| Msg # |
User |
Message |
Date |
1
|
Amanda (0)
|
Hi Skippy. When a site changes its name (In this case Hegre-Art to Hegre.com), it's our policy to close the older listing and post one for the new sitename. We know it's not new. There's just no way for us to post a new listing without our system seeing it as new. Does that make sense? I hope so. We'll get a new TBP review up for Hegre ASAP.
|
12-12-17 07:13am
Reply To Message
|
2
|
skippy (0)
|
REPLY TO #1 - Amanda :
Hi Amanda,
Thanks for the quick response. I know you guys have a LOT of site reviews to manage, but there really needs to be a better way to deal with this type of situation where a site changes its domain name, especially when the old domain name is still active. By not attaching an old domain to a new one, you are inadvertently aiding and abetting those really awful sites that change their name to evade bad reviews and deceive people into signing up for something again. At the same time, this process means that well established and highly rated sites that change their domain name for other reasons are treated like new sites with unknown reputations. Seems like the bad guys win here.
Hegre-Art.com actively links to this new hegre.com domain and the format and content hasn't changed at all. As a member for many years, I didn't even notice that the name had changed because all of my bookmarks still work. In TBP and PU The search for Hegre-Art returns a not-found or a message that says the site is no longer active. Totally not true. Even a search reference as simple as "This site is now X" would be helpful.
On the other hand, I have signed up for a couple of sites that have had no review only to find that it is the exact same crummy site that I had signed up for before where only the domain name had changed. This isn't common, but it does happen, especially among small niche sites.
So, unfortunately, the limitations of the TBP/PU system not being able to cross-reference site names are doing a disservice to your viewers. From my perspective, you are inadvertently helping these bad sites deceive people while hurting the really good, well established ones that change their name for other reasons. As the Consumer Reports of porn, I know you can come up with a better way.
I went ahead and created an updated review so that at least there is a PU score associated with the new domain name.
OK, vent closed. :-)
Thanks,
Skippy
|
12-12-17 08:54am
Reply To Message
|
3
|
Amanda (0)
|
REPLY TO #2 - skippy :
Hi skippy. Thanks for the reply. In our experience, it's quite rare for a site to rebrand after being so well-established, but I see where you're coming from. We deal with Hegre quite regularly and even we did not know that a rebranding was in the works. I can tell you that if we see a poor scoring site closing at one point only to reopen a while later with the same poor experience, we take this into account and it becomes a discussion as to whether to list it at all. We want our users to trust our reviews and know that we're working very hard to make sure they get the best paysite experience possible.
To touch on another point, the TBP infrastructure has not been updated in about 10 years, so this is also a question of making big changes to the architecture. Since taking over TBP in 2015, we've compiled a laundry list of back-end changes that we want to implement and will hopefully be able to tackle in 2018. This kind of change is most certainly on that list.
All that said, I am going to speak to our Lead Programmer to see if it's possible to make an exception for Hegre and somehow get them linked, as it is a popular site and a very good one. Stay tuned!
|
12-12-17 10:26am
Reply To Message
|
4
|
skippy (0)
|
REPLY TO #3 - Amanda :
Hi Amanda,
Thank you SO MUCH for taking my comments in the correct and positive light. In the end, we are all pretty committed to making TBP and PU a great place for people to find out what is good and what is bad. If PU isn't the CU of porn, I think it is at least safe to say you are the tomato meter. :-)
Thanks, again!
|
12-12-17 03:20pm
Reply To Message
|
5
|
sonofzog (0)
|
REPLY TO #2 - skippy :
Thanks for writing the review, skippy, very helpful. By a coincidence I fell onto hegre while searching for a particular model I "discovered" on MetArt. Hegre has a huge number of galleries for her and I'm curious how his vision differs from the MetArt photographer. Your review was extremely encouraging.
|
12-12-17 05:14pm
Reply To Message
|
6
|
sonofzog (0)
|
The PU price is said to be $19.95 recurring but CCBill reports that it goes up to $29.95 after the first month.
|
12-12-17 05:24pm
Reply To Message
|
7
|
Amanda (0)
|
REPLY TO #6 - sonofzog :
Hi sonofzog. Thanks for the head's up. Looking into it!
|
12-13-17 05:18am
Reply To Message
|
8
|
Amanda (0)
|
REPLY TO #4 - skippy :
;)
|
12-13-17 05:19am
Reply To Message
|
9
|
skippy (0)
|
REPLY TO #5 - sonofzog :
Which model? Most of his shoot of popular Met-Art models are A-MAZ-ing!
|
12-13-17 06:07am
Reply To Message
|
10
|
sonofzog (0)
|
REPLY TO #9 - skippy :
She's Elin at MetArt and Aya Beshen at Hegre. I have to say, I'm disappointed with his shoots compared with Natasha Schon's (MetArt). She's pretty controversial there; people either love her more artful, less graphic photosets (that would be me) or they hate them because there are never any spread legs and Schon experiments with lighting quite a bit. I found Hegre's photos of Aya to be really pedestrian and unimaginative, although there is plenty of good stuff among the other models. And, yes, the models are insanely beautiful.
|
12-13-17 08:44am
Reply To Message
|
11
|
skippy (0)
|
REPLY TO #10 - sonofzog :
Ah. OK. Natasha Schon is kind of a mixed bag for me, I've commented on MA many times and these shots of Elin/Aya are a good example. All 3 of the Schon MA sets are fairly dark, stylized and possibly highly altered images that attempt to shroud the model in mood and mystery. We have no idea what else Schon is altering in the name of artistic expression. I can appreciate the effort but prefer a little less alteration. The Hegre shots are mostly exactly the opposite and mostly just show the model in her true and unaltered form. Now, I also notice that Hegre has 35 galleries of this model dating back to 2013 (First set is called 18th Birthday so that says a lot....), so this model is younger and less experienced in the Hegre sets. The Schon sets are all dated 2017, so at this point the model has been working for 4 or 5 years. One huge change? The model's teeth. They are decidedly "European" in all if the Hegre sets including the ones published in 2017. (We have no idea when they were shot and every set could have been from the same 2-3 day shoot many years ago.) In the Schon shots, she's either gotten crowns or Schon has done a lot of editing. Either way, the difference is significant.
In the end, none of this matters. It is all in the eye of the beholder. I like this model's body on both sites. Please hold it against me. :-)
|
12-13-17 12:27pm
Reply To Message
|
12
|
sonofzog (0)
|
REPLY TO #11 - skippy :
So my take is completely different. As much as I appreciate full body shots, I prefer them in some sort of context (preferably a bed) for the fantasy aspect. Taking the model out of the framework of a room (not a big fan of outdoor shoots, especially not beaches) spoils the mood for me. I've had to adjust a few of Natasha's photos, true, because her experiments don't always work and I really do want to see the model but I find her images far more erotic than Herge's. Then again, I'm not a great fan of Stefan Grosjean, whose models are stunning but invariably surrounded by gilt and gaudy sets. It's a balancing act.
|
12-14-17 08:55am
Reply To Message
|
