| Type |
Site |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Reply
126
|
Karup's Hometown Amateurs
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#3
from Karup:
(WeeWillyWinky's Reply)
Sounds great, thank you. :)
Looking forward to hearing from you and I'll keep you posted on the progress of fixing the affected content once I do.
Regards,
Jeff
|
10-28-08 09:48pm
|
Reply
127
|
Karup's Hometown Amateurs
(0)
|
Reply of
WeeWillyWinky's Comment
from Karup:
Hi WeeWilly & Drooler,
Been a while, hope all is well. :)
I assure you, this is definitely an oversight. There seems to be no benefit in doing this, whereas there is plenty of negative to it (i.e. our members thinking we're trying to pull a fast one).
Judging by you saying you were browsing the older pic archives, my guess is it's a problem related to when we revamped our members area. All sets that were already in the members area had to get renamed. Unfortunately, it was a big project and one in which mistakes were going to occur.
Can you please e-mail me a few example urls so we can look into it? The more you can send the better, as we will hopefully be able to establish a pattern & pinpoint all sets that are affected. We'll begin fixing all of them one by one.
jeff a.t. karups d0t c0m (lol, can you tell I'm paranoid about bots/spiders?) :-)
Regards,
Jeff
|
10-28-08 12:14pm
|
Reply
128
|
Karup's Hometown Amateurs
(0)
|
Reply of
WeeWillyWinky's Comment
from Drooler:
One guess I have is that they use some kind of macro or set of macros to process the pics for the galleries: naming the files and putting them into hmtl pages and such. Perhaps a repeat loop was allowed run twice as much as it should have.
I saw the exact same problem just today at Babelicious: a double dose of Dominika in shower.
Good webmasters don't allow such things to happen. They visually check their work and look for the "saboteur," as I call it. They fix problems such as you and I have described before taking the pages live. They have enough experience and enough sense to do these things. They don't take things for granted.
Good webmasters don't have to read people's comments on their sloppy workmanship at sites like PornUsers.
|
10-28-08 10:51am
|
Reply
129
|
XX Cel
(0)
|
Reply of
WeeWillyWinky's Comment
from williamj:
thanks good comments
|
10-19-08 08:08am
|
Reply
130
|
XX Cel
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#4
from messmer:
(WeeWillyWinky's Reply)
Thanks, www. That's what I was afraid of. You've touched upon two of my "crusades:" more pictures in landscape and smaller watermarks. I know the ones I saw on Cel pictures were obscene in their size.
|
10-18-08 07:22am
|
Reply
131
|
XX Cel
(0)
|
Reply of
WeeWillyWinky's Review
from Toadsith:
Great review, thanks - as a photo person, I may have to check out this site.
As for why some of us are bothered by pregnancy?
Ever seen the Chest Rippers from the Alien movie series? Just replace the fanged insect/snake with a really fat, tiny ape and make it scream like a wounded rabbit. Now put it inside the lower abdomen of another person. Have it twist, move and parasitically feed off that person - getting stronger and larger, month after month, forcing the host to consume more energy due to the added weight and because their blood system is feeding another being, like a tape worm, but more intimate. It consumes for almost a year and then it needs to leave, making the host's body an accomplice - but sometimes the host isn't fit enough (too small, too inflexible, too weak, et cetera). Sometimes they won't survive. So doctors try to help. They cut the host open, straight through the belly. They reach in and pull out this writhing creature and sever its connection with the host. Even with a successful breach from the host, the flabby, screaming parasite squeezing out through the sexual genitalia of the host, the parasitic relationship isn't over. The host's body is altered to lactate and feed the parasite for even longer - as if feeding from the blood stream wasn't enough, the parasite is now feeding off liquid expelled from the host's body. The real horrifying aspect for me, is that the parasite doesn't need the womb to survive, any good blood source will do fine. Hosts unfortunate enough to have a severe ulcer on the womb, puncturing straight through the wall of the womb, have had a fertilized egg attach itself to a very good source of blood: the heart. Aesthetically, the skeletal stance of the host changes - the hips widen, the center of balance is adjust to account for the weight - the host is physically altered not just in shape but in movement. All these things combined make pregnancy not the most erotic of visages for me.
I understand others talk about a "healthy glow" or the "miracle of birth" and so on - I understand it is a fetish for many - but in isn't for me. I do believe it would be awkward if a long-term lover of mine became pregnant. I would fully support her if her decision was to keep the child and I would take care of her and the parasite, but once it was large enough to change her physique, coitus would be much more difficult - especially oral administration to her. I fear my vivid imagination would ruin much of that. Hopefully we'd be smart enough to find solutions, maybe the furry scene so coitus would be performed in full body costumes...
|
10-17-08 09:10pm
|
Reply
132
|
XX Cel
(0)
|
Reply of
WeeWillyWinky's Review
from messmer:
While I'm grateful that landscape is catching on I've always been stopped from subscribing because this is another site with huge watermarks. At least they were a year ago. Are they any smaller now?
And thanks for a great review.
|
10-17-08 06:03pm
|
Reply
133
|
Busty Amateurss
(0)
|
Reply of
WeeWillyWinky's Comment
from TheRizzo:
LOL yeah sometimes its amazing what some photographers were thinking. I am sure they thought it would be a cool effect and something different. As long as its not a style that is constant thru out a whole site I am ok with a few "out of the box" things though. Sometimes they try things that work out great.
|
09-11-08 07:33pm
|
Reply
134
|
Abigail 18
(0)
|
Reply of
WeeWillyWinky's Review
from mbaya:
I downloaded the trailer. It is 320x240 and 466kbps. It doesn't even come close to filling the screen. I wouldn't save a video either.
|
09-03-08 02:25pm
|
Reply
135
|
N/A
|
REPLY TO
#11
from BostonPJR:
(WeeWillyWinky's Reply)
Yes she does. God bless that woman.
|
08-04-08 03:44am
|
Reply
136
|
N/A
|
REPLY TO
#15
from Drooler:
(WeeWillyWinky's Reply)
I had a similar experience watching Alexis Love at 1000 Facials (or was it StuffedPetite?). Anyway, one of those sites you join all of for one price.
Was really looking forward to it, but she just wasn't very responsive. And, as you said, it just looked mechanical. I think she's just putting herself through something she doesn't enjoy. Hope she enjoys the $$.
|
07-31-08 03:46am
|
Reply
137
|
Wifey's World
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#2
from Khan:
(WeeWillyWinky's Reply)
Well, that's certainly easy enough to fix.
If you just go to recast your vote (as if you were going to change from yes to no) then the trust interface will open allowing you to reset the vote to yes or no (as you really want) AND to change the status of the "vote anonymously" check-box.
|
07-29-08 06:24pm
|
Reply
138
|
Wifey's World
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#1
from roseman:
(WeeWillyWinky's Reply)
Thanks dude.
|
07-29-08 05:00pm
|
Reply
139
|
In The Crack
(0)
|
Reply of
WeeWillyWinky's Review
from turboshaft:
Good review. I am thinking of rejoining soon to "catch up" on their previous material. You'd think they were founded by a bunch of horny doctors in the way they capture female anatomy, but it's still interesting and entertaining for closeup porn.
|
07-28-08 03:04pm
|
Reply
140
|
In The Crack
(0)
|
Reply of
WeeWillyWinky's Review
from Drooler:
After some time away, I decided to take another -- well, you can guess -- at this site.
Nice that they're finally on an every-other-day schedule, which started July 16th. But of the 74 pics of Lepidoptera (today), there were only 4 that did anything even remotely "crackworthy." Most of it looked like something you could find at OnlyCuties: pussy + toys = the Universe.
Hoping this is just one little slip and that the site will stay focused on its mission.
|
07-20-08 04:41am
|
Reply
141
|
Panty Amateur
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#3
from messmer:
(WeeWillyWinky's Reply)
Thanks, www. This site is now being put on my list of possible next subscriptions! Especially since I like "old school" and despise thongs and boyshorts!!
|
07-19-08 08:30am
|
Reply
142
|
Panty Amateur
(0)
|
Reply of
WeeWillyWinky's Review
from messmer:
Hi www, we're definitely on the same wave length because I keep meeting you in all of my places of interest. No downloads? I've never heard of a site like that. Does that mean streaming only? Thanks.
|
07-15-08 06:26pm
|
Reply
143
|
Oh La La Glamour Girls
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#5
from messmer:
(WeeWillyWinky's Reply)
Hey, www, thanks for the informative reply and the ones that followed this one. I would like to see nudity at the end of a set of pictures so LV Panties looks like a promising site. Too bad their video isn't up to scratch! But as you wrote, most of us have a next to impossible time finding stuff that is completely up our alley!
May both of us be lucky in our hunt for THE site!
|
07-15-08 10:55am
|
Reply
144
|
Oh La La Glamour Girls
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#4
from Khan:
(WeeWillyWinky's Reply)
What you see is a result of the system's parsing of a site who's name has two words. In cases like this, feel free to include the full URL to the site's review page here at PornUsers so there won't be any confusion (as you did in your followup msg).
|
07-15-08 05:13am
|
Reply
145
|
Oh La La Glamour Girls
(0)
|
Reply of
WeeWillyWinky's Review from WeeWillyWinky:
Hi messmer,
I can't think of anything off the top of my head that would fit the bill.
UK Upskirts, as well as most of the sites from that company, has very high quality videos, but there is no nudity. Also the pics are smallish. Amateur Upskirts has plenty of nudity but is heavy on the cotton, which I know you don't like, and the last time I was there the vids were just not up to par quality-wise and the pics were tiny. Panties Pulled Down is not upskirt-focused but has lots of upskirt material and plenty of nudity, but while the Quicktime vids are top-notch quality-wise the content is masturbation-obssessed and hence boring to me. And the pics there are great but are just too small to get excited about. LV Panty has big, HQ pic sets which you might like, as they always end in nudity and are not fixated on cotton, but the vid section is less than mediocre, or at least it was the last time I checked.
Like you, I have a next to impossible time finding stuff that is completely up my alley. Good luck hunting!
Edited: the site UK Upskirts links to IS NOT UK Upskirts....
https://www.pornusers.com/review/ukupskirts/
|
07-14-08 10:38pm
|
Reply
146
|
Oh La La Glamour Girls
(0)
|
Reply of
WeeWillyWinky's Review
from messmer:
Hey, www, have you ever found a site exactly like this one with the important difference that the last few shots in a picture series (or the last few frames in a video) were in the nude? That would be my perfect site and I am still looking very hard for it.
|
07-14-08 08:51am
|
Reply
147
|
In The Crack
(0)
|
Reply of
WeeWillyWinky's Comment
from Drooler:
First, I'll note the improvements: full access to everything (what a change!), overall improvement in image quality, and an upcoming doubling of updates (to every other day) starting July 16th.
But as you note, the angles leave much to be desired. This is true with the pics as well. The site is really stuck in a mode. Another vexing consistency is, when the girl is shot from the back, it's either full body head-to-toe or just the ass in the frame. There are very few top-of-head to upper-thigh framed pics, which you can often get at lots of other sites. And the girl usually faces away so that you can't even see her face! The fairly recent Betty Saint pics are that way, for instance.
At least with the recent Jane F on the couch, she's looking back at the camera, but again it's either ass only or fully head to toe.
I've downloaded and tossed vids that have too much of the odd angles. Anyway, I hope the webmaster is reading this and takes into consideration what I'm saying.
|
07-05-08 10:52am
|
Reply
148
|
In The Crack
(0)
|
Reply of
WeeWillyWinky's Comment
from Goldfish:
I watched some of the free demo clips and I see what you mean. I wouldn't mind some of the shifting angle thing but for most of the scene I'd hope the picture would be stable and upright.
|
07-05-08 07:51am
|
Reply
149
|
ATK Natural & Hairy
(0)
|
Reply of
WeeWillyWinky's Review
from mr smut:
Thanks! I guess I'll keep that in mind when I'm ready to join another site. The scary hairy girls are really something for those who like it extremely hairy but most of the girls photographed are worth it I'd say!
Keep up the good work!
Cheers,
Eddie
|
05-18-08 12:18pm
|
Reply
150
|
ATK Natural & Hairy
(0)
|
Reply of
WeeWillyWinky's Review
from Denner:
Hey WWW
Another fine and well founded (and trustworthy) review.
Good to have you here....I'm now going for this ATK N&H after this review...thanks!
Denner
|
05-17-08 07:56am
|
