| Type |
Site |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Reply
1
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Amanda's Poll
girl watching girl/girl. keeping most of their cloths on, so lots of hands down panties.
|
01-01-16 09:32am
|
Reply
2
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Drooler's Poll
depends on what she's wearing...
|
06-05-11 01:57pm
|
Reply
3
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Colm4's Poll
It would probably have been a very bad, soft porn Fiona Cooper c.1990.
|
11-07-10 04:51am
|
Reply
4
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Drooler's Poll
too lazy to edit my collection.
|
09-20-10 12:57pm
|
Reply
5
|
N/A
|
Reply of
BadMrFrosty's Reply
another reason to use Firefox for safer browsing.
|
09-07-10 01:54pm
|
Reply
6
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
death to any developer that does this. same league as pop-ups and opening new windows without asking you whether you want to.
not only bad habit, but bad usability practice.
|
09-06-10 01:26pm
|
Reply
7
|
N/A
|
Reply of
graymane's Poll
i, for example, might point out double standards of mainstream "culture" which frowns upon porn, but accepts images, particularly in advertising, with strong sexual connotations.
|
08-31-10 02:12am
|
Reply
8
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Wittyguy's Poll
i prefer the cooler months because more boot sightings though given our wet and windy august, there's been plenty of boots on show.
|
08-25-10 02:23pm
|
Reply
9
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
i've never tried a trial.
three reasons:
- slow broadband, so wouldn't be able to try much content
- i'll make up my mind from site tour, previews and/or tbp/pu reviews
- i'd probably forget to cancel
|
08-22-10 04:11am
|
Reply
10
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
no. but i did find an improvised sex toy under the bed shortly after i moved in.
|
08-17-10 02:21pm
|
Reply
11
|
N/A
|
Reply of
mistresskent's Poll
if you blog, you should accept comments.
if you accept comments, you should make the effort to engage in a conversation.
|
08-14-10 01:05am
|
Reply
12
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
you write the code once. that code should meet web standards.
but you may have to write patches - or fixes - too compensate for browsers that are not fully standards compliant and that make all the features you've written in compliant code work in other browsers.
ie6 is the bugbear. apart form the technical issues, it's a function of microsoft's dominance. ie6 was the standard browser delivered to a very high proportion of pcs bought say 5+ years ago. i'm amazed at looking at site stats that it still covers a big sector of the market.
there are more browsers than dracken mentions. there's also konqueror, older versions of netscape and a few more i don't know that run on linux or other more obscure operating environments.
even compliant code in compliant browsers can appear different because browsers will render differently and a lot depends upon your screen resolution.
then there's the server side and client side scripts - or mini-programs - that developers use to get sites to do cool stuff. javascript is probably the most common. apart from mundane uses, javascript can deliver a lot of dynamic activity like scrolling pictures and interactive menus. it can be used to run searches, but there's other code that can do that.
flash is usually used for video and a lot sites will use it for streaming. youtube uses it.
some users choose to turn off client side scripts like javascript because these can be exploited by hackers.
web standards require that the site delivers the same usability if scripts are turned off. some hope.
it's a mess really. but the good developers can usually write code that will work reasonably well for 95% of users.
|
08-10-10 01:25pm
|
Reply
13
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
death to ie6. but...
best efforts please and i'd rather sites avoided using javascripts - not the best from a security pov.
html5 should deal with a lot of these issues, but you're going to have people using legacy browsers for a long time.
oh, and any web developer who can't be bothered to code to standards should be fired.
|
08-09-10 02:03pm
|
Reply
14
|
N/A
|
Reply of
slutty's Reply
a couple of quick hints for making better videos:
- plan your shoot - unless you're doing a simple point/shoot, a simple storyboard can make quite a difference
- keep the camera still! - use a tripod, limit zooming in and out, pan slowly
- if you can use different angles
- use as much natural light as you can or invest in some decent lighting/reflectors (you can pick up something second hand that will do the trick)
|
08-07-10 01:20am
|
Reply
15
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
have taken some of significant me.
pictures? what about video too? with those little phone sized jobs - gbp80 in the uk - it is p!ss easy to shoot, edit and load!
|
08-07-10 12:55am
|
Reply
16
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
boobs, pussy, face about equal.
clothing and boots, essential!
|
08-01-10 02:26pm
|
Reply
17
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
does taking candid photos count?
|
07-06-10 01:43pm
|
Reply
18
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Cybertoad's Poll
Depends a lot on what sites I'm registered with. I'm using a Southern Charms site at the moment. Photos only and no zips. That makes downloading slow and not a huge amount.
Will downloaded up to 5 gig a week at best. but, suffer from poor broadband speed - 1/2 meg - as we're in a rural location, 10 km from the nearest phone exchange. Males everything an effort.
|
05-02-10 05:40am
|
Reply
19
|
Flashy Babes
(0)
|
Reply of
nadiencendia's Review
thanks for this.
i was tempted by the $1 for 2 days offer, but won't bother now. video tease is flashy and well-produced, but boobs covered up. that seems to tell the story.
|
08-07-10 01:02am
|
Reply
20
|
Girls In Leather Boots
(0)
|
Reply of
alexmedia's Reply
hey. no problem. have you got any recommendations?
yeah. site uses tables. i do a bit of web development at work and home. site design and code is awful.
|
08-07-10 12:51am
|
Reply
21
|
Girls In Leather Boots
(0)
|
Reply of
Capn's Reply
ah. i should've covered that a bit better. i'd say 80% of the sets contain nudity, of which about 33% topless only.
|
08-04-10 10:34am
|
Reply
22
|
Ladies Kiss Ladies
(0)
|
Reply of
messmer's Review
Thanks for the review.
Sounds similar to my experience of 'Lick Nylons', part of the same stable. Content lacked passion.
|
07-04-10 01:04pm
|
Reply
23
|
Twistys
(0)
|
Reply of
Drooler's Reply
Yeah. It is a good deal.
However, I've just checked though and I was last at Twistys in October 2009. So, I'm probably going to wait for at least 6 months before going back. Shame to miss that deal though. :-(
I'm going to check out Viv Thomas instead though looking at the possibility of In Focus Girls.
I was last at Digital Desire in March 2009. Probably a bit too pricey to go back just yet.
|
05-02-10 05:32am
|
Reply
24
|
Twistys
(0)
|
Reply of
anyonebutme's Reply
Thanks!
I'm probably due a revisit to Twistys. Either that or Digital Desire.
|
04-29-10 12:52pm
|
