Online free porn at mobile phone

Wallingford · 22nd January 2025, 01:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by BooBootheBear

Exactly! I'm fairly web savvy but if a way exists I haven't been able to find it.
But as a change it's one of the simplest tweaks that would make life easier in a way you never realised was an unsung irritant.

I don't want to butt in with ignorance here, because I haven't read this entire rant, just a few of the posts.

But are we forgetting something?

You find ONE POST that you like. You know that poster uses fillintheblank file host. Search posts in that thread. Search posts by that user.

Am I oversimplifying?

Am I on my way to the fridge for my fourth beer? I'm not trying to be a

contains hidden content You will have to click 'thank you' to see hidden content

but I think that might help a lot.

*You know that voice; and you know why.

BooBootheBear · 22nd January 2025, 06:00

If every discussion had is condemned as a "rant" then there's no bloody point in talking about anything.

Leave it all as it is and let's not consider anything that might improve what doesn't work well.
Especially not the fact that the searches for specific file hosts and the opening of single posts from searches were two entirely different points and unrelated, Searching posts from one specific user will only ever favour that user and anyone else using those hosts posting files you like are penalised for not being popular.
And what happens when that user leaves, is banned their links stop working and they don't replace them? You sill can't find what you're looking for working on a host you can use.

As for the hidden content function, it has become the tool of ego strokers and serves no useful purpose. Yes I know the argument that it "protects links" from take down requests but we've already established you can't search links. Copyright infringement hunters search content and performer. Not links. So those trying to protect their links behind the thankswhore's curtain are hiding their eyes to pretend their knackers aren't out.

Want to see that working in practice? Go to the upload hosts request thread. The hidden posts don't expire any later than the open posts and there are no DMCA notices there.
And another thing. Very few things piss me off more than opening the 22nd result I've opened from a search clicking thanks yet again only to find the link dead, the user banned or unresponsive and the whole thing a waste of time energy and effort.
Thanks for nothing.

Oh. I'm sorry. Am I ranting?

22nd January 2025, 16:48

This is more of an ownership issue, but they need to make the forum software swap. There isn't going to be a magical day when it will be as easy as flipping a switch and the change will be seamless. Have moderators make mass purges of some of the sections (remove all threads without new posts after a set date is a great start), and then just do it.

BooBootheBear · 4th February 2025, 15:27

Removing threads with no new posts would kill the archives and there's some real history of the industry charted there. Losing that IMO would be a mistake.

Clearing out the dead shite and useless posts/replies/rows/ is a horse of a different colour discussed ad nauseum sime pages back. Go have a look.

IMO that's still the first stage. Stage two is to move the entire dead section to a new space allowing it to be sandbox tested without risk of losing anything active. Clearing out that weight from the file system might make many of the other symptoms ease or disappear.

From there new plans can be devised and put into operation.

Shedload of work, but.

BooBootheBear · 4th February 2025, 16:12

Simple niggles.
Dates.

My understanding is the date used should be the release date (because the posting date is in the top left frame of every post so adding the date of posting would be redundant). If I'm wrong I'm happy to be corrected.

Many posters when putting up scenes use the date they are posting however. If that's the actual release date then no problem. If it isn't its the start of the Great Porn Misinformation Snowball that also includes wrong titles wrong performers and everything just made up to call the damned thing something coz I'm too bloody lazy to look it up etc etc etc.
It also, irrationally, causes steam to jet out of my ears, like the other day when someone posted this

The date used is the posting date. The scene however was made and released in October of last year. Someone else will take that scene and the info, reposted it here or elsewhere, and lo and behold everyone's getting it wrong.

Whatever the case this should be properly clarified (IMO).

Some users will ask "How the hell am I supposed to know that?"
Good question.
One of the reasons I still prefer IAFD to sites like Indexxx (still a useful resource but not as encyclopaedic) is they have excellent fact checkers and a very thorough information barrel. They aren't perfect but they are the best I've found online and if you point out a mistake or raise a query they have the contacts to allow them to check and verify.

Often missed is in the bottom left panel just under the titles. All the scene info including release date.
Take the scene with incorrect date attributes above:

That's how you know.

(Below the original production date and title you could add remastering dates and new titles or repackaged or whatever but that's a whole different discussion Porn is an industry of recycling profiteers, not one focused on artistic integrity like mainstream film.)

Which brings me to another niggle that oddly causes misinformation problems. Date format.

The forum likes dates to be noted numerically in the American format. MM/DD/YYYY. Much of the rest of the world however do not use this format. They naturally and habitually format DD/MM/YYYY. The reason for this is surprisingly simply, and linguistic.
When Americans speak a date they usually say for example "April First Two Thousand and One" and being a very literal people that's exactly how they write things down. 04/01/2001.
Much of the rest of us use a slightly different format, putting the day first.
When those numbers are switched we read them differently according to cultural experience and learning. Its not malicious. Just habit learned from childhood and used every day.
The solution is that elegantly employed by IAFD. Alpha numeric, spelling out the month. Therefore: Apr 01, 2001. Or 01 Apr 2001. It would no longer be of any consequence.

Clears up confusion. Eradicates misinformation and mistake. Doesn't put anyone's nose out of joint unless they really are spoiling for a fight.

Now those of a pragmatic mind might ask "Who the hell cares?". In reply I'd ask "if it doesn't matter and no one cares, why have a rule about dates? Just get rid."
My way keeps the info and solves the problems unintended but inherent in a forum with international membership.

Just a thought.

BooBootheBear · 5th February 2025, 15:53

I had a thought about the filehost search.
It can't be solved without major recoding (expensive and tricky) BUT it could be made simpler with a small post formatting adjustment.

Back of the envelope test of theory:
This is a standard post search in PATM for Krystal Steal

You can see most of the time what you see in the little boxes is the post title (if they added it) then a pile of garbage code that is the image link. That's because habitually an image is posted first
BUT when you get text first it looks like this

and you get more information in the search boxes.

What if the post was formatted something like this

Random Porn Title And Star
File Format Size etc
FILE HOST INITIALS (FJ/FB/DF or whatever)
file links
thumbs images and description/text

The last two can be interchangeable. It doesn't matter. As long as the first three lines contain the info as shown and those lines are at the very top of the post that should be visible in a standard post search which should help ID not only the post you want, but the file hosts you're most at home with.

It's a change in habit that would require some re-education but might be worth a try, especially if people see the potential help value.

It'll never happen of course, but I found it an interesting thought exercise.

Wallingford · 6th February 2025, 19:50

All threads would stop at or before 665 pages. Maybe we should make that 665 posts.

The image theme threads regularly update to part 2, part 3, still going, but some threads here, specifically, those exclusive to an individual are massively long.

I know there are number after 665, but why risk it?

Wallingford · 6th February 2025, 20:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by tenletter

I tried searching for 'Mila Azul' in Pictures and get a load of randoms, so...

I'd discourage posts that mess up the search functions by advertising other threads
Encourage them to use their signature instead, search doesn't index there, right?
And it's less data for them to add in every post too

Example here: http://veterperementour.ru/showpost.php?p=23559282

You see the part on the bottom right that says Mila Azul ? Click that.

jaydogbones · 7th February 2025, 00:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaydogbones

It seems to me that in the Hardcore Models subforum there needs to be some kind of thread Naming Rule in place. I found at least six duplicate threads most likely due to the thread creator's initial Forum searches not bringing up any hits because of the hldd3n/5ubt3rfuge in the Thread Titles where and "i" could be a 1/!/l etc. Sometimes I feel I need Bletchley Park to decipher some of these thread titles.
Here's a few examples:
Rodney Moore
http://veterperementour.ru/showthread...ht=Rodn3yM00re
http://veterperementour.ru/t1082895-r0dni3vison.html
Vince Voyeur
http://veterperementour.ru/t1077819-v...unl3ash3d.html
http://veterperementour.ru/t981483-vouyrmd.html
Ed Powers
http://veterperementour.ru/t1135811-e...-ends-etc.html
http://veterperementour.ru/t1071344-ed-p0w3r5.html

and there's probably a shit load more

Just revisiting this topic because I wanted to post a video in the Hardcore Models subforum for an extinct company called Loaded Digital.
I tried searching Loaded Digital with multiple different spelling variations of it with no luck.
So I decided to create a new thread which I labelled Loaded Digital without any subterfuge in the names because this company went out of business over 10 years ago.
I'm wondereing what the need is for the subterfuge in the titles as many of these companies are long gone. As an example I copied the Thread names on the first page in the latest order with my new thread at the top:

Loaded Digital
OnlyF@ns
Țr!p F0r Ϝṵcḱ
1t's P.0.V
Fvck th3 G33k
Navghty Am£r1c@
Thr0ated
21st S3XXtury
De3per
Cz3ch Fant@$y
T0ky0-h0t
R€dL!ghtD!$tr!ct
JM Pr0duct!0ns
W!ldLif3
An4rchy
WestC04stPr0duct1ons
Banq!

stob · 7th February 2025, 11:56

Ban forum members from using file hosts who do not allow free users downloads to be resumed.

I'm sure though that's been mentioned many a time before now.

22nd January 2025, 06:00	#1962
BooBootheBear Registered User Addicted Join Date: Feb 2013 Location: Jellystone Posts: 654 Thanks: 817 Thanked 1,573 Times in 565 Posts	If every discussion had is condemned as a "rant" then there's no bloody point in talking about anything. Leave it all as it is and let's not consider anything that might improve what doesn't work well. Especially not the fact that the searches for specific file hosts and the opening of single posts from searches were two entirely different points and unrelated, Searching posts from one specific user will only ever favour that user and anyone else using those hosts posting files you like are penalised for not being popular. And what happens when that user leaves, is banned their links stop working and they don't replace them? You sill can't find what you're looking for working on a host you can use. As for the hidden content function, it has become the tool of ego strokers and serves no useful purpose. Yes I know the argument that it "protects links" from take down requests but we've already established you can't search links. Copyright infringement hunters search content and performer. Not links. So those trying to protect their links behind the thankswhore's curtain are hiding their eyes to pretend their knackers aren't out. Want to see that working in practice? Go to the upload hosts request thread. The hidden posts don't expire any later than the open posts and there are no DMCA notices there. And another thing. Very few things piss me off more than opening the 22nd result I've opened from a search clicking thanks yet again only to find the link dead, the user banned or unresponsive and the whole thing a waste of time energy and effort. Thanks for nothing. Oh. I'm sorry. Am I ranting? __________________ When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle. Edmund Burke Last edited by BooBootheBear; 22nd January 2025 at 06:18.

4th February 2025, 15:27	#1964
BooBootheBear Registered User Addicted Join Date: Feb 2013 Location: Jellystone Posts: 654 Thanks: 817 Thanked 1,573 Times in 565 Posts	Removing threads with no new posts would kill the archives and there's some real history of the industry charted there. Losing that IMO would be a mistake. Clearing out the dead shite and useless posts/replies/rows/ is a horse of a different colour discussed ad nauseum sime pages back. Go have a look. IMO that's still the first stage. Stage two is to move the entire dead section to a new space allowing it to be sandbox tested without risk of losing anything active. Clearing out that weight from the file system might make many of the other symptoms ease or disappear. From there new plans can be devised and put into operation. Shedload of work, but. __________________ When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle. Edmund Burke

4th February 2025, 16:12	#1965
BooBootheBear Registered User Addicted Join Date: Feb 2013 Location: Jellystone Posts: 654 Thanks: 817 Thanked 1,573 Times in 565 Posts	Simple niggles. Dates. My understanding is the date used should be the release date (because the posting date is in the top left frame of every post so adding the date of posting would be redundant). If I'm wrong I'm happy to be corrected. Many posters when putting up scenes use the date they are posting however. If that's the actual release date then no problem. If it isn't its the start of the Great Porn Misinformation Snowball that also includes wrong titles wrong performers and everything just made up to call the damned thing something coz I'm too bloody lazy to look it up etc etc etc. It also, irrationally, causes steam to jet out of my ears, like the other day when someone posted this The date used is the posting date. The scene however was made and released in October of last year. Someone else will take that scene and the info, reposted it here or elsewhere, and lo and behold everyone's getting it wrong. Whatever the case this should be properly clarified (IMO). Some users will ask "How the hell am I supposed to know that?" Good question. One of the reasons I still prefer IAFD to sites like Indexxx (still a useful resource but not as encyclopaedic) is they have excellent fact checkers and a very thorough information barrel. They aren't perfect but they are the best I've found online and if you point out a mistake or raise a query they have the contacts to allow them to check and verify. Often missed is in the bottom left panel just under the titles. All the scene info including release date. Take the scene with incorrect date attributes above: That's how you know. (Below the original production date and title you could add remastering dates and new titles or repackaged or whatever but that's a whole different discussion Porn is an industry of recycling profiteers, not one focused on artistic integrity like mainstream film.) Which brings me to another niggle that oddly causes misinformation problems. Date format. The forum likes dates to be noted numerically in the American format. MM/DD/YYYY. Much of the rest of the world however do not use this format. They naturally and habitually format DD/MM/YYYY. The reason for this is surprisingly simply, and linguistic. When Americans speak a date they usually say for example "April First Two Thousand and One" and being a very literal people that's exactly how they write things down. 04/01/2001. Much of the rest of us use a slightly different format, putting the day first. When those numbers are switched we read them differently according to cultural experience and learning. Its not malicious. Just habit learned from childhood and used every day. The solution is that elegantly employed by IAFD. Alpha numeric, spelling out the month. Therefore: Apr 01, 2001. Or 01 Apr 2001. It would no longer be of any consequence. Clears up confusion. Eradicates misinformation and mistake. Doesn't put anyone's nose out of joint unless they really are spoiling for a fight. Now those of a pragmatic mind might ask "Who the hell cares?". In reply I'd ask "if it doesn't matter and no one cares, why have a rule about dates? Just get rid." My way keeps the info and solves the problems unintended but inherent in a forum with international membership. Just a thought. __________________ When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle. Edmund Burke Last edited by BooBootheBear; 5th February 2025 at 12:56. Reason: typos and aditional thoughts

5th February 2025, 15:53	#1966
BooBootheBear Registered User Addicted Join Date: Feb 2013 Location: Jellystone Posts: 654 Thanks: 817 Thanked 1,573 Times in 565 Posts	I had a thought about the filehost search. It can't be solved without major recoding (expensive and tricky) BUT it could be made simpler with a small post formatting adjustment. Back of the envelope test of theory: This is a standard post search in PATM for Krystal Steal You can see most of the time what you see in the little boxes is the post title (if they added it) then a pile of garbage code that is the image link. That's because habitually an image is posted first BUT when you get text first it looks like this and you get more information in the search boxes. What if the post was formatted something like this Random Porn Title And Star File Format Size etc FILE HOST INITIALS (FJ/FB/DF or whatever) file links thumbs images and description/text The last two can be interchangeable. It doesn't matter. As long as the first three lines contain the info as shown and those lines are at the very top of the post that should be visible in a standard post search which should help ID not only the post you want, but the file hosts you're most at home with. It's a change in habit that would require some re-education but might be worth a try, especially if people see the potential help value. It'll never happen of course, but I found it an interesting thought exercise. __________________ When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle. Edmund Burke Last edited by BooBootheBear; 6th February 2025 at 04:09.

22nd January 2025, 16:48	#1963
reclaimer Guest Posts: n/a	This is more of an ownership issue, but they need to make the forum software swap. There isn't going to be a magical day when it will be as easy as flipping a switch and the change will be seamless. Have moderators make mass purges of some of the sections (remove all threads without new posts after a set date is a great start), and then just do it.

6th February 2025, 19:50	#1967
Wallingford Meanwhile . . . . . . . . Postaholic Join Date: May 2012 Location: Destination Unknown Posts: 7,190 Thanks: 54,277 Thanked 25,895 Times in 6,595 Posts	All threads would stop at or before 665 pages. Maybe we should make that 665 posts. The image theme threads regularly update to part 2, part 3, still going, but some threads here, specifically, those exclusive to an individual are massively long. I know there are number after 665, but why risk it?

7th February 2025, 11:56	#1970
stob Junior Member Addicted Join Date: Jul 2015 Posts: 234 Thanks: 669 Thanked 629 Times in 172 Posts	Ban forum members from using file hosts who do not allow free users downloads to be resumed. I'm sure though that's been mentioned many a time before now.