| Type |
Site |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Reply
51
|
N/A
|
REPLY TO
#35
from asmith12:
(jd1961's Reply)
I used to think this is your quote I've answered: "the first three answer options in this poll are not options at all", isn't it?
|
12-18-07 11:57pm
|
Reply
52
|
N/A
|
REPLY TO
#28
from asmith12:
(jd1961's Reply)
> the first three answer options in this poll are not options at all
They can easily be options if interpreting the question the way as I've read it ("what would you do if you were making laws") or another way "what would you do if it would be legal"?
And as I understand US law (which I can easily misunderstand as I'm not a lawyer), this question and answers to it cannot possibly be illegal (in modern US; I'm not speaking of Iran or Orwell's Oceania, where most likely even thought about it would be punished) as they're covered by the First Amendment. Right to DISCUSS things freely is a fundamental right in modern liberal society, so let's not fear to DISCUSS even the most controversial (and even potentially illegal) issues.
|
12-18-07 10:48am
|
Reply
53
|
N/A
|
REPLY TO
#6
from Khan:
(jd1961's Reply)
Not sure how you're reading this but, the wording of the question is entirely hypothetical, thus, there is no admission of guilt to anything. It asks for an opinion and opinions are not a felony ... actions are. Had the question been worded to expressly admit guilt (i.e. When did you first let your kids watch porn?) then that would be a different matter and in that case, I'd agree with you, it would have been inappropriate wording.
But back to addressing how it IS WORDED ...
While I (personally) do not understand the reason for asking this question, I (as the one who approved the poll submission) allow that questions might be valid even if I do not immediately see the reasoning behind them. In this case, I'm not a parent so I wouldn't presume to understand everything a parent wants to know concerning rearing a child in today's world.
Who knows, perhaps a parent wants a feel for what fellow parents *feel* is appropriate? I have to agree with Drooler, I see nothing about the wording of the question suggesting that porn should be shown to the underage.
I would further point out that what is "underage" varies widely with different geographical areas and different time periods. It was not all that long ago that a woman who wasn't married by age 16 was considered well on the way to being an old maid.
So again, there was nothing so inherently wrong with the question that I felt it shouldn't be asked. As always, if there's a particular question you take exception to, just skip the poll that day.
|
12-17-07 08:24am
|
Reply
54
|
N/A
|
REPLY TO
#1
from King:
(jd1961's Reply)
Great! That's what should have been done long ago! Thanks!
|
11-27-07 02:29pm
|
Reply
55
|
N/A
|
REPLY TO
#25
from SnowDude:
(jd1961's Reply)
I can't say I'm surprised...it was a good idea while it lasted.
|
11-26-07 06:08pm
|
Reply
56
|
N/A
|
REPLY TO
#9
from Pinche Kankun:
(jd1961's Reply)
Okay, then you tell that psychiatrist I said I think he is gay!!
The minute I see more than one dick appear on the scene, I give the phuckin' TV set the finger and turn to another scene!!
PHUCK DAT SHIT, MAN!!
|
11-21-07 10:47pm
|
Reply
57
|
N/A
|
REPLY TO
#16
from asmith12:
(jd1961's Reply)
I see, thanks :-).
|
11-15-07 02:22am
|
Reply
58
|
N/A
|
REPLY TO
#12
from Pinche Kankun:
(jd1961's Reply)
I kinda like Rodney Moore movies a little because he does have the women stand up and pose naked for the camera for a good amount of time... That's the kind of shit I like because I love to relish a woman's body!!
I think all porn movies should show the woman showering after her session because there is nothing better than to see a really hot naked woman of your preference... Covered in Soap!!
|
11-06-07 11:36pm
|
Reply
59
|
N/A
|
REPLY TO
#4
from Rick:
(jd1961's Reply)
Yeah, you make a good point. It's definitely something users could abuse to promote their favorite site. We'll try to be fairly loose, but keep an eye out if it gets out of hand.
|
11-01-07 08:01pm
|
Reply
60
|
N/A
|
REPLY TO
#9
from Drooler:
(jd1961's Reply)
Thanks for the support. PU is growing community. Can't expect things to work out with everyone.
|
09-23-07 04:20pm
|
Reply
61
|
N/A
|
REPLY TO
#3
from Rick:
(jd1961's Reply)
Sorry for the delay on this. Required reasons for "no" trust will definitely be implemented based on user feedback. This and a few other tweaks/upgrades will be completed in about 3 weeks. :)
|
09-22-07 02:33pm
|
Reply
62
|
N/A
|
REPLY TO
#10
from DivBZero:
(jd1961's Reply)
OK jd, I see your point.
I like full access trials on good sites because they are a 'value' way to catch up on content. If you have a site that charges $30 per month you'll find that you can DL 6 months of content overnight. Then cancel the trial as soon as you're complete.
Do this twice per annum -- bargain
Cheers
DivBZero
|
09-17-07 10:08am
|
Reply
63
|
N/A
|
REPLY TO
#21
from Drooler:
(jd1961's Reply)
Makes me realize how much it has changed since the '70s. The full length porn films back then more often had more human portrayals of people and were generally more sensual (a popular term then). These days, we've got fuck bunnies captured with technology that's a lot more efficient for rapid production of fuck-bunny formula flicks, but the viewer winds up having to relate to them as a fuck bunny, too.
There are subtleties of erotic experience that get lost when the basic idea is only, and always, to go at it like a crazed animal and do the weird shit that is just considered popular.
I must say that some of the girls really do their best to relate to viewer under the present circumstances.
And I agree about the annoyance of the "circus poses." I think, what is this? PT Barnum in the 21st century?
Another thing is taking the camera right down to the girl's finger-stretched asshole, then spitting in it. Ecccchhh. That's not sex; that's just decadence.
|
08-23-07 03:27am
|
Reply
64
|
N/A
|
REPLY TO
#14
from Drooler:
(jd1961's Reply)
Man, you said it. Reading your post, I was thinking, "That's just how I see it, too." It may sound harsh, but I think a lot of people who do the sites are idiots.
I add to your points of criticism galleries of softcore photos of the women looking away from the camera 40, 60, 70% of the time, as well as unexplainable cropping. The image is clear, the babe is hot, the pic is huge, her beautiful round ass is ... cut halfway at the cheeks! What is this bullshit?? (MetArt just had one like this of Marina/Euphrat; the other pic cut half of her head off. Fucking ridiculous!)
That's just one example of THOUSANDS.
|
08-22-07 12:45am
|
Reply
65
|
N/A
|
REPLY TO
#13
from pat362:
(jd1961's Reply)
For all it's fault I still like my XP, and my IE. There might be some that are better, but that's often because they took the idea and built on it. That said, I have been burned a couple of times with the patches. Live and learn
|
08-20-07 07:36pm
|
Reply
66
|
N/A
|
REPLY TO
#19
from Pinche Kankun:
(jd1961's Reply)
I use VHS tapes... HE HE HE!!!
:)
|
08-14-07 12:58pm
|
Reply
67
|
N/A
|
REPLY TO
#20
from Pinche Kankun:
(jd1961's Reply)
Hey jd1961, don't feel bad!! If someone has to be anonymous about their Trust Rating, they are probably still locked in the closet!!
|
08-12-07 06:18pm
|
Reply
68
|
N/A
|
REPLY TO
#8
from RagingBuddhist:
(jd1961's Reply)
jd - There is one small known issue with AVG free - I went to install AVG and got a warning about a potential conflict with Roxio 7. But I definitely agree - Norton AV (along with just about every other Symantec product I've tried) oughta be made illegal.
|
08-08-07 11:38pm
|
Reply
69
|
N/A
|
REPLY TO
#14
from Pinche Kankun:
(jd1961's Reply)
Cause they don't enjoy industry sex love, it's homo!! The reason why you really don't see the missionary style sex anymore is because male porn performers are so fucking busy trying to get head from these chicks, and they seem to enjoy have a chick choke close to vomiting off of their cock and cum load... "OH YEAH SUCK IT BABY, SUCK MY DICK AND SWALLOW MY CUM!!
OH YEAH... peep this out: Did you know that there is a porno series where guys nut on top of a birthday cake and make the girls eat it?!!
"I dare ANYONE to come forth and tell me that they get off on gross shit like that... Meaning they will actually masterbate off to this shit!! I tell you right now, I won't!!
jd, that is another example of circus porn!!
|
08-04-07 03:22am
|
Reply
70
|
N/A
|
REPLY TO
#11
from Pinche Kankun:
(jd1961's Reply)
jd, I feel you, bro!!! I cannot stand when they make comedy out of porn!! Like for example, they swing chicks around on ropes with rubber dicks stuck up their ass or something, or they'll lay a woman on a sofa and have her spread open and aim a handball right for her snatch like it was a bullseye target!! And muthafuckas actually get off on that kind of shit!! Or better yet, a man is smacking a woman's asscheeks with a 39 foot boat paddle!!
Come on man, can someone explain why is THAT is arousing?!!
|
08-02-07 10:42pm
|
Reply
71
|
N/A
|
REPLY TO
#8
from RagingBuddhist:
(jd1961's Reply)
I'm with JD - the anonymity of a trust rating is a bit of a curiosity to me too. Someone obviously didn't like something I wrote in one of the reviews I've written and I'd love to know why they feel they can't trust me. Good or bad, I've only written about how I feel about a site I've joined - in as clear and concise terms as possible. Disagree with my take on a site? Fair enough. But it is just my opinion...
|
07-03-07 01:14pm
|
Reply
72
|
N/A
|
REPLY TO
#13
from Khan:
(jd1961's Reply)
But JD, you seem to be skipping the fact that before a User can cast Trust Ratings, they need to have accrued 5 points.
Again, I will not say it is absolutely impossible for a determined webmaster to trick the system, I will say it's not something I can see happening very often as we do have certain safeguards in place.
Not sure what else I can say to convince you that webmasters aren't running around giving out negative Trust Ratings whenever they get a poor review.
|
06-29-07 05:17am
|
Reply
73
|
N/A
|
REPLY TO
#14
from Pinche Kankun:
(jd1961's Reply)
Isn't American Kissing tongue penetration?! L - O - f-cking L
|
06-22-07 12:05am
|
Reply
74
|
N/A
|
REPLY TO
#12
from Drooler:
(jd1961's Reply)
Now that's a creative alternative!
All the more reason not to get too serious about the trust ratings, too.
|
06-15-07 08:46pm
|
Reply
75
|
N/A
|
REPLY TO
#6
from Jay G:
(jd1961's Reply)
I Totally agree. Anonymous trust ratings are a real problem to me.
Anonymous seems cowardly, aomeone trying to game the system to hurt others and make themselves look good.
But, why? I love getting and sharing information and am sure my anonymous slimer said he didn't trust me because he didn't like the kinky sites I review (even in porn users there are those who are pretty intolerent of others with different likes/dislikes). If we disagree, it's OK, but I want to know why you disagree.
Thanks for your input, I feel better about my dislike of anonymous ratings.
|
06-14-07 08:39pm
|
