Replies Given
|
Your replies to other users's reviews and comments. |
| Type |
Site |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Reply
176
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Monahan's Reply
You'll have to buy an old 5 1/4" floppy drive. They're about $35 on eBay. You'll probably also need a floppy controller card, because most modern BIOS don't have native support for 5 1/4" floppy drives. You can get a controller for $60 here http://www.deviceside.com/fc5025.html. If you want to see those photos again, I'd get them now, because the hardware you need will only get harder to find and more expensive.
|
07-27-14 06:35am
|
Reply
177
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
I didn't like it for the longest time. Then one day I was watching an AbbyWinters.com video featuring a hairy model, and something just clicked, her natural state was all of a sudden such a turn on. I still like shaven most of the time, because too much hair can hide the pussy lips, but I do understand the appeal in hairy.
Once I was driving a friend home after she had a run. She was kind of the hippie type, very hot, but she only shaved her legs, not even the armpits. She was sweaty after her run, and she apologized for her BO, but actually it was kind of a turn on. It wasn't the nasty, haven't showered in three days-type smell, it was more just fresh but sweaty and aromatic.
I knew she wanted me, but I didn't play into any of her advances. I had broken up with my ex at the time - now my wife - and I was still too fixated on my ex, despite the fact that I had broken up with her. I was tempted though. I still really wonder what it would have been like though, but now I will never know. No complaints though, my wife and I have been happily together for 8 years, and she is a smoking hot ex-model who loves pee almost as much as I do.
Sorry for the digression, I've had a couple of glasses of wine tonight. Hope you guys enjoy nonetheless.
|
07-25-14 04:52pm
|
Reply
178
|
N/A
|
Reply of
graymane's Poll
I'm about as likely to use a CD today as I am to use a floppy.
|
07-24-14 05:30pm
|
Reply
179
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Cybertoad's Reply
My issue with DDF and their old content is slightly different than yours. At this point, since I've already come out talking about this issue in vague terms, I think it's time to get it all out and write my review. I hate to expose shortcomings of a great site, but if no one speaks up, then where is the motivation to change? I'm going to try not to slam DDF, I'd rather have them look at my review as fair and perhaps realize that there is truth in it. Look forward to it soon.
|
07-24-14 09:07am
|
Reply
180
|
N/A
|
Reply of
pat362's Reply
It's dishonest when that happens, but I think it's great when sites remaster their older stuff, bring it up to modern quality, and clearly label it as remastered.
|
07-21-14 08:16pm
|
Reply
181
|
N/A
|
Reply of
LPee23's Poll
Your comment hit so close to home Cybertoad, that I forgot to comment on the topic of my own poll. If you haven't guessed already, I think it is much worse to remove older content than to fail to produce new content. Webmasters, please consider this. When you remove your original content, you lose your appeal to collectors. Collectors are your best customers and biggest spenders. As a collector, I don't want to have 90% of the content from a favorite site, I aim for 100%. When I join a site that's been on my list for a while, and my anticipation turns to dismay when I see that only a part of their content is available, it detracts from the experience. Even if you are producing amazing content, I am much less likely to be a repeat customer, because I see less of a point in adding new content to a collection that is irreparably flawed by missing the original work. I don't collect anything but porn, but the closest analogy that comes to mind is comic books. Maybe DC Comics wrote some great comic books in the 1990's, but could you ever presume to have a great Superman collection without the originals from 1938? It's the same thing with porn, at least for me, and I'm sure for many others too.
|
07-21-14 04:26pm
|
Reply
182
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Cybertoad's Reply
I have my own issue with DDF's old content, which I may bring to attention some day. They make new content that is second to none, but their handling of old content has deeper failings than what you refer to here. I've held off on writing a review on DDF for several months, because I am honestly way too conflicted to know how to score them. I don't know how I can take a site with such strong positives as DDF, reconcile those with some of the strongest negatives, and produce a review that I would want to post. It could potentially be one of my best reviews, I could write volumes, but I like DDF too much to call them out right now. Maybe when I feel able to write a more unbiased review of DDF, I will post it one day.
|
07-21-14 04:06pm
|
Reply
183
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Drooler's Poll
Close-ups are one of my favorite type of shots, but of course they need to be within the context of a set where you see the model's face and body too. Close-ups shot well with high resolution and a lot of detail are the best. The more detail, the more it looks like you are right there.
|
06-29-14 10:30am
|
Reply
184
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Randyman's Poll
It's been about 2-3 hrs/day lately, but that's about to change. I'm moving up in the world professionally, which is a good thing, but soon my work is going to demand my time close to 24/7. I probably won't be able to comment here as much either, but I'll make sure to check in often.
Edit: To whoever answered 9-12 hrs/day, I envy you and the time you have on your hands. Wealth can be measured in time as well as money, and I wish I could have the same luxury as you.
|
06-28-14 04:35pm
|
Reply
185
|
N/A
|
Reply of
jberryl69's Reply
"Netflix did this when they broke out their DVD & Streaming business into the same cost for each as the cost for both was. They lost my business but obviously their business has grown."
Nice! They lost my business at exactly this point too!
|
06-11-14 05:20pm
|
Reply
186
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Colm4's Poll
Considering that you probably paid about $30 per site for the porn and 4Tb externals go for under $150, it's an easy call to buy a new drive.
|
06-11-14 03:07pm
|
Reply
187
|
N/A
|
Reply of
jberryl69's Reply
It's not a trick question, but the vagueness makes it hard to answer, especially if you put a lot of thought into it.
To clear one thing up, it's all about the bottom line. If you choose #1 or #2 it should be because you think that losing your base or damaging your product will hurt your bottom line.
|
06-10-14 03:42pm
|
Reply
188
|
N/A
|
Reply of
LPee23's Poll
I can add a few to the list besides Brazzers:
JustinesBedroom.com - forced to do so
HelenVolga.com - reasons unknown
One other site I can think of too, but I won't call them out on it, because they were really cool about it. They actually waived copyright so that I could get it from one of their previous members.
|
06-09-14 08:05pm
|
Reply
189
|
N/A
|
Reply of
LPee23's Poll
I knew someone would ask for extreme to be clarified. It's deliberately subjective here, just answer based on what it means to you. This poll was inspired by Acworth saying that he may remove some of the more "extreme" lines on Kink.com to improve sales by reaching a more mainstream audience without clarifying what extreme means. It is open to your interpretation.
I answered both 1 and 2. If the reason for this is to improve sales, I don't think it will work.
|
06-09-14 02:58pm
|
Reply
190
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
I don't mind a few, especially if they are actually good discounts at sites that I am interested in. Also, if the ad revenue helps keep membership costs down, then that's a good thing. No deceptive ads though.
|
05-06-14 09:12am
|
Reply
191
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Marcus's Reply
When HD came out years ago, some people cautioned that the extra detail may not be appealing when it shows blemishes. As we all know, the market has since voted overwhelmingly in favor of HD, with standard definition video being below almost anyone's standards today for a paysite.
|
04-30-14 01:03pm
|
Reply
192
|
N/A
|
Reply of
graymane's Poll
The other thing that I will add is this. There was a time in the early 2000's when scams and shady billing practices were much more pervasive on paysites, and many got a bad name for it. That type of thing angered customers, and probably encouraged piracy. Nowadays, almost every site I've been to is just trying to do honest good work for their customers. On the other hand, judging by the prevalence of piracy today, many customers haven't changed their mindset. The owners really seem to occupy the moral high ground now, and maybe it's time for those who still resort to piracy to seriously reexamine your ways.
|
04-28-14 06:55pm
|
Reply
193
|
N/A
|
Reply of
graymane's Poll
Like badandy400 said, it depends on where the line is drawn. In my first, somewhat controversial post on this forum, I mentioned that I had obtained the content of a couple of sites that had been closed for years from someone who uploaded it for free. Granted, this was after first trying to join the sites, finding out that they were closed, trying to track down the owners with the intent of buying their old content at a large premium, and failing. This is either borderline piracy or piracy according to the various replies that I received on this particular post. I had no bad intent though, made no negative impact, and actually really wanted to pay for what I got.
|
04-28-14 02:37pm
|
Reply
194
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
I have WiFi, but I still go Ethernet for my downloads. I have a 50 Mbps connection on Ethernet, but my wireless router slows it to just over 30 Mbps.
|
04-24-14 04:10pm
|
Reply
195
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
I don't go looking for it, but I don't mind it either. There's enough around online though, including 5 fingers, but maybe less on DVD.
By the way, the 4 vs 5 finger fisting distinction came from British obscenity law. 5-finger fisting is considered extreme porn in the UK and a criminal offense. 4-finger fisting is OK in the UK though.
|
04-20-14 04:19pm
|
Reply
196
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Cybertoad's Reply
I should add that the place where this happens the most is on the amateur sites with user generated photos and videos, although that's not what I had in mind when I wrote the poll. While most of the stuff on this type of site like amateuralbum.net isn't high quality, there are occasionally great sets of really hot amateurs that get posted. I check frequently, because it's not uncommon for the users there to delete their own photos after a week or two, and many users delete their entire profile within a few years.
Models that have been removed by DDF include Jenny Noel and Julie Silver, as well as about 16 more that I can't name.
There are a small number of models from Abby Winters who have bought back their own shoots for removal. I don't want to dwell on that site too much here, because the topic of these models has already been beat to death on member forums, and Abby Winters is an excellent site despite this, but I will post their names just so that you guys can recognize it if you have one of these rarities. Alana, Jasmin, Jules, Kate, Louise, Mikaela (killed in terrorist attack in Bali), Nikita, Tammy, and Verity. You can't fault Abby Winters for this, they do try hard to keep their content up, and they are coming out with lots of great new stuff.
There was also Ember from ALS as I said before. I think there was a thread started on her topic, and people came out in supports of ALS's decision.
|
04-20-14 05:00am
|
Reply
197
|
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
198
|
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
199
|
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
200
|
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
|
|
