|
|||||
|
| Porn Users Forum » User Ranks » User Post History |
Post History:
lk2fireone (0)
|
| 3601-3618 of 3618 Posts | < Previous Page | 1 | 2 | 13 | 24 | 35 | 46 | 57 | 72 | Page 73 |
| 11-28-08 06:06am - 5868 days | #15 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User  Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
I've only done 3 reviews. Two of the sites I scored 75. The other site I scored 97. But I was a member of each site for multiple months (actually, 1+ year at each of the three sites). Just because I score a site in the 70s, does not mean it is junk or not worthwhile. I think score is very subjective. But my score is my estimate of what the value of that site is, in terms of content quality, quantity, and price, as the major factors. If that does not make sense, too bad. I'm only human. | |
|
||
| 11-27-08 05:57pm - 5868 days | #6 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
TheSquirrel, you should not be ashamed to be a soap boxer. That's a fine English tradition, which is the basis of free speech. In the USA, we have soap box racing, because Americans have been devoted to racing at least since the early days of automobiles. I can understand your frustration with the scoring system, but you have to remember, we are only human. The ideal might be an objective scoring system, but really, I think we would be more comfortable with a subjective scoring system that is based on our opinions, as well as solid details that describe the content of a site. I am interested in sites that score high, as possible sites I might join. But more important than the score, is whether the site contents appeal to me. And then I look at the price, which some members say is irrelevant to score. Because I have limited porn dollars to spend. I think I'm making sense, even if it could be expressed more clearly. | |
|
||
| 11-27-08 05:18pm - 5868 days | #5 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
I think people are getting too hung up over the idea of perfect, and they are forgetting the recommended rating guidelines that PU offers. Also, the rating guidelines are only guidelines, and you are not required to follow them, which PU clearly states. Below are the quoted guidelines that PU offers: "Recommended rating guidelines, not required to follow: Score Title Description 100 Perfect Site is perfect, could do little to improve. Top recommendation. 90-99 Excellent Site is near perfect, best in it's class. Highly recommended. 80-89 Very Good Enjoyable site, but could improve in key areas. Recommended. 70-79 Average Does some things good, some things poor. Might recommend. 60-69 Needs Work Does more things wrong than right. Low recommendation. 50-59 Poor Site Offers very little, needs serious work. Not recommended." If you think a site is perfect, fine, give it 100. A lot of PU members will disagree, because they "know" no site is perfect. But if you believe a site is perfect, give it a 100 score, anyway. But for "best in class", you can give a 90+ rating. That's your opinion, that it's best in class. Who cares what the other PU members think? If they don't realize that that is your opinion, you can kindly point out to them that your score is subjective, based on your opinion, and not on their opinion. If they don't like your score, they have the right to post a reply that indicates why they don't like your score. Or they can write their own review, and put their very own score with the review. 80+ Very good. It's all subjective opinion anyway. 70+ Average. Maybe worth joining. But not as good as a higher rated site, in your opinion. 60+ Below average. Probably not worth your money. 50+ Definitely a waste of money. I'm a newbie, had some problems with the idea of scoring, and finally decided: A score is what I say it is. That's my opinion of the site. Somebody else rates the site, they will probably come up with a different score. On top of which, the score for a site is only part of how PU members will value the site. The personal tastes of each member, what turns him/her on, is more important than the "quality" or score of a site. I've said before, and I will say again, I've seen [pay] sites scored 90+ that I would not watch for free. The score might be solidly based on what the site is offering to the reviewing member. But if the site contents don't appeal to me, it's a waste of my time and my money to join that site. | |
|
||
| 11-27-08 03:04am - 5869 days | #5 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
Wittyguy, I assume your current avatar means you enjoy art. Would you explain what your previous avatar was saying? I'm not a critic, but I thought the previous avatar was more intriguing. From a newbie, trying to discover the secrets of a porn adept. For a fantasy 100 site, maybe I could add a glam model service that would clean you and your apartment, free of charge. Plus provide whatever other services you might require. | |
|
||
| 11-27-08 02:30am - 5869 days | #4 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
I gave met-art a 97 recently for: -High quality pix -Massive number of attractive models -Massive number of pix -Low monthly and/or annual fee Site is not perfect, but definitely best in class for softcore teen pix. For a fantasy site, best in class, add: -Free membership -Great vids of the gorgeous models -Online ordering of these gorgeous models delivered to your home or place of worship. Price of these models included in the free membership. The last service, real, gorgeous models sent to you, is one of the more important requirements, obviously. | |
|
||
| 11-25-08 01:48pm - 5871 days | #18 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
I started a thread 2 days ago called "Favorite mega-sites". Asked for a simple listing of favorite mega-sites that people have joined, and why the sites were a favorite. Thought the answers might be useful in a general sense for many different readers, more than specialty sites that would appeal to smaller audiences. Did not really expect many strange or far out sites to be listed, because these are mega-sites. Only got 3 replies so far. You might check the thread out, for possible sites to join, or to enter your own favorite sites. Toadsith already entered his list. | |
|
||
| 11-25-08 07:43am - 5871 days | #13 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
I think the thread "What should a PU review include" is a great tool and should be highlighted strongly, to both newbies and older members of the PU site. I am serious. The site staff should post a summary of the thread as an addition to the "Rules and FAQ's for submitting reviews". The thread is only a guide. Members are free to more or less follow their own guidelines or lack of guidelines. But as a template of what details to include, to provide the expected value that many members seem to desire from member reviews, the thread is a great tool. One major idea I disagree with in the thread: "TBP has done away with [membership] price". And many respected reviewers do not include price in the review's score. Value (in whatever form) is the basis of capitalism. How can you ignore the price of membership? (Quality of content + Quantity of content + Site ease of use) divided by Price should be the method to calculate site score. If the price of a site is $10 per month, or the price is $20 or $30 per month, it makes a huge difference in the value you are getting for your money. It also makes a huge difference in whether you can join that site, or a different site. Our porn dollars are limited. That is the basic idea behind PornUsers. We are trying to find porn sites that are good to excellent that we can afford. If we had all the money we wanted, we would not need pornusers. We could google "porn sites" and join them all. We might not spend much time on the sites we found that are junk, but what difference would that make, if the price was immaterial? As for the other thread where some members think a member should not review a [pay} site if the person has a complimentary pass: 1. I have not yet read that thread. 2. I know the PU site guidelines state that if you have a complimentary pass, you should not review the site. 3. I disagree with the apparent idea that your review would be tainted by a complimentary pass. Unless you were specifically told that you were required to write a positive, glowing review of a site because you had a complimentary pass, I think most members would have the moral strength (we are talking porn members, remember), to write what they honestly believe about a site. Good and bad. Bottom line: On 2008.05.19 Wittyguy wrote: "I've noticed a number of newbie reviews recently that are pretty much worthless. I hope some of them, if they're going to keep adding reviews, take at least something from this discussion." Newbies and older members alike would gain insight into writing better reviews if they read the thread. But why would they read it if they don't know it exists? I came across the thread only because Toadsith mentioned it in a different thread I was reading. Again, I believe the thread (or better yet, a concise summary) should be posted at the bottom of the PU user guideline for writing a review. Toadsith seems to be the most qualified person to write that summary. He wrote the "Porn Users Cheat Sheet" and other major points in a single post dated 2008.04.25, 11:39pm. Let him add a small summary of the other thread points. The PU staff can give him extra raffle tickets for posting his summary, as payment for his service. Seriously, that cheat sheet is a professional-style approach to writing a review. You don't have to follow it exactly, but it's great to keep in mind, as a way to increase the value of any review you do write. And it should be included at the bottom of the official PU "Rules and FAQ's for submitting reviews". Since a PU staff member will read this post for vetting purposes, would he/she please comment on the value of my suggestion? Edited on Nov 25, 2008, 08:28am | |
|
||
| 11-24-08 09:23pm - 5871 days | #6 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
TheSquirrel, I was looking at your profile page and it shows you have gotten no raffle tickets. Your score of 6 entitles you to raffle tickets, and your Rookie Badge entitles you to at least one raffle ticket. The raffle is held once a week, with 3 prizes: $100, $50, and $50. Entering is free, and automatic, once you sign up for the raffle and earn your tickets. As a newbie, like me, your chances of winning are small, because some of the older members will earn far more tickets than we do. But since it's free to enter, why not give yourself a chance to win some raffle money? I will only charge you your first 5 winning raffle tickets for this advice (joke-please do not report me to the staff, who could ban me for unfair bribery or something). | |
|
||
| 11-24-08 08:54pm - 5871 days | #5 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
I watched the original series of Dangerman (called Secret Agent in the U.S.), and The Prisoner back in the 1960s. That was long before Toadsith was born. Maybe he saw reruns of The Prisoner. But my memory is nothing compared to yours. I remember liking both series, thought they were exciting/interesting, Dangerman more exciting, Prisoner more interesting. But specific names and events and catchphrases are completely gone for me. I also thought there was an element of science fiction in the Prisoner, because of the supposedly advanced techniques that were used, such as brain-washing and supposed advanced gadetry. At the end of the series, I seem to recall Patrick McGoohan becoming the new No. 2 or No. 1 man, or being offered the slot. Back to the original point: I think, on a practical basis, the trust votes have little value as far as determining the value of a member's reviews or postings. I believe that most reviews are the honest opinion of the members that write them. Some members do write better, more informative reviews than other members, but more important than how informative are the reviews, is, does the site content (hardcore, softcore, pix, vid, fetish, whatever) appeal to your interests? A site with a 99+ rating is not worth watching, if the site contents are a personal turnoff (unless you enjoy getting turned off, which is possible, I suppose). The real, practical value of the trust votes is that when you get 30 positive trust votes, you get a Trust Badge. And each badge is helpful in giving you 1 bonus raffle ticket for each weekly drawing (after you earn 1 ticket by some other method). Edited on Nov 24, 2008, 08:57pm | |
|
||
| 11-24-08 06:58pm - 5871 days | #3 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
Toadsith, thanks for your input. As a newbie, I did not realize there was any past debate on whether there should be an anonymous option or not. I actually wondered how useful the "Trust" vote was. As far as I can tell, most reviews by members are honest. Whether I agree with the opinions expressed or not, what I've read in the reviews seems to be an honest expression by the members. I've seen in the rules that the site workers/owners do not want biased or false reviews. They want reviews that are informative, fair, and useful to the members. So for quality control, the reviews are vetted by the staff. But the Trust vote is used by different members in different ways. It's more than just a simple "Do I think this reviewer or member is being honest." For some members, the Trust vote is "whether they think the review is worthwhile, with good site details or not". That's my take on the Trust vote. Because I see "no" trust votes for some members, and I read their reviews, and I think the reviews are honest expressions of their thinking. So the members who voted no were probably voting no on trust because they thought the reviews or ideas submitted lacked enough value to qualify for a positive trust rating. I do not believe a negative trust rating means the person giving the rating is usually calling the person being rated a liar. PS: Your image/icon/whatever-it's-called. Is that based on Patrick McGoohan, from the Prisoner and Dangerman TV series? Edited on Nov 24, 2008, 07:12pm | |
|
||
| 11-24-08 05:43pm - 5871 days | #5 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
My favorite softcore site for teen pix is Met-art. Nothing comes close in terms of quality and quantity of the models and their pictures. I've seen a lot of good softcore pix sites, that are worth joining, but Met-art is best of class. I can't offer any best of class for softcore vids, hardcore pix, hardcore vids. Most of what I've seen is softcore pix. Sorry I can't give more details or opinions on those other areas. | |
|
||
| 11-24-08 05:26pm - 5871 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
I believe the reason there are so many Trust Ratings submitted anonymously is because the default selection in the profile is set that way. I am a newbie, just joined Nov 14. But I have seen a lot of trust ratings that were submitted anonymously that had a positive trust. It sometimes makes sense to give a negative trust with anonymous, but when you give a positive trust rating, you would be more likely to attach your name to the rating. My profile was set, by default, to "Pre-select Submit Anonymously when submitting new trust votes." In that case, you have to de-select (uncheck) the box, or you will enter a rating with the anonymous tag. A lot of newbies would not realize that, or bother to uncheck that box. I believe that's the reason there are so many anonymous entries for the Trust Ratings. Opinions? Agree? Disagree? Too minor to matter? | |
|
||
| 11-24-08 05:10am - 5872 days | #23 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
badandy400, with 15 terabytes of porn, you could open your own web site. Lol. I'm a newbie with no winnings. So I've had no experience or problems with my choice of ebay gift certificates. Be glad to report on my winnings if I ever get any. | |
|
||
| 11-23-08 02:16pm - 5873 days | #19 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
I am a photo guy. Have very few vids. But on a personal basis, I find it very hard to delete any photo sets I downloaded, unless the sets were lousy quality or with an unattractive model. I must be anal retentive or something. Am thinking about getting an external hard drive, because the prices keep dropping so much and the storage available is so massive. The more photosets you store, the harder it is to find the sets you want to look at. But storage space is the main reason I never got into vids. That, plus photosets can easily have high quality, and quality vids are much harder to find. | |
|
||
| 11-23-08 04:29am - 5873 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
How about a simple listing of your favorite mega-sites, in approximate order of value, and a short (or long) description of why you like them? Any type mega-site, any type content: hardcore, softcore, megacore (my own special blend, or yours). A simple listing of the sites would do. Better would be the basic reasons you like the content and the value of each site (content + site ease of use)/(membership price) I think it makes more sense to leave niche sites off this list, because we are comparing mega-sites, not specialty items. Hopefully, mega-sites that appeal to a broad audience. I'm thinking more pay sites than networks or avs services or whatever, but if you like an alternative to a pay site, go ahead and list it and the reasons you like it. | |
|
||
| 11-23-08 04:04am - 5873 days | #7 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
I don't have more than a few active memberships at any one time, so I have not experienced any cancellation issues personally. Also, my last two memberships were 1-year subscriptions to Hegre-Art and Met-Art, and they were non-recurring, so they just expired, I did not cancel them. As far as having half a brain: If money gets tight, you tend to focus on the short term. Who gives a flying f---- what happens 6 months from now, if you are scrambling to pay your current bills? You've had some massive bankruptcies in the financial sector recently, the stock market is getting creamed, and the pain is spreading. | |
|
||
| 11-23-08 03:29am - 5873 days | #7 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
I find it hard to remain faithful to any one model. There are just too many gorgeous women out there, and in my dreams I salivate over them all. One special girl I really appreciate, no longer active: Liana Shevchenko (real name) aka Melissa(8teenies), aka Isabella(teenstarsmagazine), aka Lily Roberts(perfect10). Gorgeous softcore model who was only around 2 years, I think (approx. 2002-2003). Great face, great body. Strictly softcore. | |
|
||
| 11-22-08 07:44pm - 5873 days | #19 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
I go along with Wittyguy when he says, "One man's pain is another man's pleasure in terms of content." The same idea as "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder." If you look at a smaller site, that idea applies even more. With a big site, you can have lots of content and features that might appeal to a broad range of people. With a smaller site, that's not as easy to do, and you are probably going to have a smaller audience for that site. Seems like you are looking for the thrill/excitement of personal discovery. Nothing wrong with that. But a smaller site would be a niche category, which would limit its appeal, no matter how excellent some people might think it to be. Like an art house film. That's a niche category. The film might be great or technically wonderful or artistic or whatever, but the appeal is probably limited. Not 100% true all the time, but that's the basic idea. The great mega-sites are the ones we should all know about, because those are the sites that have the broadest appeal, and that we should probably join (great content and a reasonable price and good site structure so we can download or enjoy the content). I'm not saying there are not truly great or appealing smaller sites, but those sites would not appeal to everyone. They would appeal to fans of that content. I've seen some paysites get a 90+ score, that I would not want to watch for free. The content would be a real turnoff for me. But for fans of that niche, those sites are hot and exciting and pleasurable. No disrespect intended, but I've also read reviews of how hot and good looking the models on some sites are, and when I check those sites out, I realize again that "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder." One guy was raving about a model that I would rate a 50 on a scale of 50-100. Actually, I would rate her lower than 50 if there was a lower rating. My favorite softcore site is Metart. You get: -massive amount of Euro teen/young models, some of the prettiest models on the web. -massive amount of high quality photosets, shot in glamor style -large number of contributing photographers -a low annual price of $99. -around 12-14 hours of free live webcams per day (different models put on a 1- or 2-hour show) -4 new photosets per day, on average. Photosets are 100+ pics, on average. So the content keeps growing. If you like videos, Metart is a bore. They have videos of some truly gorgeous girls, naked, and it's a waste of time to download or watch most of these videos. I don't understand how they do it. In a photoset of some gorgeous girl, she can appear sexy, erotic, appealing, wonderful, and a whole bunch more. Then you watch a Metart video of that same girl, and the thrill is gone. Completely. The music is distracting, the special effects editing is amateurish, and it's such a complete waste of an opportunity to spend some video time with a lovely young model. Chiara A. is the only Metart model I've seen that had some watchable videos. I am not currently a member, but I will rejoin it in the future. I almost feel like a shill because I keep recommending the site again and again. Drooler has much more porn background than I do. I belonged to TeenDreams late 2006 early 2007, so maybe my experiences have little current relevance. And you can skip this section if you want. Teendreams is a supersite like Metart. -huge number of models, some very attractive -large number of vids -softcore and hardcore photosets If you are into teen/young women pics, then almost none of the photosets I saw at TeenDreams in early 2007 had the high quality of Metart. A girl will look gorgeous at Metart, and merely attractive or just OK at TeenDreams. Presentation can make a huge difference in the appeal of a model's picture. At Metart, they go for a glam approach, like the Playboy magazine of the 1970s-1980s, although even more glam than Playboy actually used back then. Sorry, I'm going into more detail than I should. Some of the models at Teendreams could be really beautiful, but the photographers don't bother to show them that way. Instead, the models are more like slices of white bread, digestible but not truly mouth-watering or yummy. Take a tour of the models at Teendreams, enlarging the sample pics of the models. Then take a tour of the models at Metart, enlarging the sample cover shot of the models (use the Metart updates page for an easy page to see a large number of different models). The more recent Teendreams pictures are much better quality than the older photosets from 2007 and before. There is a large amount of 2007 and earlier photosets where the quality is just OK, certainly not great like Metart of the same period. But from what I can see (as a non-subscriber to Teendreams for 1+ year), even the recent photosets of Teendreams don't match the quality of Metart. The quality of HegreArt is as good as Metart for photosets. Both sites (HegreArt and Metart) are softcore Euro teen that focus on photosets. But Metart has a massive amount of models and photosets, while HegreArt's content is far more limited in number of models and number of photosets. Both sites have some great-looking women, so they are both worth joining to see their wares. But Metart content is massive compared to HegreArt. And Metart is cheaper as well, for a monthly or an annual subscription. But if you prefer hardcore to softcore, then skip Metart and HegreArt, because they are both soft only. My experience of hardcore is very limited. If you want hardcore suggestions, I have none. Edited on Nov 22, 2008, 07:49pm | |
|
||
| 3601-3618 of 3618 Posts | < Previous Page | 1 | 2 | 13 | 24 | 35 | 46 | 57 | 72 | Page 73 |
|
