| Msg # |
User |
Message |
Date |
1
|
Drooler (Disabled)
|
They are helpful when they're accurate.
One thing that doesn't help much is the Y/N statement as to whether a site has "hi res" pics. When it is "Y," it's still an inch-to-a-mile question left unanswered. 1280 pixels is hardly the same as 4000px. That "Y" does not say how big the pics get, so obviously it's not very useful.
And if it's "N" the range will be much narrower (usually 800 to 1024).
Why not just give the dimensions of the pic sizes in the facts rundown? They give the dimensions for videos, so why not for pics?
But I also hope that each time this information is put on TBP, it's done after independent verification and not simply because the site told them.
|
12-11-08 12:41am
Reply To Message
|
2
|
elonlybuster (0)
|
I use them a lot, but not to the point where I rely on them only because what one person loves another may not.
|
12-11-08 02:41am
Reply To Message
|
3
|
apoctom (0)
|
Exactly what Drooler said.
Another example is Exclusive Content. TBP only checks that the site advertises 100% exclusive content, but never checks it out. I have been to a lot of sites that TBP said was 100% exclusive only to find out that the site is full of ripped DVDs found on VideoBox or other sites.
Also, most sites are posting updates, so the number of movies or photos changes from the time the site was reviewed until I read it. I wonder if those statistics are kept up to date.
|
12-11-08 07:22am
Reply To Message
|
4
|
TheRizzo (0)
|
I wish TBP would update site facts more frequently especially newer sites that are growing or go stale. Some of the longer established sites can go longer without new facts but the new sites I think need more updates to prove they are actually updating.
|
12-11-08 10:00am
Reply To Message
|
5
|
Toadsith (0)
|
The TBP site stats are consistent and can be quite useful when looking into new or obscure sites. The rough estimate quantity of content and quality of content is useful, especially considering most sites are less than forthcoming about their own precise stats.
However, TBP doesn't always update the stats all that often - granted they seem to be improving this as of late, but I still find some sites where that stats are over a year old. If they site in question has been reviewed by any of our core group of esteemed reviewers on Porn Users, I find the specifications provided by our reviews are vastly more useful. Specific image dimensions, download speeds, video codecs with bit rates and dimensions, up to date content summations, et cetera.
The stats that TBP provides are commendable, but I think they could be improved upon - and that, I believe, is what we here at Porn Users do with our reviews.
|
12-11-08 10:22am
Reply To Message
|
6
|
Wittyguy (0)
|
I also have to chime in as a picture guy and agree with Drooler's post. TBP lists the screen size of the vids so why not the pics too?
Overall, I rely a lot on the TBP site statistics. Some you have to take with a grain of salt, especially claims of exclusive content. If you prefer quality over quantity then you really need to be thinking about the technical stuff and statistical facts about a site.
|
12-11-08 11:58am
Reply To Message
|
7
|
mbaya (Disabled)
|
I think they are very important, especially for sites that don't have PU reviews or if they are very old.
|
12-11-08 05:07pm
Reply To Message
|
8
|
jd1961 (0)
|
Are there zip files?
Hi-Res photos?
DRM?
Any discounts?
Definitely always check.
|
12-11-08 05:33pm
Reply To Message
|
9
|
pat362 (0)
|
I look at them because they are part of the info given for their review. I find the 100% exclusive statement to be less than accurate because as stated above. It's not necessarily true. All in all I do enjoy them.
|
12-11-08 06:07pm
Reply To Message
|
10
|
PinkPanther (0)
|
Statistical site facts? What are those? I'm a simple man - hot babes or not hot babes - that's the statistical site facts that I'm interested in.
|
12-11-08 07:31pm
Reply To Message
|
11
|
Drooler (Disabled)
|
REPLY TO #6 - Wittyguy :
About the exclusive content business, right! Now I actually haven't had that much trouble due to TBP, but that's because I don't take their statements all that seriously. I can go to the preview section of a site and tell pretty quickly if it's really exclusive or not -- within the niches that I am familiar with, anyway (softcore photography, especially).
But I'm not so versed in hardcore vids, so when TBP gives a site a 5 or a 4 on being "exclusive," that's when I have to go to PU and see if someone knowledgable in that regard has reviewed the site, and done well at that.
Anyway, you'd think the elite reviewers at TBP would be more knowledgable on the "+/- exclusive" question than any of us proletarian PUer's. But what you get are vague (i.e., worthless) statements like "seems exclusive." I think, "Gee, thanks. 'Seems exclusive.' That was a BIG help. And thanks for being that lazy."
|
12-12-08 02:16am
Reply To Message
|
12
|
Denner (0)
|
What I'd appreciate is a more regular update on amount of videos at the sites - but guess it's almost hopeless since the amount of reviewed sites are well over 5000...
Still I consinder those site facts very importend before joining.
|
12-12-08 11:58am
Reply To Message
|
