Welcome GUEST!      CREATE ACCOUNT - Forgot Password? Create an account to share your experiences and more! E-MAIL   PASS   Auto Log-in Future Sessions (on this computer).

Feedback History A detailed history of activity from this user in all different categories.

User : asmith12 (0)

Feedback:   All (504)  |   Reviews (60)  |   Comments (61)  |   Replies (383) Other:   Replies Received (321)  |   Trust Ratings (1) All Activity A summary of all the feedback from this user. Shown : 226-250 of 508 Page : Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21    < Previous Page - Next Page > Type Site - Score Feedback / Review Date Comment 226 Mature Toilet Sluts (0) Outrageous Terms and Conditions From http://www.nolimitweb.nl/terms.htm : "The occurrence of complaints from Customers, inquiries, Credit Backs or Charge Backs with respect to the Client's program or service may be cause for termination of this Agreement if such events occur with unacceptable frequency as determined in the sole discretion of the Company. In addition, The Company reserves the right to charge the Client reasonable fees and recover its expenses on account of Credit Backs, Charge Backs, or excessive customer inquiries." - have anybody seen anything like this? These guys seem to reserve the right to charge members as much as they wish, at their sole discretion. 05-15-08  03:13pm Replies (6) Comment 227 Mature Toilet Sluts (0) Random Site comment This comment has been inspired by poll of May 15, 2008 on https://www.pornusers.com/browse_polls.html . For this purpose, I've took 10 completely random sites to see if there are chances they're "unethical". Ok, here goes the price of reviewing RANDOM sites :-(. But to maintain experiment as clean as possible I shouldn't avoid even as filthy stuff as this is (sorry guys who love it, it's not my cup of... oh, forget it). Review of non-member area of the site is easy: there is only one page, so there isn't that much to see, but there is a movie on this page, so it isn't that uninformative after all. There are very few promises on this page, so there aren't much things to break (except for content being filthy enough, which is somewhat confirmed by sample WMV), but there is one interesting thing there in their "Terms and Conditions" (http://www.nolimitweb.nl/terms.htm , see my other comment to this site for a quote). I have no idea if some provisions was EVER used by them, or if similar conditions are present for any of the other sites, but this is IMHO nothing short of outrageous (they seem to reserve the right to charge members at the site discretion). Bottom line: not only content is filthy, Terms and Conditions are not less filthy and I would stay away from sites with such Terms and Conditions at any cost. 05-15-08  03:10pm Replies (0) Reply 228 N/A Reply of Denner's Reply Oops, sorry for misreading it :-). I hope to finish "reviewing" 10 random sites today and post results here. 05-15-08  12:25pm Reply 229 N/A Reply of Denner's Reply > This has got to be based on a feeling... Sure, but it's even more interesting to compare results of my little exercise to overall feeling of the members, isn't it? > There are maybe over 100.000 "porn sites" on the net and about 14.000 > registered at TBP. Come on, I don't pretend my little research to be scientific or something, it's obviously only about TGP-registered sites (though personally I have difficult time finding sites outside TBP). But it still somewhat answers a question "if you're trying RANDOM site out of TBP list, what are the chances of being scammed in some way?" 05-15-08  10:00am Comment 230 Pornstar Pay Per View (0) Random Site comment This comment has been inspired by poll of May 15, 2008 on https://www.pornusers.com/browse_polls.html . For this purpose, I've took 10 completely random sites to see if there are chances they're "unethical". Results of reviewing non-member area: according to TBP it is a clone of a well-established site, and looks pretty much like expected for such a site. It has everything needed for this kind of site: ability to search clips, purchases of time from $3.95 to $84.95, streaming/rental/download/XXX-to-Burn and so on. Bottom line: while I'm not being fan of streaming and DRM, if you're ok with it, can be not too bad (especially considering "XXX to Burn" feature). Chances of being unethical are estimated as "very low". 05-15-08  09:54am Replies (0) Comment 231 Mia Baby (0) Random Site comment This comment has been inspired by poll of May 15, 2008 on https://www.pornusers.com/browse_polls.html . For this purpose, I've took 10 completely random sites to see if there are chances they're "unethical". Results of review of non-member area: looks somewhat more "fishy" than, for example, previously reviewed Nina Wonder. This girl claims she's from St. Louis, Missouri (and I have some doubts about it), says about live-cam girls (which might be true), says there are hundreds of "friends" sites within (and while it implies that they're included into membership, I'm not so sure about it being true; not even clear if membership includes access to 16 sites of Roller Girl 2000 mentioned by TGP). Bottom line: IMHO quite high risk of it being pretty much a scam, with only a few hundred of pics and nothing else for this price. 05-15-08  09:40am Replies (0) Reply 232 Be The Mask (0) Reply of themask's Reply :-(. Thanks for warnings. 05-15-08  09:24am Reply 233 N/A Reply of Vegas Ken's Poll Ok, here go first RANDOM sites to check chances of running into unethical site (see also comments titled "Random Site review"); I plan add another 5 sites a bit later. Crazy Drunk Girls - no PU reviews, no TBP reviews. IMHO unethical: unlikely (don't promise much); chances of being unethical are estimated at 25%. Porno Dinero Network / LolliHotties - no PU reviews, TBP review: 77.4. IMHO unethical: quite likely (promise updates but unlikely keeps it). Chances of are being unethical are estimated at 66%. Squirting Pie - no PU reviews, no TBP reviews. IMHO unethical: YES (PRE-CHECKED cross-sale by Epoch). Chances of are being unethical: 100% Dildo Machine Sex - PU review: 1, rating 75, no TBP reviews. IMHO unethical: NO. Chances of are being unethical are estimated at: very low. Nina Wonder - no PU reviews, no TBP reviews. IMHO unethical: NO. Chances of are being unethical are estimated at: very low. Summarizing numbers above, my findings show that on this sample, chances of running into the unethical site are 35-40%; this number may be corrected as I add more sites to the sample, and obviously your mileage may vary :-). P.S. obviously it's an exercise in guesswork, and estimates are wildly personal and subjective. 05-15-08  07:00am Comment 234 Nina Wonder (0) Random Site comment This comment has been inspired by poll of May 15, 2008 on https://www.pornusers.com/browse_polls.html . For this purpose, I've took 10 completely random sites to see if there are chances they're "unethical". Results of review of non-member area: looks as more or less typical individual model site, with not that much content, but providing access to a few dozens of other similar sites. Bottom line: if you're REALLY into amateur girls, could even be interesting (though more research of affiliated sites will be needed). About being unethical - this site doesn't promise much, and most likely keeps its promises. 05-15-08  06:54am Replies (0) Comment 235 Dildo Machine Sex (0) Random Site comment This comment has been inspired by poll of May 15, 2008 on https://www.pornusers.com/browse_polls.html . For this purpose, I've took 10 completely random sites to see if there are chances they're "unethical". Results of review of non-member area: looks decent (assuming you like this kind of stuff). Action as advertised, with photo and video samples. Dated updates would help, but still impression is not too bad. Bottom line: if I would be a fan of this stuff, I could consider joining myself. About being unethical: they don't promise much (except for machine content which is shown right there), and seem to deliver at least not less then they explicitly promise. Moreover, even though they're using Epoch (infampous for it's PRE-CHECKED cross-sellings), this site does NOT use them, kudos to site webmaster and/or owners. 05-15-08  06:34am Replies (0) Comment 236 Squirting Pie (0) Random Site comment This comment has been inspired by poll of May 15, 2008 on https://www.pornusers.com/browse_polls.html . For this purpose, I've took 10 completely random sites to see if there are chances they're "unethical". Results of review of non-member area. Good: action as advertised. Bad: pop-up on home page, link "preview video-clip" leads to "join", quality of pics isn't too good. BEWARE: pre-checked cross-selling "special offer" for another site by Epoch. Bottom line: risky and probably not updated, but BIG fans may still want to try. About being unethical - site doesn't promise much, so there isn't much to break, but PRE-CHECKED cross-sale is IMHO an unethical practice. 05-15-08  06:20am Replies (0) Comment 237 Lolli Hotties (0) Random Site comment This comment has been inspired by poll of May 15, 2008 on https://www.pornusers.com/browse_polls.html . For this purpose, I've took 10 completely random sites to see if there are chances they're "unethical". Results of review of non-member area: girls are ugly, but suck lollipops as advertised. Comment is advertised as exclusive, and looks so (confirmed by TGP review). Updates are advertised as one per week, and it was confirmed by TGP back then, but without dated updates it doesn't look that they're still updating the site. Bottom line: if you're REALLY into this fetish, you might want to risk it despite girls being outright ugly and probable lack of updates. Chances of site being "unethical": IMHO, quite high because of updates. 05-15-08  06:04am Replies (0) Comment 238 Crazy Drunk Girls (0) Random Site comment This comment has been inspired by poll of May 15, 2008 on https://www.pornusers.com/browse_polls.html . For this purpose, I've took 10 completely random sites to see if there are chances they're "unethical". Results of reviewing non-member area: Link to "tour" leads to the same page. Link to http://www.crazydrunkgirls.com/ doesn't work at all. Not much promises (except for "full length videos" and access to 50 more sites). Their page states that "PaycomEU.net/Epoch.com/EPOCHEU.COM"; is their "authorized sales agent", but billing is done by "AdInHelp.com". Bottom line: you should be crazy drunk to join this site, but IMHO because of not much promises they make it doesn't look likely they're essentially unethical. 05-15-08  05:47am Replies (0) Reply 239 N/A Reply of Vegas Ken's Poll Inspired by this poll, I've decided to take 10 RANDOM sites and take a quick look at them; obviously it's an exercise in guesswork, but results can still be interesting. Stay tuned for comments titled "RANDOM Site Comment" and summary here in this poll :-). 05-15-08  05:36am Reply 240 Slaves In Love (0) Reply of Jay G's Reply You're very welcome :-). 05-13-08  10:16am Reply 241 Slaves In Love (0) Reply of Jay G's Reply I'm not a member anymore (may re-join in the future), so my comments are about 3-4 months out of date. > but was turned off by the poor main page which gives very little > imformation (no update info, no quantity of product info, no models > info), just random photographs. You're right, but inside it is MUCH better than outside :-). > Also, there was no reply to my e-mail questions about the site (usually > a very bad sign). Probably because they're Russians (that's for sure) and could have problems writing in English. Usually it's better to stay away from Russian sites, but this one is an exception. > Is there lots of content? Yes; most updates are photos (decent quality), but even my video collection (not full) is more than 100 of their clips (5-10 minutes length each). > How often do they update? I think twice per week (or maybe once, don't remember exactly), but updates are either photosets, or quite small parts (older about 5 min, newer 10min or so) of larger videos (some videos span up to 10 such updates, and there is usually a VERY good script behind the video). > I thought there used to be a lack of videos. Is that improved now? See above. > What is the quality of the videos? The most recent ones were VERY decent 640x480 WMVs at 800-900kBit/s. Bottom line: if you're into this theme (on milder side, with more of psychology than physics and even less brutality), you should try it (obviously that's assuming that they didn't turn to worse during these few months I'm not a member). PS If you decide to join, please tell me how it goes - I might re-join too :-). 05-13-08  07:33am Reply 242 Ultra DVD Pass (0) Reply of bobtheelephant's Comment Good luck in your fight with them. See also my comment here: https://www.pornusers.com/replies_view.html?id=18002 - if you complain about fraudulent charge to your bank, it will be a good thing not only for you, but for community as a whole (scammers don't like to be fined or their license revoked). 05-12-08  02:43pm Reply 243 N/A Reply of JBDICK's Poll Cannot help it: voted for Clinton 'cause it would mean she loses the presidential race :-). P.S. Would vote for Obama and McCain too if they would be on the list :-). 05-12-08  02:34pm Reply 244 Be The Mask (0) Reply of themask's Reply :-(. Thanks. 05-12-08  07:17am Reply 245 18 Inches Of Pain (0) Reply of Khan's Reply Oh, I see, thanks. 05-07-08  08:24am Comment 246 Plug Her Holes (0) PU typo Plug Her Holes is shown as a clone of Plug Her Holes. :-) 05-07-08  05:02am Replies (1) Comment 247 18 Inches Of Pain (0) Clone? From preview areas PlugHerHoles and 18inchesOfPain look VERY different. So either one of them is outright lying in their preview, or they are NOT clones. Any further info will be appreciated. 05-07-08  05:00am Replies (2) Reply 248 Kink On Demand (0) Reply of Ergo Proxy's Reply Let's hope that their competition (TwistedFactory) will come up with something better :-). 04-28-08  04:27am Comment 249 Kink On Demand (0) Kink on demand $8/episode? What kind of price is it? Also you can get ONLY very old episodes, with new episodes still available ONLY for subscribing guys :-(. Kink.com sites are well-known for their high prices (and high quality), but this is outrageous even for them. I don't see how anybody would want to go for this on-demand stuff (even assuming that it's DRM-free, which is most likely true). 04-24-08  03:18pm Replies (5) Reply 250 N/A Reply of Pornjackker's Reply > will the average viewer buy it? FWIW: I've heard that stories by Private (like "Robinson Crusoe" or "Cleopatra") are VERY popular, so yes, average viewer will buy it. It's more expensive, that's for sure and very few guys are doing it, but that's another story. Personally I'm quite tired of all the same "meat on screen" and ANY variety is a good thing for me as long as it's not too violent or too disgusting. 04-23-08  03:39pm Shown : 226-250 of 508 Page : Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21    < Previous Page - Next Page > Home - Sites - Users - Reviews - Comments - Categories - Forum Contact Us - Announcements - FAQ's - Terms & Rules - Cookies - DMCA - 2257 - Porn Review - Webmasters Protecting Minors We are strong supporters of RTA and ICRA, two of the most recognized self labeling organizations. Our site is properly labeled to assist in the protection of minors accessing inappopriate content. For information about filtering tools, check this site. DISCLAIMER: ALL MODELS APPEARING ON THIS WEBSITE ARE 18 YEARS OR OLDER. To report child pornography, go directly to ASACP!  We're proud to be a corporate sponsor. Have concerns or questions about porn addiction?  We recommend this helpful resource. All Rights Reserved © 2003-2025 PornUsers.com. Loaded in 0.36 seconds.