town will accept, not what it will tolerate. In other words, just because you find nastier shit at your local store doesn't mean that the local community has to accept it as being OK; the community in that case just tolerates it. The government's take is that experts and similar videos would just tell the jury what communities tolerate, not what they'll accept. So, apparently the idea is that one hypothetical community (the deviant types) must find the dvds arousing and then the "real" local community, as defined by the jurors, will have to decide if it's acceptable, not just tolerable. All these legal gymnastics are clearly done to make the feds case as simple as pie and to shut down just about all defenses. There a few other gems in this legal brief (including the fact that government wants to shut down websites that the defendant doesn't own or have an interest in) but you can already smell what's cooking. Using the government's logic here, almost anything could be considered obscene. So long as something is marketed as sex and has sex in it, a jury could find it obscene. Just cause sex (or nudity for that matter) is out there in everyone's home dvd player and web browser doesn't mean that any jury on given day couldn't find it obscene. I doubt that the government's position here will fly too far but it demonstrates two points: First, the government will waste lots of tax money and take just about any position that passes the laugh test to win a case regardless of the large scale idiocy and havoc it might generate should they win. Second, the feds desperately do not want the "community" be identified with what is out there in cyberworld, rather it shouldn't go beyond the neighborhood and the fronts people put on and hold forth to conceal what they're really looking at. Hypocrisy and speculation are not pillars of justice that the founding father's probably had in mind when they started this whole country. | |
|
||
| 09-14-09 08:10pm - 5577 days | #47 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
My prior post above talked about how this was really a workplace safety issue and seems that's how things are playing out for now. I saw an article last week (sorry, can't remember where) where attorneys for the adult organization were discussing the whole condoms in porn thing. Apparently Cal-OSHA (the state public safety board) is taking the position that all porn sets must have a hazardous substance policy and other written workplace safety codes. Since most employers need to have this stuff I guess I don't see a problem with the porn people needing it; just another sign that porn is a mature industry run by people who don't have much business sense. More importantly, Cal-OSHA takes the position that all porn sets must use condoms even though there is no written code or law requiring such. The bottom line is that if some prude files a complaint with Cal-OSHA and they investigate, the production company will have to use condoms from then on or risk getting shut down. I guess it's the porn industry's turn to fight back in court and show that current HIV testing procedures are enough to justify a "no condoms policy" along with any other legal claims they might have. | |
|
||
| 09-14-09 07:56pm - 5577 days | #88 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
If you ever needed a reason not to go to Walmart, here's another one. Apparently a family in Arizona dropped their memory card off at Walmart to have their vacation pics developed. A couple of the pics showed their young kids naked in the bathtub and lying on a rug (no sexual suggestiveness apparently, just stupid kid pics). You can see where this is going already. Walmart called the police and then police, displaying even higher levels of genius thinking, decided to charge the parents with child pornography and sexual abuse and put the kids into state protective custody (aka foster care). Needless to say the case was dimissed but only after the family hired lawyers and started filing motions. First, why would you drop pictures of your naked kids off at a photo shop; that's just stupid to begin with (how many movies feature pervs and psychos who work at photo shops?). Second, even though people sometimes lack decent judgment, it just seems so wrong that anyone who sees a naked, or partially naked kid, has to assume that it's child porn and call the cops. Is society/business that fearful of anything involving child nudity that it must be assumed criminal? Third, cops won't save your bacon when it comes to kids. Cops are trained to be very sensitive when handling child exploitation / sex abuse. If they see naked picture they'll probably just pass the buck along to someone with a higher pay grade (aka - the district attornyes office) to decide what constitues porn or not. The situation just lead to a big expensive and stupid mess that the tax payers end up covering. If the cops are not going to exercise discretion here, then I'm wondering why they don't take a similar hard line with sexting teens. If the police come across a cell phone pic of some girl flashing her fun bags, clearly she must be living in an inadequate home environment and she's clearly a meanace to herself and society so why not take her into protective custody and order her to get a pscyhological evaluation? The legal calculus at work here seems to read "child nudity = porn = throw the book at them". A big problem here is the ambiguity of child porn laws. Most state and federal laws require that the picture of child be "sexually stimulating" in order for it to be considered child porn. Because of the vaguaries in this definition the lowest common denominator (nudity) is often enough to trigger a legal inquisition. By chucking thought and discretion out the door the taxpayers end up in Dire Straits by paying 'money for nothing' ... even if the naked chicks are free ;. | |
|
||
| 09-14-09 04:09pm - 5578 days | #20 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
x Edited on Apr 20, 2023, 11:37am | |
|
||
| 09-14-09 02:55pm - 5578 days | #16 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
x Edited on Apr 20, 2023, 11:37am | |
|
||
| 09-11-09 02:49pm - 5581 days | #23 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
x Edited on Apr 20, 2023, 02:16pm | |
|
||
| 09-10-09 02:59pm - 5582 days | #20 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
x Edited on Apr 20, 2023, 02:16pm | |
|
||
| 09-10-09 12:38pm - 5582 days | #25 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
x Edited on Apr 20, 2023, 11:38am | |
|
||
| 09-10-09 12:01pm - 5582 days | #4 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
I guess the answer lies in if you like a little tease factor thrown into your porn or not. If done well, then I guess I'm sort of a 50/50 guy (keep 'em on to start, toss 'em off at the end ... just don't toss them in the salad). The key is if the masturbation scene is done well. Seeing some girl just sitting there petting her pelvis through her grundies or, conversely, yanking on her g-string like it's slot machine arm isn't exactly high art. If she's a good tease / actress, then it's all good ... just don't keep the big dog waiting too long. | |
|
||
| 09-09-09 02:23pm - 5583 days | #8 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
x Edited on Apr 20, 2023, 02:11pm | |
|
||
| 09-08-09 03:07pm - 5584 days | #31 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
x Edited on Apr 20, 2023, 11:32am | |
|
||
| 09-08-09 12:47pm - 5584 days | #28 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
x Edited on Apr 20, 2023, 11:31am | |
|
||
| 09-08-09 12:18pm - 5584 days | #7 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
x Edited on Apr 20, 2023, 11:38am | |
|
||
| 09-04-09 02:57pm - 5588 days | #81 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
To the extent that he is pointing out government abuse and the stupidity of our current obscenity laws, I agree. To the extent that he's trying to use this as marketing for himself I don't agree. Where the truth lies is probably somewhere in the middle ... but hopefully more towards the principled side rather than the business side. | |
|
||
| 09-04-09 02:44pm - 5588 days | #6 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
x Edited on Apr 20, 2023, 11:38am | |
|
||
| 09-04-09 02:27pm - 5588 days | #79 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
Staliano's claims are a bit true and a bit self serving in regards to Pinkpanther's posted link. On it's face, the government is in effect trying to silence him by not allowing his statements given in interviews since the obscenity charges were filed against him to be admissable in his trial, should this case make it to trial. That's sort of stupid because no judge will ever order that Stagliano can't bitch to the media about his case if wants to. However, I'll bet you a ton of money that Stagliano only gave these interviews after long talks with his legal counsel. In criminal cases defense lawyers never want to put their client on the stand during a trial if at all possible. While his statements may in fact be true (no Monday morning quarterbacking in other words), I'll bet you more money that his defense attorneys might have considered using his interviews during the trial as a way of getting around putting their client on the stand and, thus, opening him up to cross examination. However, when push comes to shove, his case will not be won or lost based upon what Stagliano thinks about obscenity, it's more a question of the legal nuances that have been discussed earlier in this thread (Miller Test, universal standard of obscenity, what is the "community" for the internet, etc). Frankly, the prosecutors can't silence him prior to trial as no judge would order that in this type of case. Any statements he made in interviews after the indictment would probably be considered self serving by a jury anyways and his statements are of limited value as evidence in this type of case. It's mostly Stagliano blowing his own horn here over stupid move by the prosecution rather than an issue of free speech. I don't blame him for making an issue over it, it's just that the issue is overblown. | |
|
||
| 09-04-09 10:21am - 5588 days | #77 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
I got a laugh when I saw that the governor of Texas (a Republican, duh) said that he would not be encouraging parents to send their kids to school on Tuesday if their local school showed the presidential address. Who's brainwashing who here? Apparently the Republicans, in an effort to keep their base from shrinking further, need more ignorant, uninformed and uneducated minions for their cause. I'm sort of surprised that no one's one upped this pointless hysteria by calling Republicans racist for wanting deprive minority children of seeing their potential role model. Shows what modern American politics has become - words over deeds, form over substance, and exploitation over reality. | |
|
||
| 09-03-09 03:26pm - 5589 days | #72 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
A Brief Lesson in Rhetoric: Considering that the Aussie nation grew up on a steady diet of English rejects and subsequently adopted the concepts of individual freedom and democracy from the Brits as well, it's almost humorous watching themselves try and copy Chinese authoritarian rule when it comes to the internet. Under the guise of power hungry Communications Minister who seems to have cut his political chops reading old Moral Majority newsletters the Aussies first came up with the idea that the government needed to impose a "firewall" on all Aussies so as to eliminate child porn. Then, they decided that violent video game websites should not be accessed. Now, the Communications Ministry is proposing that all Aussie ISP providers must track all internet useage, users and isp addresses; subject to turning this data over to the government upon request or private companies as part of civil lawsuits. The reason for the proposed law is to crack down on file sharing porn pirates. While all of these absurd Aussie ideas (thinking "Down Under" instead of "upstairs" seems to be the theme here) probably won't become law they do teach us a few lessons about issues that are going to be arising in the US over the next few years. Currently, there are two major voices calling for more US based internet monitoring. On one side are the well intentioned but ignorant moralists who want the government to block "offensive" sites to preserve the purity of nation (remember, Jesus likes us best ... even though the nation states didn't exist 2,000 years ago) and to prevent child porn from spreading. On the other side are the policy wonks in the Pentagon and CIA who worry about tracking national security threats and cyberattacks aimed at crippling an internet based nation. The Australian government has adopted the tone laid out by the moralists. All their claims for monitoring web activity are based upon protecting the public from offensive content, protecting children and preserving law and order by upholding copyright protections (aka - law and order ... only this crime doesn't get solved in one hour). While most of the sheep who inhabit society probably don't care, the effect of going this route causes the few who don't follow the flock to note that government is telling adults what it can and can't see on the net and leads to claims about the creation of a "nanny state" and "Orwellian society" which tend to ring home with a lot of people who believe in free will and a free society even if they don't really care in practice. By taking the moral high ground, the government faces an ever growing chorus of people who are firing back with strong rhetoric of their own. In other words, the language of the debate in a professed freedom loving country quickly shifts over to the group claiming to defend the pillars of freedom when the reasons for internet monitoring are couched in moral words. In the US, the argument which is just beginning is currently being couched in the form of national security. It's a lot easier to shout down the opposition and call them "unpatriotic" when the perceived security of the nation is at stake (mmmm, where have we heard that before). By taking cues from the Boneheads Down Under, the US cyber monitors would take care to express that the government would need a search warrant or, even more likely, that monitoring for national security purposes would be done by the secret court that currently approves spy operations in the US. The result, is that the debate gets muted and effects of any government nosing around is largely hidden from view. If the moralists (frequently represented by the Republicans) start edging in then the argument could become too much of a political hot potato to go very far. If they stay out, meaning Obama pushes something through (and he supports greater web security), it will probably be more palatable but the end result will be a Bigger Big Brother. While the Aussies are having a public debate centered around law and morals, our debate will likely be short and terse with the subsequent enforcement of any monitoring laws shoved under the carpet where hopefully no one will notice. Of course, as I noted in an earlier post, the net effect of the passage of any mandatory ISP tracking laws or enhanced government monitoring will be negligible. The big meanies are already off the radar in that they use heavy encryption and surrogate hosts to hide their tracks. If people think they're being watched their likely to start using surrogate host sites that make tracking difficult. That only causes the cost of the government surveillance program to escalate faster trying to keep up with the off road crowd. The Everyday Joe gets watched for and busted over file sharing while the real asses (the child porn pervs and terrorists) go about their business as usual. Edited on Sep 03, 2009, 04:24pm | |
|
||
| 09-03-09 02:06pm - 5589 days | #26 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
x Edited on Apr 20, 2023, 11:33am | |
|
||
| 09-03-09 11:43am - 5589 days | #22 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
x Edited on Apr 20, 2023, 11:33am | |
|
||
| 09-02-09 04:43pm - 5590 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
I realize that we're in the dog days of summer here but that's no excuse to leave all the forum posting to the two big dogs ("Drenner"  and a few others. It seems like were down to about 10 or so regular posters. Edited on Apr 20, 2023, 11:33am | |
|
||
| 09-01-09 04:54pm - 5591 days | #81 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
As you may have noticed, the new TBP reviews are basically copies of the PU format. ___________________________ TOADSITH CHEATSHEET VOLUME 2: Electric Boogaloo! for writing reviews following a TBP 2.0 review: TO REVIEW OR NOT TO REVIEW: This is no Shakespearean dilemna. In a word, "REVIEW". This topic was discussed in another forum thread, here, so check out the ideas. Basically, TBP reviewers are in and out of these sites, while we've got the edge on how a site feels and operates over a longer time and we have more info about the content and downloading aspects of the site. PHOTO CONTENT: I know many of you don't care that much about pics. However, it only takes a minute or two to give the rest of us the low down by noting: 1. What is the largest size pics? Usually the new stuff is biggest so click on a pic. Right click on the photo, select "properties" and click on that and it will tell you the resolution size. 2. Watermarks? Big and bold, small and tasteful, or nonexistent. TBP doesn't always do a good job of this and sites do change their watermarks. 3. What is the breakdown of content? What portion of photo sets are hardcore, what are solo, what are lesbian etc. It's also good to know the average number of pics per photo set. Just an educated guess if the site doesn't have them categorized is good enough. TBP doesn't do this. 4. Is there is a resolution size difference between newer content and older content? If so, about what percentage of photo content is in the older (and presumably smaller size) versus the bigger pics. 5. Are there multiple pic sizes? Yes or no. 6. Are zips available? If so, are zips only for one size or do they come in multiple sizes. TBP still doesn't get that deep into numbers 5&6 here. 7. Cropping? Good, bad or not worth mentioning. TBP says nothing about this and you don't have to either (just a peeve of mine). Sometimes though sites crop the hell out of pics leaving us with what appear to be sets of amputee sex. 8. Updates? TBP mentions them but these change. Please confirm or deny the update schedule or just simply tell us what it is. If TBP is spot on, no need to mention. VIDEO CONTENT: TBP does a very good job of getting into videos by addressing various resolution sizes, playback formats, download managers, file sizes, download speeds and number of videos. My advice is to just confirm that the TBP facts are correct. Your checklist is the statistics on the right side of the 2.0 reviews. If your findings differ from the stated TBP facts, please tell us your experience. There are some things TBP doesn't do, so feel free to include: 8. What is the breakdown of the content? Like with pics, what percent are hardcore, softcore, lesbian, etc. An educated guess will do if the site doesn't have them categorized. TBP doesn't do this. 9. DRM or Stream Only? Stream is the new DRM and should be considered the same as DRM. Please mention DRM or the lack of it in your review because DRM is an immediate deal breaker for so many here. TBP notes this but it's important so be redundant here. 10. Full scenes or clips only? In looking at new TBP reviews I have seen some sites listed as having clips only when they do have full length videos. Please set the record straight by telling us. 11. Is there a resolution difference between old and new videos? TBP will say there is but doesn't say how much content there is of the new and presumably bigger size and the older smaller stuff. Give us an estimate of how much big vs. small stuff there is. 12. Updates? Again, these change. Tell us what the schedule is for video updates if different from TBP. 12.5 Watermarks? (and yeah, I'm too lazy to renumber this one). Again, watermarks frequently change on sites. Let us know if they're big and nasty, small or nonexistent. "BULLSHIT FACTOR": This is a new category, not previously on the Toadsith Cheat Sheet. Please note: 13. Prechecked cross sales. 14. Difficulty in signing up or cancelling. 15. Sites loaded with advertising, both for other sites and their own products. 16. Automatic and unauthorized upsells ("Click here to see hot HD vids" which take you to another site and ding your credit card). 17. Nonresponsive (or very good if that's the case) webmasters or customer service. 18. Report if a site has lots of problems with dead or broken links. 19. Report problems with getting timed out on downloads and report frequent log-in requests. SITE DESIGN AND GENERAL QUALITY: 20. Search Engine? If so, is it good (can search under mulitple options like body type, boob size, action, etc.) or less so (no search or just categories)? Also, if part of network, note if the search works across the network or is site specific. 21. Search by model name and/or model directory and is directory complete? 21. Site Design? (only mention if really bad or really good). 22. If a network, number of sites and general content on the various sites. MODELS / CONTENT: 23. Exclusive content or not so much if you know? TBP mentions this but they're not real good at it. Also mention if the site is recycling old content as new. 24. Originality (only mention if a unique or well done niche)? 25. Models Attractiveness? 26. Amateur / Professional in terms of models and quality? 27. Good Angles or Lighting? (optional, discuss if very good or very bad). EXTRAS: 28. Bonus Sites (only mention if decent quality)? 29. Site extras like a forum, exclusive model interviews or cams, special events exclusive to the site, etc. ___________________________ Edited on Apr 20, 2023, 12:59pm | |
|
||
| 09-01-09 03:32pm - 5591 days | #11 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
x Edited on Apr 20, 2023, 11:40am | |
|
||
| 09-01-09 02:51pm - 5591 days | #9 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
x Edited on Apr 20, 2023, 11:40am | |
|
||
| 08-31-09 11:03am - 5592 days | #15 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
x Edited on Apr 20, 2023, 02:15pm | |
|
||
| 08-28-09 04:50pm - 5595 days | #153 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
I usually see 3 or 4 movies in theatres a month with my GF. However, we usually go to the cheap theatres (showing stuff just about to be released on video), go to matinees or use our stash of discount coupons we got out of an entertainment book. It's definitely cheaper that way but you still pay between $10 and $20 for two people. | |
|
||
| 08-28-09 04:46pm - 5595 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
I came across this article at AVN the other day which talks about websites rethinking how they charge the public for their wares. The articles a tad long and biased towards the industry. Edited on Apr 20, 2023, 02:15pm | |
|
||
| 08-28-09 03:28pm - 5595 days | #19 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
Well put Turboshaft. My little rant on the Boomers was more or less a means of showing how generational attitudes and complacency can lead to unintended consequences. I agree that our current clusterfuck of problems is transgenerational, more defining of a country than a dominant demographic. I think that the "average" American, based on all the stupid surveys and polls, has never been able to find their way out of a wet paperbag back in 1809 let alone today. So, I don't think it's general stupidity. We are less civic minded then past generations in part because we work more hours, have two spouses who work so there's more domestic ework to be done at the end of the day, and many more entertainment options other than politics and news to attract our limited free time. Often what news that grabs peoples attention is the shallow hype and talking head drivel that the 24 hour news cycle generates to feed itself. Because of the news beast, politicians feel compelled to label their programs and directives in such a way as to offend no one (especially their base of talking heads) or to brand those who disagree as unamerican. Take a less civic minded populace eating from the news beasts trough, mix in more money (aka lobbyists and campaign cash) than politics has ever seen and add the phony idea that politicians keep trotting out by saying you can get something for nothing (the "W" legacy said "deficits don't matter"; Obama says "we can pay for healthcare reform by making medicare more efficient" and the Republicans say "if we just cut taxes and make government more efficient more we can pay for everything") and you end up with a mess. Everyone ends up outside of the reality loop with no resolve to change because change involves uncertainty or displeasing someone and none of the players in this game like those cards. Change sucks but sometimes you gotta do it whether that means actually paying attention to whom you elect and watching what they do instead of what they say or waiting until your country can't afford to borrow any more money and tightening the belt until it hurts. When some kid opens their history book in the year 2300, we (along with our parents, and children and the entire world during this time) will be branded as idiots. Not for the economic/political mess America has now but for failing to address global warming when we knew about, failing to address the world's population explosion when we knew about it and failing to preserve species and ecosystems for future generations when we knew they were disappearing fast. These topics aren't even on the table for serious discussion by anyone, anywhere. These aren't problems for a generation, these are problems for next thousand years plus. Edited on Oct 28, 2009, 08:41pm | |
|
||
| 08-27-09 04:54pm - 5596 days | #16 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
In my book there are actually very few events that affect a generation which can then be claimed as truly "defining". Off hand, I would say that WWI and WWII would be such events because the entire population had to live through them (both as soldiers and citizens giving up normal life for the war effort). For the rest of us, we're stuck rembering where we where when certain shocking events happened or claiming some cultural fad as our own in an attempt to define our demographic other than merely age. 9/11 and the two wars that spawned from it could have been truly generational defining but, as one pundit so aptly put it, "Never have so few, given so little in a time of war". If you buy that statement as true then I guess I you in fact have defined the generation (re-affirmed actually) running our country at that time. You could argue that the Baby Boomers, not just the Republicans, who were in charge of the country at the time felt that their personal needs (voting for war so as to not look "soft" and not raising taxes all so they could get re-elected) are a reflection of the "me generation" label attached to the Baby Boomers. Personal and national sacrifice were abandoned in favor of the illusion of security and sacrifice (airport screening and some color coded terrorist threat chart dreamed up by Dr. Strangelove), sending the nonelite classes who make up the bulk of our military into combat, and conducting the wars through a mixture of hubris ("They Iraqi's will welcome us" and "Democracy will take root in the Middle East and make the world safer") and running up the national charge card (As Dick Cheny said "Deficits don't matter"). So, I guess, 9/11 is generational defining moment ... it just defined the Baby Boomers for who they are; the "me" generation who believed that democracy, deference to the poll numbers, and instant credit are the secrets of life. Meanwhile, the rest of us to sort out the mess they left behind while we pay for their retirement. All you old farts can put that in your pipe and smoke it :) Edited on Aug 27, 2009, 05:08pm | |
|
||
| 08-27-09 02:30pm - 5596 days | #7 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
x Edited on Apr 20, 2023, 11:41am | |
|
||
| 08-27-09 01:27pm - 5596 days | #14 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
Not bad there turboshaft (you might have made the list but your lack of an avatar left the Class of 2013 drawing a blank ... sort of like how they reacted to the math portion of their college entrance exams). Here's a couple more off the cuff fun facts: 36. 82% of them believe that "Denial" is a river in Egypt ... which is located just south of Alaska. 37. Have never driven a car without air bags, ABS brakes, cd player, power windows and doors and air conditioning. 38. Refer to "GI Joe with the kung-fu grip" as some military recruit caught masturbating in his tent. 39. Believe that when people talk about "9/11" they're refering to a supersized 7-Eleven store. 40. Have never held a Playboy (or any other skin magazine) in their hands. 41. Only know Madonna as a tired, over-the-hill rock act and know Hulk Hogan and The Rock as tv/film stars, and believe the original Starship Enterprise was led by "Captain Priceline Negotiator". 42. Define "Gay Pride" as a group of homosexual lions. 43. Think that when their parents reminisce about drive-in movies that they're referring to their colonoscopy exams. 44. Are eagerly waiting for scientists to develop a pill that can mimic the placebo effect. Edited on Aug 31, 2009, 04:17pm | |
|
||
| 08-26-09 05:31pm - 5596 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
x Edited on Apr 20, 2023, 11:41am | |
|
||
| 08-26-09 01:22pm - 5597 days | #10 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
Glancing at the list in the link provided by Khan, I've come to the conclusion that most of the stuff listed there isn't really informative, useful or entertaining. For anyone who has seen the Late Show with David Letterman, his "Fun Facts" routine is entertaining and more appropriate here (he starts out with a list of trivial but true facts, then mixes in a bunch of made up shit). So, here's Wittyguy's Fun Facts about the Class of 2013: 1. Have probably never used a phone with a cord attached to it. 2. Agree that "I Dream of Drooler" is the worst porn movie never made. 3. Probably have never worked a real summer job. 4. Describe Brett Favre as DR. FILTH (Double Retired Football-player I'd Like to Fuck). 5. Will never vote for a Baseball Hall of Fame candidate who wasn't juiced during his career. 6. Think that "Denner" is an impoverished African country with a serious porn problem. 7. When they start their work careers, there will be 3.9 of them working to pay for each of our retirement (social security and medicare). When they retire there will only be 2.7 people doing the same. 8. Refer to the "State of Virginia" as a girl who claims to be a virgin because she only has anal sex. 9. Think that BadAndy downloaded all the good porn so they're stuck ripping all their porn from free tube sites. 10. Generally like the TBP version 2.0 reviews but find they're too hard to read because they're not written in txt msg frmt, OMG!. 11. Believe that America is dominated by ruling class families named Clinton and Bush. 12. Only know Michael Jackson as perv, not a singer. 13. Secretly think that Pat362 and Messmer are a gay married couple because they live in Canada. 14. Believe that Daniel Radcliffe (aka Harry Potter) is the most influential movie star in history. 15. Fucked up the world's perception of vampires by making them "glitter". 16. Have only known communism to exist in China, Cuba and North Korea. Of course, according to Republicans, if America has government sponsored health care that will make us communists too. 17. Voted RagingBuddhist's avatar as the America's number one pre-apocalyptic messianic action figure, edging out David Koresh and Sarah Palin. 18. Think that looking at porn on their cell phone is "awesome". 19. Believe the phrase "Booty Call" refers to pervs who set their phones vibrate and stick e'm in their rear for fun. 20. Often confuse Lk2fireone's avatar with Hello Kitty. 21. Probably will be the first generation to think that porn is cool, like tattoos and nose rings. 22. Will never read this post because Wittyguy wrote it. 23. Believes Obama's slogan "Change We Can Believe In" was stolen from a coin dispenser advertisement. 24. Believe the phrases "Taking a Toke" refers to watching the Lord of the Rings on dvd again and "Getting stoned" means pulverizing some Ritalin with a rock for a quick hit. 25. Think that Khan is a reanimated caveman who works here only because Geico didn't think he looked Neanderthal enough for their commercials. 26. Think that Paris Hilton is an old skank. 27. Will deny even knowing the name "Hannah Montana" in another five years let alone admitting they owned her music/merchandise. 28. They have no lurid thoughts or chuckles when someone talks about a "stimulus package". 29. Coined the phrase "I was Max Hardcored" to mean excessive punishment for a minor offense. 30. As a group, unanimously voted a can of spaghettioes as being sexier than BadAndy on the site www.hotornot.com. 31. Believed that the "Cash for Clunkers" program was a way to make some college money by euthanizing their grandparents. 32. Barring a massive wave of immigration, the Class of 2013 will be the last generation of Americans because it's so much easier and faster to participate in "sexting" instead of actually doing the deed. I'll let you figure out what's real (or intended to be) and what's not. Feel free to add your own "fun facts" should you not have a life and choose to participate in mindless posting. Edited on Aug 28, 2009, 10:59am | |
|
||
| 08-25-09 06:41pm - 5597 days | #35 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
My last post on the health care topic for now, just happened to come across the following quote in an article and it shows why shit ain't working now: In 2007, employer-based health insurance cost, on average, more than $12,000 per family, up 78 percent since 2001. I've run several companies and company divisions of various sizes over the course of my career, so I can confidently tell you that raises (and even entry-level hiring) are tightly limited by rising health-care costs. You may think your employer is paying for your health care, but in fact your company's share of the insurance premium comes out of your potential wage increase. Where else could it come from? Let's say you're a 22-year-old single employee at my company today, starting out at a $30,000 annual salary. Let's assume you'll get married in six years, support two children for 20 years, retire at 65, and die at 80. Now let's make a crazy assumption: insurance premiums, Medicare taxes and premiums, and out-of-pocket costs will grow no faster than your earnings--say, 3 percent a year. By the end of your working days, your annual salary will be up to $107,000. And over your lifetime, you and your employer together will have paid $1.77 million for your family's health care. $1.77 million! And that's only after assuming the taming of costs! In recent years, health-care costs have actually grown 2 to 3 percent faster than the economy. If that continues, your 22-year-old self is looking at an additional $2 million or so in expenses over your lifetime--roughly $4 million in total. Would you have guessed these numbers were so large? If not, you have good cause: only a quarter would be paid by you directly (and much of that after retirement). The rest would be spent by others on your behalf, deducted from your earnings before you received your paycheck. And that's a big reason why our health-care system is so expensive. | |
|
||
| 08-25-09 04:42pm - 5598 days | #44 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
x Edited on Apr 20, 2023, 11:30am | |
|
||
| 501-550 of 1139 Posts | < Previous Page | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 10 | Page 11 | 12 | 14 | 16 | 18 | 22 | 23 | Next Page > |
|
