Replies Received
|
Replies to your reviews or comments. |
| Type |
Site |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Reply
51
|
N/A
|
REPLY TO
#14
from pat362:
(careylowell's Reply)
That would seem right because IAFD says that Tracy's birthday is May 7 1968. That would mean she was 16 at the time. No matter how we look at it. She was underage. She didn't act or look like a 16yrs old. There have been quite a few rumors over the years that she planned her downfall. The main reason for the rumors is that she created her own production company and filmed the only legal Tracy Lord porn movie: Tracy I love you. She went to the authorites right after it's release. She made a killing with that single movie since she was still a very popular actress and the only movie anyone could own or sell was Tracy I love you. A couple of persons were sent to jail because of this and in their defense. She presented a valid drivers license. I'm glad she was able to find a career out of porn.
|
07-12-09 08:59am
|
Reply
52
|
What Boys Want
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#4
from badandy400:
(careylowell's Reply)
Usually you can figure it would from looking at replies to your reviews. The person that seems hostile towards your comments is usually the person it ends up being.
Without doing some creative digging, and a lot of it, I do not think even the staff can tell you who it was. If I recall correctly I believe they said some time ago that the anonymous ID is saved in a one way encryption to protect the privacy. I believe it was the trusts they were talking about.
In any event, it does not hurt to guess who it was and send a reply to them. Even if they have not been around for a while they could still get the notice email for receiving a reply. This might bring them back, you never know and it certainly does not hurt. Besides, who wants that one bad trust thing floating around.
|
07-11-09 11:12pm
|
Reply
53
|
What Boys Want
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#2
from badandy400:
(careylowell's Reply)
Okay, I just really wanted to be sure about this. Thanks for the reply. Do you have any idea who the "NO' trust came from. One of the things a few of us have been trying to do lately is getting people who voted no a while back to reconsider in the even the user has improved reviews since the NO trust and is still around. Anyway, you may want to add an extra reply to that trust just to make it clear.
|
07-11-09 07:14pm
|
Reply
54
|
What Boys Want
(0)
|
Reply of
careylowell's Review
from badandy400:
This may or may not pertain to this review, but I need to ask you something.
I was just looking around and for no reason clicked on your name. I noticed you had a single "NO" trust and I was curious as to what it was for. The person believed you did not join some of the sites you had reviewed. You replied saying "I joined seven of the nine sites mentioned for at least one month. No review based on a trial m'ship."
Is this statement implying that you had not joined them two of them, or simply that you joined and left before a second month. The distinction is very important. If you had not joined them how could you review them? Also, which of the nine sites DID you join? At this point I think it is just poor choice of wording, but it is unclear.
I am a little reluctant to throw out a "NO" trust on you because your more recent reviews seem much more in depth and honest. I would like some clarification on this just in case there is a misunderstanding. It was not that long ago a reviewer had all his review points removed and was semi-suspended for implying that he did not join sites he had reviewed. I do not want this to happen to you, but I (all of PU) need to know that you have actually joined all the sites you have reviewed.
|
07-11-09 12:45am
|
Reply
55
|
Orgy Max
(0)
|
Reply of
careylowell's Review
from Monahan:
Being 29.95 Euros, the cost of this site can vary in US$ terms (they charge your credit card in Euros, they say.) Right now it's about US$42.00. Also, their preview site claims on one place that there are 18 sites in the network, and, in another, 13 sites.
In any case I really liked the review. It told me everything I wanted to know and, because I like the same things, I'm seriously considering joining up.
|
06-06-09 10:12am
|
Reply
56
|
N/A
|
REPLY TO
#19
from exotics4me:
(careylowell's Reply)
See Carey, I had a feeling this was going to go this way.
First, you are not required to read my posts if you don't like them or if they are not rhetorical enough or too rhetorical for you and Demosthenes.
Second, you say to keep perspective. You submitted this poll question, and haven't even posted your stance on it. So, for you to say that you were not advocating babies in a furnace, really has no meaning whatsoever, you haven't advocated either side of this very topic! A few of the members even showed some curiosity towards the topic, but you still didn't expand on it, explain it, or give your opinion. The question also does not give your stance away.
Third, you submitted a poll question, meaning you wanted opinions on this topic. I gave my opinion and for whatever reason, you admit in this (#19) reply that you were being a bastard towards me because of my opinion, which must differ from yours, even though I had no clue what your opinion was, see your words, "You're the only one on PU permitted to be a bastard?"
Fourth, of my hundreds of replies, which you are of course free to skip over, I've never been called a bastard or thought I replied in other way except to be helpful or to joke around with the member I replied to.
Of course you aren't going to argue my 2nd post, you would prefer playing flame wars like we were in the 5th grade. If my stance on the point hasn't been clear, it is nothing more than a rule that nearly all businesses have. It asks soldiers to "Not tell your sexual preference and we won't ask". Now, somehow this became about gays, but the rule is saying no one tell, so it isn't just about gays, until the wonderful American media put their typical sensationalistic twist on it and made it into discrimination. Rosa Parks, Dr. King, Jackie Robinson and millions of others roll in their graves about what is considered discrimination these days in America.
|
03-26-09 01:18pm
|
Reply
57
|
N/A
|
REPLY TO
#15
from exotics4me:
(careylowell's Reply)
Carey, you dummied down my entire post. The post is about sexuality, not gender and the situation was hypothetically asked, not something that was tried to be seriously passed.
In life, a male or female is based on their reproductive organs at birth. Over time, puberty strikes and sexuality is born.
Somewhere around this point, it is not okay for males and females to take showers together. It really isn't just because one has a dick and one doesn't. It is because of the possible bad situations that could come from it. Most likely, but not completely, based on the males possibly sexually assaulting the females.
Going by that, if a gay man, who is sexually aroused by naked men is allowed to stand in a room full of naked straight men and get his jollies, then it is no different, hypothetically, then a straight man standing in a shower room full of nude women, getting his jollies.
Oh and by pointing out gender, it does go against the very question that was asked since homosexuals blur the line that gender is defined by. A gay man is a man by gender because of his penis, but is attracted to the same things sexually that a female is attracted to.
|
03-25-09 07:44pm
|
Reply
58
|
N/A
|
REPLY TO
#6
from badandy400:
(careylowell's Reply)
No babe spotting would defeat the purpose for me!
It is a very broad and likely uneducated statement. I never have been to one and never will. I do not see the appeal in hanging around a bunch of naked people with no sexual innuendos at least.
I know for one of two things would happen. One I would have a hard on the whole time, thus embarrassment. Or I would be extremely limp and shriveled, thus embarrassment. I am sure people do not say much about it there, but I would still be very self conscious and not get a lot of enjoyment out of it. Perhaps this is all my ignorance showing through, but I do not intend on finding out personally.
So if you have been to a few and can testify that there are good looking people there than I will stand corrected at your word. I have seen many nudist videos and picture scattered over the internet and extremely rarely is there anyone that i would call attractive. That is the bases for my opinion, however weak of a base it may be. But you wont find me sitting naked by the lake with my buddies!
|
03-06-09 12:29am
|
Reply
59
|
Orgy Max
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#6
from rome476:
(careylowell's Reply)
i agree 100%; it amazes me that with all the sites available there are almost no real orgy sites.
|
02-18-09 04:44pm
|
Reply
60
|
I Feel Myself
(0)
|
Reply of
careylowell's Review
from TrashMan:
I think all the girls answer casting calls in newspapers or sex mags.
It is important to point out that all the girls are English (which you can deduce by their noticeable accent), so I'm going to say that unless you live in England and are familiar with English porn sites, more likely than not you will have never seen the girls the site features.
|
02-17-09 07:17pm
|
Reply
61
|
I Feel Myself
(0)
|
Reply of
careylowell's Review
from RagingBuddhist:
>Does anyone claim to have seen these gals elsewhere?
It's funny that you mentioned Abby Winters later in your review - If you look close enough, I think you'll find at least one or two girls from Abby's on the site. The ones that spring to mind are Ainslee and Antoinette, but I'm pretty sure if I dug through what I have saved from the site there were more. I Feel Myself, Girls Out West and AbbyWinters are all Australian based, so it wouldn't surprise me if some of the girls are also on GOW.
|
02-17-09 12:04am
|
Reply
62
|
I Feel Myself
(0)
|
Reply of
careylowell's Review
from lk2fireone:
Nice solid review with lots of details.
The only thing I question is your opinion that there might be gentlemen on the PU site to read your review. The PU membership tends to lean towards the redneck/caveman/pervert persuasions.
|
02-16-09 05:53pm
|
Reply
63
|
Orgy Max
(0)
|
Reply of
careylowell's Review
from rome476:
Thank for the excellant review. I really like group/orgies material(not gangbangs) and I have liked the DSO and MSP DVDs I have seen but the site price has kept me from signing up as well as the lack of any nonfetish sites in the network. Fullyclothedsex and ironically "Myfetish" seem ok; are these still being updated?
Also, any ideas for other orgy sites?
|
01-24-09 01:03pm
|
Reply
64
|
Orgy Max
(0)
|
Reply of
careylowell's Review
from elephant:
Nice review, site not for me neither, found myself screaming for the girls to get naked, fully clothed sex isn't what I like, but its a niche market and theres obvious thousands who love it.
|
01-24-09 01:24am
|
Reply
65
|
Orgy Max
(0)
|
Reply of
careylowell's Review
from Wittyguy:
Thanks for the review on this one. I was a member a few years ago and, being a picture person, was somewhat disappointed in the smallish picture sizes. From some of the free thumbnails I've seen it looks like the pics have gotten bigger so I was wondering what pixel size their stuff is coming in at now a days.
|
01-22-09 01:51pm
|
Reply
66
|
Orgy Max
(0)
|
Reply of
careylowell's Review
from mbaya:
Very nicely written. This site is not for me, but you did a good job of being descriptive using creative vocabulary. Loved the review.
|
01-22-09 12:08am
|
Reply
67
|
Danni.com
(0)
|
Reply of
careylowell's Review
from Monahan:
I remain totally pissed at these jokers at the way they defrauded their members with their old DRM waiver scam back in 2005 and 2006.
But when they offered a discounted membership to PornUser members, I thought I'd give it a go to see whether the site now offered the old content without DRM.
So I went in to sign up to find out that the discount was not really available after all, and no response from their customer support people. (After notifying Khan, the discount offer was pulled down from the PU listing.)
The technical flaws mentioned in this review were common when I was a member and apparently still are. These flaws are very rare in other sites but the folks at Danni.com don't seem to give a shit and let them continue rather than correct them.
So the bottom line is that this site continues to screw its members with false promises and a terrible customer support attitude.
Sign up at your own peril. But I refuse to give these Bernie Madoff types $25 of my hard earned money to be ripped off yet again.
|
01-11-09 09:55am
|
Reply
68
|
Danni.com
(0)
|
Reply of
careylowell's Review
from TrashMan:
One third of the movies I viewed on the site have no audio. Whats up with that?
Then some girls have videos listed, but when you click the link to the video there are neither links to stream or download the video (e.g. one video from Adara Star).
|
01-10-09 08:56pm
|
Reply
69
|
Busty Romina Lopez
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#4
from williamj:
(careylowell's Reply)
I haven't been a member of score land for 5 years. Maybe 8 years might be a bit of an over statement. 5 years I'm sure of . She was doing mag layouts and some solo video. I don't think I recall any lezzie. She had a nice hairy cunt in some of the layouts.
|
09-05-08 12:15pm
|
Reply
70
|
Busty Romina Lopez
(0)
|
Reply of
careylowell's Review
from williamj:
Ms. Lopez has been a model for over 8 years. she was in lots of Scores layouts. I liked her stuff.
|
09-05-08 08:14am
|
Reply
71
|
Busty Romina Lopez
(0)
|
Reply of
careylowell's Review
from badandy400:
Can you tell us how big the site is. I am just looking for an idea. I like to know if there is 10 videos or 500. It makes a big difference on which sites I join and when. Also, video and picture quality information would be nice.
|
09-03-08 04:50pm
|
Reply
72
|
Jelena Jensen
(0)
|
Reply of
careylowell's Review
from PinkPanther:
Jelena is another of the models doing cam shows at Misha's 1ModelCam Network - pretty regularly doing a show at some point during the week. Her next scheduled cam show is this Thursday at 7 PM Pacific Time. I don't know if her site links to this network - it would be odd if it did not.
|
05-26-08 09:30am
|
Reply
73
|
BangBus
(0)
|
Reply of
careylowell's Review
from badandy400:
Just for clarification it is 5 years I believe, I just read an article bout a child porn case that was resolved the other day. But, we all get your point!
They have Gianna Michaels among others, I am pretty sure she is checked for age and diseases. Besides, they due use condoms.
Basically, there is nearly zero real reality porn out there. The site could not sell it if it was true reality because of the age issues and other legal stuff. It is just a fantasy! Just like sites like Brazzers who have the girls dress up like teachers or nurses, it is not real. It is just to help you imagine doing that yourself.
I can not say my email address was sold by them, but perhaps by some others. I get tons of penis enlargement adds among other things.
But I must ask why you joined the site if did not think you would like it? If you wanted out within minutes because of the content type you should have been able to see that before joining. I can not say this is my favorite site on their network by any means, actually I believe it is the worst. But I believe you are being a bit harsh since this does not seem to be your sort of thing. Be like many of us on here giving a gay site a 50 just because it had no women. I think the idea of the site could not be misunderstood, hell it is even in the name!
|
05-23-08 05:03pm
|
| *Message rows highlighted in light orange are replies to replies. |
|
