Replies Given
|
Your replies to other users's reviews and comments. |
| Type |
Site |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Reply
26
|
Brazzers
(0)
|
Reply of
malikstarks's Reply
Thanks, calculation follows:
51min 16sec = 3076 sec
4,675,992,829 bytes = 4,675,992,829 * 8 bits = 37,407,942,632 bits
So we have average bitrate = 37,407,942,632 / 3076 = 12,161,230 bits/sec, or approximately 12MBit/s . It is indeed HUGE (Asstraffic has about 8MBit/s); on the other hand, higher bitrate does not always guarantee higher quality, so it's a pity that Brazzers don't have an HD sample for public download, so everybody could compare their quality.
|
11-17-09 08:16pm
|
Reply
27
|
Brazzers
(0)
|
Reply of
malikstarks's Reply
If you can tell me (for the same file) it's size in bytes (megabytes, gigabytes) AND it's length in minutes, I can easily calculate it's bitrate. Thanks in advance.
|
11-17-09 12:50am
|
Reply
28
|
Brazzers
(0)
|
Reply of
malikstarks's Reply
> They do take up alot of space 4-5 GBs
Do you know what kind of bitrate they have? Or at least can you tell how long one single file is (in minutes) and how large it is (in gigabytes)?
|
11-16-09 01:55am
|
Reply
29
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Colm4's Poll
Yes, and also ALL the sites should be marked as RTA/whatever else, so browser filters (school ones and those installed by parents) are able to filter such sites out. While I really hate government regulation, I think THIS (site labeling) should be made the law (it does not create any problems while solving concerns of those who cares about minors accessing porn).
|
11-15-09 10:28pm
|
Reply
30
|
Brazzers
(0)
|
Reply of
malikstarks's Reply
> Brazzers if brighter with much richer color textures.
With AssTraffic colors already being IMHO vastly oversaturated, I can't say it's a good thing if somebody has even more saturated colors.
> Put it this way, I have a very powerful computer that plays the
> Brazzers HD smoothly with no problem at all, but if I try to fast
> forward a scene it will not let me do it, the video freezes. No
> other HD porn has ever given me that problem.
And you see that "video freezes" as an ADVANTAGE for Brazzers?? No comments.
|
11-15-09 10:04pm
|
Reply
31
|
N/A
|
Reply of
pat362's Reply
If we're speaking about the sites which say about "real people", I can agree it's (arguable) a kind of fantasy. But if we're speaking about the sites who promise their members a chance to get into shoot (which I think was the whole question of this poll), and using boyfriends of models instead, I tend to qualify it as an OUTRIGHT CHEATING; don't you agree?
|
11-13-09 10:15pm
|
Reply
32
|
Brazzers
(0)
|
Reply of
rome476's Reply
Oh, so not only their marketing, but also their programmers went downhill recently; doesn't look too good for them :-(. Still, if they refunded money, it's not a bad sign (most of the sites won't bother at all with refunding and even with answering e-mails these days :-(( ).
|
11-13-09 10:12pm
|
Reply
33
|
Brazzers
(0)
|
Reply of
picdude's Reply
> they are getting some awesome locations/sets these days.
I agree, that's why I've put their ranking not as 50, but as 75 :-).
|
11-13-09 05:59am
|
Reply
34
|
N/A
|
Reply of
RagingBuddhist's Reply
Do you mean that guys from the site members are GETTING PAID for doing it? :-) If yes, it would probably simplify things, though as the guy has paid for the site, to qualify as "getting paid" for it they will likely need to pay ALL of his previous membership dues, PLUS something "extra".
And obviously even then it will depend on specific location GREATLY (California is one thing, Tennessee is another one, and Europe is a different game altogether), which alone is enough for me to re-iterate that personally I still wouldn't risk it.
|
11-13-09 01:35am
|
Reply
35
|
Brazzers
(0)
|
Reply of
RagingBuddhist's Reply
> I have to ask how you've missed all the comments and reviews about this site...
I didn't really miss them, but there are two reasons why I still wrote this comment:
1. Even after reading reviews, I didn't expect it to be THAT bad.
2. with average PU rating being in 85+ range, I don't think it is yelled loud enough :-).
|
11-13-09 01:24am
|
Reply
36
|
Brazzers
(0)
|
Reply of
malikstarks's Reply
> As for Ass Traffic, it is a site that I was vaguely familiar with before but had never had an interest in membership. Now after having had a look they do indeed shoot vids in 1080p so it probably does match Brazzers offer from that standpoint.
Thanks for comment, but did you REALLY compare Brazzers stuff with Asstrafic HD samples (I think they do have HD sample for free)?
> legitimate beefs with the Brazzers model that I do agree with. First if...
VERY FIRST, they MUST tell RIGHT ON THEIR HOME PAGE that all the HD they're telling about on their home page (like "NOW IN FULL HD" and "Join now and embrace the future with the best HD experience") will NOT be available for the price they're asking for. Do you think THIS kind of stuff (telling user "Join now and embrace the future with the best HD experience", and THEN, when he clicks there and 'Joins now', PAYING them money they're asking, to ask MORE for this very 'HD experience' they've just promised and he just paid for") is fair?? This is CHEATING (or MISLEADING advertisement AT THE VERY LEAST), and IF I would join them because of HD they advertise, I would FOR SURE ask my bank to revert transaction.
Is there a chance of them stopping this kind of CHEATING of THEIR OWN USERS? I don't think so, unless they will get hit by reversed transactions because of it (which I hope for).
|
11-12-09 10:11pm
|
Reply
37
|
N/A
|
Reply of
pat362's Reply
> Now what's the likelyhood that any of these so called real people having sex with pornstars sites are real??
Personally I will believe it only when I see a genuine report from PU member who's made it. BTW, have anybody tried to do it with BigSister? (and BTW, THERE it COULD even be legal, even if it IS prostitution).
|
11-12-09 09:53pm
|
Reply
38
|
N/A
|
Reply of
james4096's Reply
About Be the mask - I was also wondering about it, see answer from former member here:
https://www.pornusers.com/replies_view.html?id=14697
Doesn't look real to me :-(.
|
11-12-09 08:58pm
|
Reply
39
|
N/A
|
Reply of
RagingBuddhist's Reply
> If the porn itself isn't illegal, why wouldn't it be legal?
I'm concerned about some *@&^#*!&@ thinking it is "sex for money", a.k.a. prostitution, which is illegal in many (or most) places.
And as it is indeed possible to organize such a site as a cover to brothel (like "pay $500 and you WILL get sex with our 'stars'"), I'm afraid courts in places where prostitution is illegal won't be really excited about it. While there is no precedent, nobody knows for sure, but personally I wouldn't take risk trying it.
|
11-12-09 08:54pm
|
Reply
40
|
Brazzers
(0)
|
Reply of
malikstarks's Reply
1. Are you sure their stuff is really better than HD from AssTraffic? I doubt it (and AssTraffic is NOT charging anything extra for them, and DOES provide good download speeds).
2. WHOLE 100% of your reply is EXACTLY what their support / webmaster would say in reply to user ranting about their newer policies (ESPECIALLY passages like "if you still want to get the HD vids you have two ways to do so. Purchase the credits, or remain a member for 6 months."). Rather strange, isn't it?
|
11-12-09 05:01am
|
Reply
41
|
N/A
|
Reply of
GCode's Poll
Didn't see any such site which I would trust, yet. Not even sure if it's legal.
|
11-12-09 04:51am
|
Reply
42
|
MetArt
(0)
|
Reply of
lk2fireone's Reply
Just a purely personal opinion :-): for me fake smile is SO MUCH worse than fake boobs, and in "fake smile" department Met Art is FAR ahead of the Playboy :-((.
|
11-03-09 12:50am
|
Reply
43
|
Brazzers
(0)
|
Reply of
anyonebutme's Reply
Thanks for warning, I need to double-check my credit card bill (they didn't overcharge me for 1100, but a few bucks could have slipped without me noticing it). But if they DID charge for something which didn't happen, I really think it will be THEM who will be in trouble, not ME. My bank is usually pretty customer-friendly when disputing credit card charges (yes, they ask lots of questions, especially "Did you already try to contact the merchant?"), but after all they are doing their job pretty good.
|
10-26-09 01:57am
|
Reply
44
|
N/A
|
Reply of
mbaya's Poll
I assume it was limit per day, wasn't it?
|
09-19-09 01:24am
|
Reply
45
|
Brazzers
(0)
|
Reply of
RagingBuddhist's Reply
Putting video encoding quality aside and concentrating on the content itself (and anyone paying attention to my rants all over PU will know that it is content itself what matters to me :-)), I will say that from what I've seen to date (which admittedly is too little yet to form reliable opinion), they're MUCH less boring and repetitive then MOST of the sites out there. Just one example of creativity not to be found elsewhere: session of underwater sex in scuba diving gear (from BigTitsInSports); for me it's a clear sign that their production team does indeed care about the footage they're producing.
And BTW, I'm pretty sure that ANY adult web site with regular updates is BOUND to be repetitive. While it is sad, but there aren't too many ways to vary adult scenes :-(. Give me ANY site and I'll make the very same "repetitive content" argument about it. And comparing Brazzers to other networks (like, for example, FilthFreaks or Jerk-Off Pass), IMHO Brazzers are MUCH less repetitive.
Their deceitful marketing is a completely different story, and I'm completely on your side in this regard.
|
09-11-09 10:14pm
|
Reply
46
|
Brazzers
(0)
|
Reply of
RagingBuddhist's Reply
> And yet, they must be doing something right - people keep going back.
Not sure about the "adult industry", but in other areas it's common to have marketing guys fairly separate from the "production" guys. So it seems to me that Brazzers have good content production team (these are the guys who're "doing something right") and horribly greedy marketing team (which I'm pretty sure will backfire sooner rather than later).
|
09-10-09 11:12pm
|
Reply
47
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Colm4's Poll
Wow, now I'm beginning to see why that many people here on PU are that much concerned about DL speeds and especially DL limits. Still not my cup of tea, so please don't expect me to jump on this bandwagon in my reviews :-).
|
08-28-09 10:55pm
|
Reply
48
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Reply
As usual, just when the real fun has begun... :-)
> I feel compelled to say (for the record) that we (PU Mgm't) see absolutely no indication that asmith12 is associated with kink.com
Thanks a lot, Khan (as you understand, it's important for me).
> Now, as I've mentioned to both of you privately,
I see now (and BTW sorry for posting URL after your first note on it - I just didn't see your notes until you've told where to look for them); the problem with such comments in "Approved" messages is that they don't pop up in any way; to compare: new "Denied" messages pop up as "Denied" at the top of the every page and attract immediate attention (and therefore one can understand that something went wrong), but such comments to "Approved" messages can easily go unnoticed forever; maybe it would be a good thing to highlight such non-standard "Approved" comments in some way (and/or to send e-mail about it)?
|
08-22-09 01:05am
|
Reply
49
|
N/A
|
Reply of
exotics4me's Reply
> Of course, the link doesn't work
As of now, it still works (if you removed all the spaces manually as I've asked); alternatively, there is an alias (I hope it won't be corrupted by forum software as it happened with the original one): http://tinyurl.com/mhenlz
|
08-20-09 11:09pm
|
Reply
50
|
N/A
|
Reply of
exotics4me's Reply
> An apology to you? For what? The "allegation" wasn't against you.
You have alleged that "main page for Ultimate Submission changed the wording over the last 24 hours" because of your referring to "brutal leg scissors" in your reply to me, implying that I'm affiliated with kink.com. As you have already admitted above, this allegation was ungrounded; I'm still sure it requires an apology to me PERSONALLY for alleged affiliation, which is a very serious allegation for PU member. If you think otherwise - it's up to you, I don't care much, and will just hope that the rest of PU users will make their own conclusions about members who are making serious false allegations and not apologize afterwards.
As for your allegations (or whatever else) about kink.com - this is another story, and I don't care at all (I think you're wrong about it, but this is ok to have different opinions, the concept which you don't seem to embrace, resorting to personal attacks and allegations instead of discussing the subject).
|
08-20-09 10:53pm
|
|
