| Type |
Site - Score |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Reply
101
|
Brutal Dildos
(0)
|
Reply of
Tom22's Comment
I agree. While I admire a site's willingness to prevent stealing/pirating of their videos, things like massive logos and DRM on their members content is really unacceptable.
A small logo that doesn't cover much, and is possibly semi-transparent is ok though.
|
05-13-07 08:26am
|
Reply
102
|
Curvy Kitty
(0)
|
Reply of
Bo M's Review
I am always skeptical of a 100% rating. Not to mention that it would be nice if you followed the review guidelines. You should put your points for and against (pros and cons) in complete sentence with a dash before each sentence to better show each point. Also, "This chick is SO GREAT!!!" is an opinion that should have been thrown in the bottom line along with the explanations of your pros/cons. For instance, your pros focus only on her abilities, and the bottom line only focuses on updates. Here is an example to make it cleaner, just for future reference:
PROS:
- Great skills!
- Does great deepthroat blowjobs!
- A is what I like about site navigation. (EXAMPLE)
- The site as great video quality (900kb/s WMV/MPG/AVI). (EXAMPLE)
- Images are high-res (1600px+) (EXAMPLE)
CONS:
- Needs better navigation
BOTTOM LINE:
This chick is SO GREAT !!! Her skills in pleasing her man is like a dream and her soft body is really wonderful to watch. I especially love the way she gives head and how she deepthroats and keep the dick deep down her throat extremely long and makes me get nutts when imagining myself being treated by her.
Every minute with her must be really terrific !! She always keep her site very fresh and up-to-date. Maybe that is why it is a bit difficult to remember what you have checked or not. But the site is wonderful !!
You should also expand on the pros and cons in the bottom line, your entire review seems to focus on the model for the most part and barely states anything about the site beyond updates and a catch line to join a site that you did not explain very well.
Just for future reference, and to help out the others on the site. :)
|
05-13-07 08:18am
|
Comment
103
|
Justine Joli
(0)
|
|
05-11-07 05:52pm
Replies (0)
|
Rating
104
|
Nubiles.net
(0)
86.0
|
No Review.
|
05-11-07 05:45pm
|
Reply
105
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Your News
Good idea! I would typically say it is a bad action to take if it weren't for the fact that you can browse back and answer previous polls! Since you can do this, it really defeats the purpose of updating the poll every day since any you miss you can go back and answer later. I'm sure you guys would have trouble getting a new question every day for all eternity anyway... :)
|
05-11-07 05:41pm
|
Reply
106
|
Ema's Place
(0)
|
Reply of
djwolf's Comment
I am skeptical not only because it is 100% rating but because it is a new site and has not had a chance to collect members yet. I will wait with this for a while to see what others say if more join.
|
05-10-07 02:15pm
|
Reply
107
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Your News
I love the new enhancements, except for one thing: I have seen people get rated bad with no reason why. People I would really put a good trust rating to many anonymously rate bad here and there with no comment. I think you should require a comment of X length (maybe 50 characters?) be attached when rating someone badly.
|
05-08-07 04:02pm
|
Reply
108
|
Bubble Girls
(0)
|
Reply of
Drooler's Comment
Drooler, I agree. It is a ripoff. I was rather shocked seeing the 'UPDATED WEEKLY' banner on the site, but when I joined the 'updates' section shows no new updates since January 2006. That is false advertising for one thing, so they should have removed that banner if they still wanted to offer old content.
My guess is they packed up shop and left. If I could, I would get my money back as it is probably just sitting in an account somewhere.
Personally, as I said, I wouldn't join unless you just want to try to grab the old videos. They seem pretty popular elsewhere.
|
05-05-07 11:44am
|
Review
109
|
All Hairy
(0)
78.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
- Exclusive content
- Medium ammount of content
- User-submission image board
- Non-professional models
- Model directory |
| Cons: |
- Some content not exclusive
- Some videos can only be downloaded in chunks
- Video quality varies
- Image size varies
- Not much user-submitted content |
| Bottom Line: |
This site has a fair amount of content, but could use more. The models are typically average-looking, but some are not exclusive to the site. The only videos/models I can clearly say are exclusive are the few that where an "All Hairy" shirt in the beginning.
The site design isn't bad, but could use some better search features and model information. It includes a model directory sorted by name alphabetically.
The user-submission gallery is a good idea, but there is not a whole lot there and some of it is copied from some other copyrighted site (with watermarks removed), but some looks original.
The video quality varies with many of them showing in a small box on top of a 740x480 black box. The videos, for the most part, can be downloaded in chunks or as a whole. Some videos are WMV (newer videos), older are MPEG.
Images are typically medium sized and good quality (~800-1000px) with very few being massive (2000px+).
If you like hairy girls and want to try out your hand at submitting your own or just viewing what few others have posted and seeing some hairy girls have sex or play with themselves, then go for it. If you are looking for the more erotic aspect of hair, there are better sites out there. |
|
05-05-07 11:33am
Replies (1)
|
Reply
110
|
Spring Thomas
(0)
|
Reply of
marquis58401's Comment
I have heard that too, but I am pretty sure it is a rumor... and not true. I have seen the site in the past, and the tour on her front page still seems to add new content here and there. I will keep track on this for a while to see if it is still true.
|
05-05-07 09:31am
|
Comment
111
|
In Focus Girls
(0)
|
|
05-05-07 09:25am
Replies (1)
|
Review
112
|
Sapphic Erotica
(0)
85.0
|
| Status: |
Was a member approx. 2 months prior to this review.
|
| Pros: |
- Plenty of content
- High-bitrate, large videos
- Great quality images
- Beautiful, skinny European models
- Good site design |
| Cons: |
- Redundant after watching the first few (mechanical)
- Not amateur in nature
- Bit expensive |
| Bottom Line: |
Overall a good site site for lesbian sex. The video quality is excellent (along with the images). It features all girls (Sapphic literally means lesbianism). The girls are the typical gorgeous, skinny models with breast size going from A to D. The design is good with a lot of search features. The reason I left is that the content seems the same for most. Girls lick, toy, touch, prod, etc. but it seems almost mechanical after watching a few. Not amateur by a long shot. The site is a tad expensive also. I recommend it if you have a European model fetish (does it exist?) or you just absolutely LOVE lesbian video (amateur or not). |
|
05-05-07 09:19am
Replies (0)
|
Reply
113
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
I keep in mind that they might be biased, but then again if a site is really bad (or really good) it has merit. I try to sort through ones that don't appear legit.
|
05-05-07 01:18am
|
Reply
114
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
Can't afford the bandwidth? Use P2P technology. It works. I think at this point ALL video should be at least full-screen TV quality MINIMUM. Sites that don't have this, I don't stay. DRM? No, just... no.
|
05-05-07 01:14am
|
Reply
115
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Rick's Poll
I am not into the matures as much, but there are many out there that are hot. I know a lot of people fantasize about that hot friend's mom.
|
05-05-07 01:12am
|
Reply
116
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
Totem (mainly), Mplayer, or VLC. I use Linux. Period.
|
05-05-07 01:10am
|
Reply
117
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Rick's Poll
Not a huge deal to me and even though I advocate safe-sex; I still prefer no condom for the creampies and I think it brings on this suspenseful "Is he ganna do it?" feeling (especially in homemade/amateur content).
|
05-05-07 01:09am
|
Reply
118
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
Planning on switching to Cable. Would grab fiber the moment it gets here (if it ever gets here... listening AT&T???).
|
05-05-07 01:05am
|
Reply
119
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Rick's Poll
Don't have a portable device to watch it on.
|
05-05-07 01:04am
|
Reply
120
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
If the site is reliable, I love to hear about updates to the site or content.
|
05-05-07 01:04am
|
Reply
121
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
Firefox, best Linux browser. Before I switched to Linux, and before Firefox... if you are going use IE, I recommend Maxthon. It takes IE and adds Firefox-like plugins, interface, and tabs!
|
05-05-07 01:02am
|
Reply
122
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Rick's Poll
WMV does not work well on linux. I prefer Xvid/Divx due to great quality for filesize, but will take quicktime or MPEG as well. Flash needs updated to compete. Will Silverlight bring that change?
|
05-05-07 01:01am
|
Reply
123
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
Usually take a few days and look at similar offerings and completion to choose best offer.
|
05-05-07 12:57am
|
Reply
124
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
It is VERY important to me. I would like to know at least about how often updates occur and that updates ARE occurring.
|
05-05-07 12:55am
|
Reply
125
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
Lack of showing when updates occurred tips me off. At this point, if I can't see updates I have no reason to believe the site is even being updated.
|
05-05-07 12:47am
|
