| Type |
Site - Score |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Comment
76
|
Sexy Hub
(0)
|
|
04-22-20 03:19am
Replies (1)
|
Comment
77
|
Dane Jones
(0)
|
|
04-22-20 03:08am
Replies (0)
|
Reply
78
|
Love Hairy
(0)
|
Reply of
Loki's Reply
I think it's an appealing site in part because ANY pubic hair on attractive models has been such a rarity for so long. I'm glad to see that bush might be coming back into style.
|
03-10-19 12:23pm
|
Reply
79
|
My Naughty Latin Maid
(0)
|
Reply of
Kody's Reply
The content is above average if you can overlook the ten year old resolution, lighting, technology, etc. Blowjob, cunnilingus, missionary, doggy, cowgirl, then cum on tits or face. Standard Naughty America stuff.
I had an annual subscription that wasn't affected by this recent debacle, but I didn't re-up when it expired in late May because very few videos would finish downloading on any of their sites.
And yes, they will do it to an archive site. It's right there in the terms I quoted. Here's a member in the forum on June 7:
"I signed up today, i cancelled a few minutes ago while checking that i have only access to one video.."
https://forums.naughtyamerica.com/topic/34399-how-do-we-warn-people-about-channels/
I halfway think they're trying to help their users give up their porn habit.
|
07-04-18 01:17pm
|
Reply
80
|
N/A
|
Reply of
pornwatcher's Poll
I usually only view hetero cunnilingus if the woman is taking charge and climbing on top of him. Lesbians? Well sure. I especially like the new POV style of filming lesbian cunnilingus.
|
04-16-18 08:38am
|
Reply
81
|
Bang.com
(0)
|
Reply of
Jade1's Reply
Sorry I'm late replying. I think the "Prime" designation just means you're a paying member vs some sort of free tier, so I'm guessing it's access to everything. When I click on "what is prime" it tells me you can download the videos, you have access to premium studios, access to photos, and some sort of early access to videos. I'm guessing the last is vs. the free tier, too.
|
04-16-18 08:19am
|
Reply
82
|
Naughty America
(0)
|
Reply of
Onyx's Reply
Yeah, it seems to be a new thing with VPNs, adblockers, and java.
https://imgur.com/a/Yp6IT
They force you to do a captcha every few pages if so. It's ridiculous. I know they want to sell ads to paid subscribers and sell the paid subscribers data to other companies, but this is a bit too intrusive, especially when more and more paying customers users are using the tools.
|
03-13-18 01:30pm
|
Reply
83
|
Naughty America
(0)
|
Reply of
WeedLordVegeta's Comment
Can confirm. Captchas every few clicks if you decide to use a VPN, adblocker, or disable java. Avoid this site.
Edited: Too wordy.
|
03-13-18 08:28am
|
Reply
84
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
I'm reminded of the old saying about locks only being there to keep honest people out. Why would a pirate searching through torrents notice and care if a site required higher costs or ridiculously restrictive limits to downloading content? I guarantee the paying customers like us would notice and care, though. I've marked a couple of sites off of my "to join" list for that very reason.
I bet both paying customers and the torrenting crowd notice when the paying customers who want to pay for legal content leave reviews saying it's both too expensive AND too much of a PITA to download, though.
It would be interesting to see data on whether heavier restrictions encourages more piracy of the product. I'd bet my $29.95 it does.
|
01-08-18 04:18am
|
Reply
85
|
Karups
(0)
|
Reply of
Karup's Reply
Thanks, but I'm not sure that moving the discussion to customer service would be helpful to other users who may be interested in the topic, especially when the pay site being discussed is clearly working as designed. Downloads are intentionally and very specifically designed to fail after ten minutes to discourage paying customers from downloading content, and download managers that queue properly and work perfectly fine at all other sites will necessarily obey these ten-minute download restrictions as designed.
Thanks for the input, and for the willingness to participate on the review site. Would you mind if I post the meat of your PM regarding the site's position on download managers?
|
01-08-18 03:00am
|
Reply
86
|
Karups
(0)
|
Reply of
Karup's Reply
"Does your download manager require that you provide links of all of the sets/movies that you want to download prior to running it? Or can it be set to open URLs on its own after a movie completes downloading? If so, that seems like it would solve the problem."
I'm not sure I'm following. A download manager that opens URLs on its own before they have been generated to queue into the download manager?
I'm unfamiliar with that technology, but I'd certainly be interested in a recommendation for a download manager that functions that way.
|
12-15-17 10:05am
|
Reply
87
|
Karups
(0)
|
Reply of
Karup's Reply
So that I don't misunderstand and misrepresent what I'm reading when I write a future review:
I set my download manager to only download one file at a time. I start my first download and queue another download 30 seconds later. If my first download takes 12 minutes to complete then my second download will fail?
|
12-12-17 09:03am
|
Reply
88
|
Karups
(0)
|
Reply of
PinkPanther's Reply
Thanks. I could certainly see a difference in experiences when compared to users that are downloading at 500 KB/s and needing 30-45 minutes for that same clip.
|
12-12-17 08:54am
|
Reply
89
|
Karups
(0)
|
Reply of
PinkPanther's Reply
What are your internet speeds if you don't mind me asking?
With the ten minute cutoff, I can certainly understand drastically different user experiences for someone on a 25.6 Mbps pipe vs the majority of rural American's on what is regarded as dial up these days.
100MB file at 25.6 Mbps = 34 seconds
100MB file at 2 Mbps = 7 minutes
Ten minute limits would yield huge variations in paid user experiences between someone who can get a set of their favorite actress in that ten minutes, and someone who has to babysit the downloads literally all evening for the exact same set.
(FWIW, I doubt pirates are bothered by any of it.)
|
12-09-17 12:30am
|
Comment
90
|
Karup's Older Women
(0)
|
|
12-02-17 04:10am
Replies (1)
|
Comment
91
|
Karup's Hometown Amateurs
(0)
|
|
12-02-17 04:09am
Replies (1)
|
Comment
92
|
Karups
(0)
|
|
12-02-17 04:08am
Replies (10)
|
Reply
93
|
Bree Olson
(0)
|
Reply of
pat362's Reply
I got a promo code that offered the network at a greatly reduced price. I'm a fan of a couple of the actresses, so I figured, "Sure, why not?" Now I'm just offering warnings to others.
|
11-19-17 05:32pm
|
Reply
94
|
Kink.com
(0)
|
Reply of
rearadmiral's Reply
Yeah, I was surprised since I hadn't seen any mention of download limits before, but I didn't re-up when my month ended. I didn't see the point. FWIW, I'd be even more inclined to not recommend the site if it's going to be a crap shoot on how users will be allowed access.
|
08-29-17 06:08pm
|
Comment
95
|
Naughty America
(0)
|
|
08-02-17 01:09am
Replies (0)
|
Reply
96
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Amanda's Poll
I'd be more inclined to suggest the "Top Rated" section of PU should be based on a running average and definitely more than one review. Naughty Alisha/Pornicate and Stiffia were some of the worst sites and networks I've ever seen, and all I would have to do to make them rank at the top for weeks would be to review a few times and then give them 100.
Blacks on Blondes is another that is puzzling. Decent content, but I was locked out of the associated network after I ran into a download limit that the webmasters say doesn't exist. It's still a "Top Ranked" site that beats MetArt, Brazzers, Reality Kings, etc. with only one review able to do the trick.
The only listing on the PU top ten that seems somewhat legitimate is Kink (3 reviews).
EDIT: All to say that the user reviews of PU seem to be a large part of the PU site appeal, and having the rankings so easily tilted seems like a poor approach.
And this is probably the entire wrong place, and I apologize. The sites are connected, though, and the scores are there for similar reasons.
|
07-26-17 08:28am
|
Reply
97
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Amanda's Poll
It would be interesting to see which way the results leaned if there were a choice with her natural breasts. How old is India Summer?
EDIT: Pre-fake tits Kayla Synz or Tawny Roberts. (Sigh)
|
07-16-17 03:11am
|
Reply
98
|
VideosZ
(0)
|
Reply of
bibo's Reply
Ah, I see. Yes, I was looking at the previews of bang.com, and not the "bang originals" material you have click to get to on bang.com.
So is bang.com just a (partial?) clone site of videosz with 100-200 or so original clips leftover from an acquisition by the videosz company?
|
11-17-16 08:37am
|
Reply
99
|
VideosZ
(0)
|
Reply of
bibo's Comment
FWIW, I'm seeing a lot of what looks like overlapping material from Tainster sites (saw some very distinct slimewave, Party Hardcore, some Bimaxx, and some of their clothing-fetish material). I'm fairly sure I saw some content from clubseventeen.com, too. I think they're associated with Tainster somehow, so that sort of makes sense.
I'll likely join videosz in the next six months, so I'll try to remember to look closer once I'm there.
|
11-12-16 09:07am
|
Reply
100
|
ATK Archives
(0)
|
Reply of
lk2fireone's Reply
The issue is less the armpits and more the forced and obvious focus on them to the point of nearly being comical.
Replace "armpit" with "inside of the knee" and imagine joining a site where you notice many, if not most, of the hundreds of sets you click through have the model showing the inside of her knee from different angles for multiple shots within the first 10-12 photos. Then you notice quite a few of the shoots involve the model pulling at the skin or licking the inside of her knees later on in the sets (yes, I know the latter is not physically possible, but it's just for comparison's sake).
I'm fairly indifferent to armpits overall. Even hairy ones. Attractive women are attractive women, period. However, armpit licking and/or pulling at armpit hair is a different thing entirely, and definitely catering towards a fetish.
|
10-16-16 04:57pm
|
