| All Activity |
A summary of all the feedback from this user. |
| Type |
Site - Score |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Reply
351
|
N/A
|
Reply of
graymane's Reply
I usually ask the webmasters if I know that I am missing something. They respond more often than not, and sometimes they are able to make content available on a one-time only basis by request, and other times they can't because of the model's wishes.
|
04-19-14 06:30pm
|
Reply
352
|
N/A
|
Reply of
LPee23's Poll
So, this is my poll, and this is an issue that I have been aware of at many sites, ranging from large networks to small operations. Webmasters are probably more aware of this issue than the average customer, because they get requests from models not infrequently for their shoots to be removed. I have mixed feelings about it, but most of the time I feel that it detracts from the entire site. As one example, I visited DDF's 1by-day.com and houseoftaboo.com recently, and found that a bunch of really nice shoots that I had once downloaded as free samples from TGP's were no longer available. Support basically said that they rotate some old shoots out, sometimes at the model's request, and sometimes for other reasons. Most of the time, I feel that it's like buying a used book with some pages missing when I learn that I am not getting everything that was once on the site. Most webmasters that I have talked with feel the same way, and push hard to keep their content up. At first, it might seem unfair to the models to keep their stuff online when they no longer want it there, but remember, they got paid for those shoots. How fair is it to webmasters and customers if the models do the shoots, get paid for them, and then make legal threats to have their shoots removed? This is a very complex issue though. There are a few sites that I would forgive for removing certain models' content. One is ALS, one of my favorite sites, who removed Ember's content out of consideration for her family after she passed away. The other is Abby Winters. I wouldn't take any points from them for removing a small number of models, because it's part of their identity that they are a model friendly site, and they would lose that distinction if they did otherwise. They still push hard to keep shoots up despite frivolous and trivial requests for removal, but they do offer models the opportunity to buy back their shoots, presumably for a significant amount of money, if their removal is very important to them. In these cases, it's a classy move to honor those requests, and you can't really fault the sites. Then again, this is a complicated issue, sites like 21sextury.com that seem to have never removed a shoot do stand out in their own way. One thing is for sure, if I learn that a model wanted her content removed, and I happen to have it already, I am definitely not deleting my personal copies. Maybe you could fault me for that, but I take extra pride in having something in my collection that has since become impossible to get again. How do you guys feel about this?
|
04-19-14 05:42pm
|
Reply
353
|
21Sextury.com
(0)
|
Reply of
biker's Review
I still give them lots of credit for keeping all of their old stuff up as you mentioned. Actually, not only have they never removed shoots for being old, but somehow they don't seem to ever have removed a single shoot. This is impressive. They must push hard to keep them up, or have an ironclad contract with models. Sites this large that have been around for so long usually had at least a handful of shoots that had to be removed at the model's request.
|
04-06-14 07:30am
|
Reply
354
|
abbywinters
(0)
|
Reply of
RagingBuddhist's Comment
I took a look 10 of their most recent videos to help answer your question. Except for the one fully clothed video, they all showed tits at or before the half way point. On average they showed tits just a couple minutes into the video. There were 2 videos that never showed pussy, and one that waited until after the half way point, but in the rest the models ditched their panties at about one quarter of the way into the video. It seems that they did change this in response to member feedback.
|
04-05-14 12:35pm
|
Reply
355
|
N/A
|
Reply of
careylowell's Poll
We'd probably be fucked if this happened. Honestly, aliens with the capability for interstellar travel could want little from us but our resources. Benevolent aliens who wanted to study us would not make their presence known. Advanced civilizations meeting primitive ones has almost always been a disaster. I'd definitely get one off before shit hit the fan.
|
04-04-14 05:55pm
|
Reply
356
|
21 Sextreme
(0)
|
Reply of
eggyfish's Review
Unless something has changed, the ones you have to buy individually are actually from 21sextury.com. That's a separate site, and if you buy that membership, you get all those videos for the price of membership.
|
03-27-14 05:26pm
|
Reply
357
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
Definitely, yes. Getting to know the owner at some of my favorite sites has been well worth it. There can be perks beyond regular membership.
|
03-27-14 05:23pm
|
Comment
358
|
Totallly Annette
(0)
|
|
03-26-14 09:16pm
Replies (0)
|
Reply
359
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
Not really an average porn surfer at all.
|
03-23-14 07:04pm
|
Reply
360
|
Wet And Pissy
(0)
|
Reply of
turboshaft's Reply
Yeah, I agree, it's great that the performers there seem to really be enjoying it. As for the download speed, I didn't run into that issue, maybe it's been fixed?
|
03-11-14 02:48pm
|
Reply
361
|
N/A
|
Reply of
nadiencendia's Poll
No, but my wife does! They have a nice term for it now - "romantic fiction."
|
03-07-14 02:37pm
|
Reply
362
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
I have never seen this, but I hate the thought of it.
|
03-05-14 08:15pm
|
Reply
363
|
German Goo Girls
(0)
|
Reply of
jimmy455's Comment
If it is a credit card not debit, you can probably contact Mastercard and initiate a charge-back. I don't have experience with Matercard personally in this area, but many credit cards will do this. Once you initiate the charge-back, they will send the biller a bunch of paperwork with an opportunity to contest the charge-back, but I doubt they can challenge it in this case.
|
03-05-14 08:12pm
|
Reply
364
|
Piss Bank
(0)
|
Reply of
Monahan's Comment
Glad you checked out one of my favorites. Prices are even lower now. $19.95 recurring, $34.90 non-recurring, and $9.90/month for a 12 month membership.
|
03-04-14 06:24pm
|
Reply
365
|
N/A
|
Reply of
lk2fireone's Poll
I went with other, because this is highly variable. The best tech support can be a great asset for a site, and it is usually found at either the large networks that are run with customers in mind or at the solo girl sites that are run by the models themselves. In contrast, many sites have poor to no tech support, especially the inactive ones.
|
03-03-14 05:21pm
|
Reply
366
|
N/A
|
Reply of
LPee23's Poll
1200x800 seems to be winning so far. Maybe because that's the size that starts to show up as a full screen on a good sized monitor? Of course, bigger can be much, much better, and I like to see active sites shooting in 3000x2000, but I still enjoy some of my older pics that are much smaller.
I have some older stuff in 900x600 that is among my absolute favorites from the early days that still looks quite good.
The absolute limit for me is 640x480. Actually, 99.9% of stuff at this size is too low res for me to possibly enjoy, but there are a couple of rare shots in my collection that are so amazing in their content that despite this low resolution, they still are enjoyable. It probably helps that I first laid eyes on them back when that resolution was the norm.
Below 640x480, it doesn't really matter what the picture shows, it's really not possible for me to enjoy those. I might look at one and say that it was an interesting shot, and wish it was done in higher resolution, but I just cannot get past the low quality with photos like that. Sure, I still keep what I have from the early days, but with photos this small, it's for "historic value" only. I think I am wise to keep this stuff, because some of it is so old it is impossible to find now.
|
02-19-14 06:41pm
|
Reply
367
|
Extreme Holly
(0)
|
Reply of
james4096's Comment
Which site is this that offers ExtremeHolly.com content as a bonus?
|
02-16-14 07:48am
|
Reply
368
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
All about variety, so I picked other.
|
02-09-14 10:04am
|
Comment
369
|
Fetish Network
(0)
|
|
01-27-14 08:05pm
Replies (1)
|
Reply
370
|
N/A
|
Reply of
graymane's Poll
I think that internet porn will survive as long as the internet. It may be banned in some countries, but never world-wide. There will be legal and technological shake-ups that may lead to periods of increased site closings, and individual sites will come and go, but porn itself will always survive online.
|
01-26-14 06:20pm
|
Reply
371
|
Wetscape
(0)
|
Reply of
graymane's Reply
Thanks for the kind words graymane. It has been a lot of fun to get more involved here at pornusers.com together with you and the other regulars.
|
01-20-14 07:16pm
|
Reply
372
|
ALS Scan
(0)
|
Reply of
Abel Semen's Review
As I look further back through my collection from ALS's earliest years, I should take back what I said earlier. While I still haven't seen any b/g photos from the early years, there were some videos. I actually came across a POV b/g video with Mia from ALS that looks like it's from the early 2000's.
|
01-20-14 08:07am
|
Reply
373
|
ALS Scan
(0)
|
Reply of
Abel Semen's Reply
I don't recall any b/g content from that long ago. I have 67 peeing sets in my collection from the good old days (some remastered now!), but none with b/g action.
|
01-12-14 06:37pm
|
Reply
374
|
ALS Scan
(0)
|
Reply of
Abel Semen's Review
"If it's not older than some of the girls in its newest sets, I'm pretty sure it's close - I'm fairly sure it debuted in the 90s, though it only specifically shows shoots back to 2005 at the moment, with selected older content relegated to an undated "archives" section."
I have some JPEG's and even BMP's from ALS dating back to 1996 - these earliest ones are of an era that can not be found even in the archives. While they are sized around 374x600, they are still relatively sharp and good photography, just a little small by today's standards.
They are remastering the older content, which is a great development! Presumably it was shot on analog color film and scanned into digital images (as the name ALS scan implies), so now it can be remastered in ~2000x3000 resolution!
|
01-12-14 06:03pm
|
Reply
375
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Colm4's Poll
I replied "quite a few days go to waste," but it is not really wasted. When I go to a paysite, I usually go on a download marathon right away and get everything that I want. Then I just hang out and see the updates, but that doesn't require checking in every day.
|
01-10-14 06:18pm
|
|
