| Type |
Site - Score |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Reply
551
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Colm4's Poll
There's no reason why any intelligent person would even think about keeping it.
But what must be done as well is that the source is reported immediately to the authorities.
The exploitation of underage girls is despicable and when discovered must be stopped immediately.
|
01-13-10 08:33am
|
Reply
552
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Drooler's Poll
Frankly I'm OK with girl-girl sex for several reasons, but I would insist on being in the audience. But I would draw the line at that point.
If she were really asking for my permission to do boy-girl or multiple, that would tell me she really wants to do it. I'm not into sloppy seconds. Sorry.
|
01-09-10 08:55am
|
Reply
553
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Duante Amorculo's Poll
If it's the model's choice to go with a single common name, it's a lousy one. Her income is directly tied to her popularity so if she cannot be found on sites, her popularity diminishes.
Why does Gianna Michaels always show up with both names? Because there are several Gianna's out there. She knows (or her handlers know) that there are those of us who want to check out her superb fun bags and she wants all webmasters to know that people are looking for her, not for one of the lesser Gianna's.
The real problem is when a site chooses some arbitrary name to make a babe appear to e exclusive.
Anyway, being a guy who, when he finds a babe he likes, wants to find anything and everything in that babe's body of work, I answered with the first option.
|
01-05-10 08:49am
|
Reply
554
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Denner's Reply
When a guy does a gorgeous babe for far longer than I ever could, then for the guy to find it necessary to jerk himself off for a "money shot" is a major turn-off for me.
I didn't much like John Leslie as a person (he was always nasty to the female talent), but I aqdmired how Leslie always splattered (back, ass or pubic area) as he pulled it out of the babe's cunt. He never had to fuck his fist to ejaculate.
That tells me he was really into the fuck and not just going through the motions.
As for where the guy splats, the only two places that make any sense are inside (creampie) or on her back or her pubic area. I don't see anything at all erotic about a mouth or tit splat (other than the possible humiliation factor, which also turns me off).
|
01-03-10 10:36am
|
Reply
555
|
N/A
|
Reply of
careylowell's Poll
I chose Southern but would also have voted for French and British (incl. Scottish, as Drooler mentioned) as well.
But also, as Drooler said, I'm into the visual more than the aural element of pornography.
|
01-01-10 01:07pm
|
Reply
556
|
N/A
|
Reply of
careylowell's Poll
Only once on an American Airlines flight.
I was seated in seat 19D and a guy who was seated in 18C was watching a porno on his big screen laptop...with the sound on.
Surprisingly the flight attendants saw and heard it and said nothing.
The worst part is that he had a smoking hot looking babe with him but from my angle I couldn't tell if it was her in the porno.
|
12-26-09 10:40am
|
Reply
557
|
N/A
|
Reply of
lk2fireone's Reply
Good point. The expertise of the photographer (lighting, angles, etc.) is far more important than the costume. A sexy Santa outfit works if the photog knows what he/she is doing, and doesn't if it's a hack behind the camera.
|
12-25-09 11:45am
|
Reply
558
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Colm4's Poll
Not interested.
I like some porn, not other porn.
Example, I get bored with a BJ when the cameraman fixes his/her closeup on just the schlong and the babe's mouth. I also get tired of shots that focus on a guy's asshole while he's porking a gorgeous, but impossible to see babe. I love the female body, not the guy's man meat.
In a theatre I would need a good book to read when the 10-15 minute BJ scenes or the lousy camera angles come on. There isn't any fast forward in a theatre.
And the price would probably stop me as well. For $10+/- to sit in a dark theatre waiting for the "good stuff" to show up is better spent on a porn site where I pick what I get to see and when.
Finally, with the large screen TV sets these days, if you want to see the angel hair in the anal cavity of a babe, the HD stuff will give you just what you want...and the ability to see it over again to make sure you don't miss anything.
|
12-20-09 10:18am
|
Reply
559
|
N/A
|
Reply of
asmith12's Poll
Nope. I've wondered how many people actually go into those sites just like I used to wonder how many people actually called those phone sex numbers that ran in front of the old VHS porn videotapes.
Based on the PU poll, not very many.
|
12-18-09 02:41pm
|
Reply
560
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Drooler's Reply
Drooler said:To a point anyway. When the girl's been so overly, Tweedlely-dum done, and she looks like something that could be hanging around in the older woman's room in that "rape with the precious work of art" scene in Kubrick's A Clockwork Orange, well, it might be worth considering that things have been taken a little too far.
My term is "Twistied," not "Tweedlely-dum" -a take on the Twistys site's over use of photoshop on its photos and why I am a member of the site just for the videos that cannot be photoshopped. So many of the Twistys babes look almost like they were computer simulations rather than real naked girls.
My response to the poll is no photoshop. If she can't pass muster without photoshop, does she really belong on a porn site in the first place?
|
12-16-09 03:03pm
|
Reply
561
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Denner's Poll
Simple.
If the reviews of a $9.99 site are lousy, I use the money to supersize my Big Mac meal instead.
If the reviews of a $34.95 are great, (DDF for example), I will spring for it.
Don't get me wrong. price will always be a factor; the higher the price, the more I will study the reviews and the preview site before making the plunge. But the reviews are always the deciding factor.
And frankly, since joining PU, the only clunker sites I've joined were those where the site had not been reviewed at all on PU or TBP. Lesson learned. If a site has not been reviewed by PU or TBP, it's probably too new or too lousy to warrant the effort.
|
12-14-09 08:09am
|
Reply
562
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Denner's Poll
I said softcore, but the problem is the choices are not mutually exclusive.
I like FTV a lot, for example. Is that softcore or teen? I also like DDF a lot which has a lot of solo girl stuff but also does some b/g as well.
I am losing interest in Brazzers, mainly because the majority of models are excessively siliconed these days, but where a natural babe is doing it I like it as well.
So just because my preference is a gorgeous natural babe showing off her assets whether or not there's a penis, a toy, another babe, bondage, whatever, in the scene, I would have voted "all the above" if that was a choice. It wasn't a choice so I went with softcore.
|
12-10-09 04:48pm
|
Reply
563
|
N/A
|
Reply of
pinkerton's Reply
Cumming on a belly or back was, in the earlier days of Porn, a contribution to the notion of avoiding pregnancy rather than the characteristic now known as "the money shot."
Back in the 70's it was not uncommon to hear the guy saying "I'm coming" followed by the babe pleading with the stud to "pull it out. I don't want a baby."
|
12-06-09 09:17pm
|
Reply
564
|
N/A
|
Reply of
asmith12's Poll
Also missing as a choice: "Smoker" movies.
At 14. It was a 16mm "smoker" movie purloined by a friend from his dad's stash.
|
12-06-09 08:17am
|
Reply
565
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Colm4's Poll
Personally I enjoy weird shit like panty and/or bra stuffing, fisting, bananas, hammers, screwdrivers, pencils, bottles, cell phone, beads, golf balls, you name it, stuffing.
Plastic dicks or strapons don't do it, just other objects that weren't intended for the way some of these babes use them.
And when a girlfriend pulls panties out of a girl's vagina slowly and erotically with her teeth, Little Richard magically becomes Big Dick.
That's my answer. Bring on the babes and their playthings. I much prefer that over some stunt cock's hairy ass placed in front of the camera.
|
12-05-09 01:52pm
|
Reply
566
|
N/A
|
Reply of
BabyGetReal's Reply
Agree with all of BabyGetReal's list....plus excessive time given to the guy's ass, dick and scrotum...plus the guy blocking the view of PTA.
PTA = Pussy tits and ass.
|
12-02-09 08:46pm
|
Reply
567
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Capn's Reply
Ditto that. I'll look for as much as I can of one babe, but there are few that I will chase down to the point of joining a site just to get more content.
I keep a list of my favorites that I will look for when I join a new site, but that's about it.
|
11-28-09 12:10pm
|
Reply
568
|
N/A
|
Reply of
exotics4me's Reply
That explains, at least in part, the pricing of the IOmega special deals; they're dumping the old guys.
Saw a 2 Tb (no-name) on sale today for $188.00. I remember in 2006 a good price was determined by it being under $1.00 per Gb. Now it's under $0.10 per Gb.
The solid state drives that haven't really been a big deal yet, will likely replace the current drives and, when an SSD price comes down more, it will probably bring the price of the current hardware down a whole lot more before they become dinosaurs.
Here's more: Review: Hard disk vs. solid-state drive -- is an SSD worth the money?
|
11-27-09 08:18pm
|
Reply
569
|
N/A
|
Reply of
RagingBuddhist's Reply
They all were FAT32 out of the box. Seagate and WD had software onboard that I copied off then reformatted to NTSF. No problem at all.
IOmega, however, had software that was copyright protected so I could not copy it. The software was not important to me because it was a basic automatic backup utility so I decided to just reformat the drive and lose the software.
But the copy protection apparently blocked the reformat
|
11-26-09 06:47pm
|
Reply
570
|
N/A
|
Reply of
lk2fireone's Poll
I have 1 IOmega 1Tb, 1 Seagate 1.5Tb and 1 1Tb WD (plus a few 750's and 640's).
The IOmega works intermittently, and clicks a lot, a very bad sign. Neither IOmega nor the retailer will work with me because I, unfortunately, told the truth, that the drive worked sometimes and others just sat there doing nothing. It must be inoperative, and only during the warranty period.
The Seagate 1.5 Tb works fast, quietly and reliably and has a few nice software features as well. And, unlike the IOmega, but like the WD, I was able to reformat to NTSF for better performance before loading my stash. And at $119.00 the cost per Gig was the lowest.
The WD is fine. Slower at times and I can't play some HD vids without some stuttering on occasion, but it cost me only $89 so I can't complain.
My next one will probably be another Seagate. WD maybe. IOmega, never.
Somewhat off topic; with the lower cost of drives, likely to go even lower, I'm thinking about redundant backups so if I have a drive go bad, I won't lose my stash.
|
11-26-09 11:56am
|
Reply
571
|
N/A
|
Reply of
nadiencendia's Reply
If a PU review is lousy, that's the ballgame. I will not sign up for any site that PU members is unhappy with. Ever.
I also will not join a site that has not been reviewed by anyone on PU even if my libido is activated by the preview site.
Life is too short and there are so many superb sites out there it makes no sense to gamble even a few bucks on a site no one here has visited.
|
11-23-09 05:32pm
|
Reply
572
|
N/A
|
Reply of
RagingBuddhist's Reply
That says what I was about to say.
TBP was my go to site before PU came along anyway, so when I checked it out I really liked it.
I voted interaction, but the no bullshit reviews as well as the occasional posts by webmasters explaining why they do what they do is not available anywhere at all on the internet.
I said before and it bears repeating. PornUsers is the Consumers Reports of porn. The only source for unbiased, real people info and an opportunity to share with others infp about sites, downloading, organizing, etc.
|
11-22-09 10:10am
|
Reply
573
|
N/A
|
Reply of
messmer's Reply
I chose bad management because that is the cause of all the others.
|
11-19-09 08:41am
|
Reply
574
|
N/A
|
Reply of
marcopolo's Poll
Why isn't PUSSY a choice?
|
11-17-09 03:25pm
|
Reply
575
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Colm4's Poll
IMHO, a site should do everything it can to stop access by anyone under the legal age. But there really isn't very much they can do beyond the warnings because it's rather difficult for a site to check a photo i.d., isn't it?
|
11-14-09 09:38am
|
