| Type |
Site |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Reply
726
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Cybertoad's Poll
Not sure what the distinction is between "using" porn and "watching" porn.
I watch porn because I love looking at the PTA being displayed in an erotic manner. Fantasy? I guess. Turn on? Most definitely. Fill a void? Sure. Getting off on porn when I'm not in a place where I can't do the deed is an objective. Maintaining a monogamous relationship? Yup. When I'm away from home, a session with my hard drive is a whole lot better (and cheaper and safer) than other pursuits.
PTA - Pussy Tits and Ass
|
08-11-08 08:15am
|
Reply
727
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Wittyguy's Poll
I don't like the idea.
The Forum is intended to be an exchange of ideas and opinions. By rewarding people for posts in the forum, you will be encouraging a bunch of low interest posts on low interest subjects made solely to run up ticket totals while, at the same time, reducing the value of the forum.
|
08-07-08 08:17am
|
Reply
728
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Drooler's Reply
I'm in relative agreement with all you say, Drooler.
When I see anal sex, I'm reminded of the old ship board caution of Navy EM's, "after a 3 month cruise, if you drop the soap in the shower room, leave it on the floor unless you want a rude surprise."
To me the sensation of experiencing vaginal sex is so much better than the sensation of shoving my willy up a girl's ass that I really don't see the attraction as a "doer." Now for gays, of course, rear-ending is the only way to get any physical sexual gratification.
Thus the logical connection is made between a male who enjoys doing anal as being "queer."
As for group sex, I also agree. My interest in watching a porn video is the babe, not the guy(s) doing the porking. A GGB video is fine, but a GBB is usually not so good because the babe is hidden behind the two guys. I want PTA* in my porn, not dicks, scrotums and hairy asses.
*PTA = Pussy, Tits and Ass.
|
08-06-08 10:37am
|
Reply
729
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
The thought has occurred to me. Often (usually?) with DP flicks, the cameraman captures both schlongs in great detail but we horndogs can't dee much of the bsbe. With gangbangs, there's a better chance of enjoying the babe, which is all I give a shit about, but really. If she's porked by one guy or 10 guys, why does it matter?
|
08-05-08 07:04am
|
Reply
730
|
N/A
|
Reply of
MargulisAZ's Reply
Ditto that, MarquilisAZ. The "celebs" who have made porn aren't all that great. The great ones are unlikely to permit any photos or videos of their coital activity.
|
08-04-08 12:32am
|
Reply
731
|
N/A
|
Reply of
pat362's Reply
If the review comments support the score, I'll remain silent about the score but may comment on some aspect of the review with which I disagree.
Otherwise I'll post a question if the reason for the score isn't explained in the commentary.
[If it's a newbie review I'll ignore the review altogether,)
|
08-02-08 07:31am
|
Reply
732
|
N/A
|
Reply of
nygiants03's Poll
"Sick?" Yup. When I see the occasional over the top garbage, like scat videos and such, which can make me physically ill.
Disgusted? Yup. When I see stuff like excess physical violence perpetrated on women, when I see women forced into gagging on large schlongs to the point where they are experiencing severe discomfort.
Bored? As porn "matures" with ever increasing video/photo quality and with more sophisticated scene direction and production, I am increasingly bored with some of my archived stuff which just a few years ago I thought was superior stuff. I am also less patient (less willing to compromise) with a lot of the marginal stuff that I used to keep, especially where the video spends far too much time recording the hairy asses of two guys in a DP scene involving a gorgeous babe that is invisible. [The good news is that I just finished dumping a bunch of "unkeepable" stuff and freed up a 360 Gig hard drive.]
Genbrally my enthusiasm can vary over a period of time but so long as Little Willy can snap to attention and make like Big Dick when a gorgeous babe is showing off her PTA* in a variety of scenarios, I'll never tire of porn.
*Pussy, Tits and Ass.
|
07-30-08 02:21pm
|
Reply
733
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
Frankly, DP puts far too much focus on the schlong and far too little emphasis on PTA for my taste.
DP, in most cases, causes the PTA parts of the babe to be obscured in favor of a hairy male ass or two.
That's kinda why I am happier without DP, or, if it must happen, if it means the babe is servicing two guys with a single blow job I can go along with that.
(By the way, PTA means Pussy Tits and Ass)
|
07-25-08 10:55am
|
Reply
734
|
N/A
|
Reply of
turboshaft's Reply
A note of explanation. The shop knows me as a business customer so he could have thought he was doing me a favor telling me about the porn so that I could deal with an employee. However I did tell him when I brought it in the day before that he was to charge me, not my company, for the work done. In other words it was not a 100% MYOB deal, but closer to a 75% MYOB.
|
07-20-08 07:17pm
|
Reply
735
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
I'm with Davit.
A few years ago I took a computer to a repair shop that had some porn sites listed in My Favorites on IE and some recent activity in history. (I transfer all of my downloaded stuff on an external hard drive to save space on my computer's hard drive.)
He fixed the problem, whatever it was, and when I picked it up he said "I found some 'naughty stuff' in history." He offered me some suggestions on how to clear out such stuff.
I thanked him with no other comment other than to discuss the issue that he resolved. Haven't been back to that shop again.
The new shop I use has never brought up the subject. Either they haven't looked, don't care, or have decided that they want to keep me as a customer.
In any case, it shouldn't be a big deal unless the repair shop guy wants to make a big deal about it...then it's time to find another shop.
|
07-20-08 10:36am
|
Reply
736
|
N/A
|
Reply of
moshic's Poll
I agree with Drooler.
My machine handles 1280's like a champ but has major trouble with 1900's. Maybe a new machine will do better, but the bigger issue is the huge space needed for the huge formats for only slightly better sharpness.
If given a choice, I'll stay with the 640's to save on disk space unless the added sharpness is significant enough to go higher.
But a poorly lighted video, or worse, one shot at lousy angles or with a shaky camera, cannot be improved by technical adjustments.
|
07-16-08 07:57am
|
Reply
737
|
N/A
|
Reply of
NMC2008's Reply
Ditto. I don't like QuickTime at all.
I do stream many videos first to see if they are worth downloading, but I'll never knowingly join a streaming only site.
|
07-14-08 08:02am
|
Reply
738
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Vegas Ken's Poll
Frankly seeing a skinny, anorexic, immature, rich bitch like Paris Hilton getting laid ranks just one step below watching two German Shepards getting it on.
If it's a girl with a good face and body like Lindsay Lohan...now we're talking.
Bottom line, it all depends on the girl.
|
07-12-08 07:55am
|
Reply
739
|
N/A
|
Reply of
apoctom's Reply
Just so long as it's not a fluffer. ;-)
I agree with apoctom. I can't think of any scenes where a "non-nude extra" would be involved except in the "Fuck my Wife, Please" series where some douchebag sits there while his "wife" is getting slammed by some porn dude.
Th one thing about porn that is not available to us horndogs but is available on the set is the olfactory element. I'd love to get a whiff of the raw tuna aroma after a good fuck especially if that aroma is mixed with a sexy French perfume.
But on second thought, looking at some of those sweathog porn studs with their ugly hair and uglier tattoos that look like they are total strangers to personal hygiene, I'm not so sure I'd be very interested in smelling their sweat.
Never mind.
|
07-10-08 01:05pm
|
Reply
740
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Reply
OK, when I originally read Rick's post I understood it wrong. The post says, in pertinent part:
Starting NOW, reviews and ratings by registered users with under 5 points (status = Newbie) will no longer count toward the site's score or review count [emphasis added].
How will this help?
1. Previous fake/shill users...
2. This will encourage authentic users to at least reach the rookie level (5 points or more) so the reviews (their vote essentially) do mean something and to shows other users they're legit.
3. This will help discourage fake/shill users...
Will newbie reviews still be displayed?
Absolutely. It's important to us not to point our fingers at who is and isn't a fake/shill. In this regard, all reviews will still be displayed on our site and now labeled as Newbie. This now tells readers that the user has simply not written many reviews and to keep that in mind.
I agree that a legitimate Newbie who takes the time and effort to write a review should have his effort recognized and that a Newbie who reaches Rookie status should have his earlier scores counted so it looks like we're on the same page.
As for the "age-out" of a score, that's a great idea as well, given how many sites stop updating; are sold; get much better, edtc.
|
07-08-08 07:31pm
|
Reply
741
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Reply
I think you answered my other question.
I got the impression that the scores posted by a newbie didn't count until they reached 5 points, at which time all of the scores posted earlier would count, retroactively.
It sounds like you're saying that the first 4 posts by a newbie will never count and that, once a newbie reaches 5 points, such as when he posts his fifth score, his scores will start counting from that point forward but not retroactively.
|
07-08-08 05:53pm
|
Reply
742
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Your News
I really like the change. My only question is whether a newbie's rating will affect the overall result:
1. While he's still a newbie?
2. After he's become a regular but has not updated a review written while he was a newbie?
|
07-08-08 12:58pm
|
Reply
743
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
Missing my answer:
Yes, but I'm struggling with it. ;-)
|
07-08-08 07:01am
|
Reply
744
|
N/A
|
Reply of
mr3633's Reply
That's my feeling as well.
There are too many "lure" sites out there that are designed to be portals onto a computer to do damage of some kind or another. My machine is loaded with all kinds of protection (even Internet sex requires the use of protection these days) but I don't know what someone else's computer has in the way of security controls.
Therefore it's hands off without the owner's direct participation, whether it's accessing MSN Sports to check a score, or accessing PornUsers to see the results of a poll.
|
07-07-08 10:32am
|
Reply
745
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
I have no problem with it, but the fact that the review is written after just a LIMITED trial, where the reviewer did not have the opportunity to see everyuthing on a site should be required. A review from a full access trial is (or should be) the same as from a full month.
That's why I voted undecided, because the question does not distinguish between FULL and LIMITED trial.
That said, my recent review of Whale Tail 'N would have been to rate it quite low if I wrote it during a 3 day trial, not after 2+ months membership, because it's a loaded site with lousy site design. It took me almost a month to get used to it and enjoy the site.
In fairness, when writing a review after only a short 3-day or less experience with the site should include that fact so the reader knows what the review was based on.
|
07-04-08 06:49am
|
Reply
746
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
If it's two gorgeous babes and the kiss is a slow, tonguing, heavy breathing, deep down heavy duty smooch, I almost blow my load even when the babes are fully clothed...but when the camera pans down slowly past four tits with fully erect nipples down to a mutual and energetic finger fuck, I'm totally sold.
Forget anal, forget mish. Two babes going at it hot and heavy where the camera almost picks up the feeling of hot breath and the sweet tuna smell of sopping wet pussy mixed with the subtle aroma of a French perfume.
Damn. Ol' Willy is anxious for me to go find some of that because he's really getting ready!
|
07-02-08 02:07pm
|
Reply
747
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Duante Amorculo's Poll
Not being a big anal fan, I really don't feel qualified to vote for anyone on the list.
I voted for Hilary Scott who is a total babe and really seems to enjoy getting rammed up the ol' poop chute. Sandra Romain, as a total babe, comes in a close second.
|
06-30-08 08:13am
|
Reply
748
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Vegas Ken's Poll
I like girls of any age who have taken care of themselves, aren't extensively tattooed and who have great attitudes.
And the ones with great eyes and other body parts!
For example, I go nutz over the older types like Vicky Vette and Penny Porsche...and over young babes like Natasha Nice and Jenna Doll. (And I like their names as well. Classic cars and "nice dolls" always do it for me.
|
06-29-08 08:57am
|
Reply
749
|
N/A
|
Reply of
asmith12's Poll
My reviews are based on content. A great price warrants a mention in the review but it will not affect my evaluation at all.
|
06-26-08 08:32am
|
Reply
750
|
N/A
|
Reply of
exotics4me's Reply
Your reference to your being a moderator of a Psychological forum on the web prompted me to add a new thread in the PU Forum: The Psychology of Porn - Actresses. I'd appreciate reading your thoughts on the subject.
|
06-22-08 09:01am
|
