Registration to the abbywinters.com messageboards is restricted to its site members only.
All current subscribers of abbywinters.com may login to the boards immediately using their website subscription username and password. Please note that passwords of website and forum are independent, changing one does not change the other.
If you don't seem to have a boards account then contact the boards administrator with your Username and Billing ID number.
Not very nice? I don't think it's unkind, just lazy, superficial, and inaccurate. No mention of who abby is on the site? Personality 5/10!? Bah.
When a review is written badly go for it in style I say and Gordon has gone and done it here, did he even visit your site abby??? because as far as I'm concerned he's reviewed a different site as none of the comments make sense.
This site has the best navigation and design going and is always making changes to make things even easier so how the hell can you only score 7/10 when the so called reviewer gordon scores the unuser friendly ATK 9/10, what????
What's this personality score 5/10 suppossed to refer to???? and only 8 for customer support, this man seriously hasn't visited this site.
I'm not too sure if it has just been written lazily, I just don't think gordon has the abillity to write and review a site properly.
My guess is some folks aren't happy unless there are squirting facials, ass-banging, and bulbous tits. Thus your site "lacks anything too outstanding".
Gorgeous photography and varied natural settings aren't outstanding? The way Abby elicits the personality of the model isn't outstanding? Abby's choice of models isn't outstanding?
What do you wanna bet he never got to the discussion boards. He certainly never got to About Abby.
P.S. It's interesting that the only "softcore" site that made it to his top-ten list is Hegre Archives, which shares the same production values as the old Penthouse, with vaseline-on-lens artsy pics of lingerie-clad girls in lush settings.
I don't get it.
I think he's being paid off.
The guy is a fool and just can't recognise what a great site this is. Have you actually looked through the review scores of the other sites, it is quite scary to see which sites have either scored the same or higher than abby's, and IMHO they're not even worthy of being mentioned in the same sentance as abbywinters.com.
Are the sample pics he used allowed to be put up on their site without your permission abby or did you give them permission first???
Well the only thing I know for sure after reading the review is that Gordon is either illiterate, lazy or both. Probably the latter.
If he can’t even be bothered to check his own review for typos (beyond a simple spell-check), what are the chances he’s going to take the time to really get to know the site. Let’s face it, most porn is bad. A site like AW is going to throw a reviewer who likes the current state of the online-porn-world for a loop.
Don’t worry Abby, if this guy can’t find the forum or your intro page, he’s not worth the time.
And for a negative review, 75% ain’t bad!
"And for a negative review, 75% ain’t bad!" A point I was going to make.
I think it's a style thing for him too. Looking at some of his other reviews it looks like he values a lot more "action." Meaning, presumably, hard-core. Also it looks like he puts a premium on videos, which are fairly light compared to some of the other sites he seems to like.
I do wonder if he saw anything in the Gold or Deviations sections -- most reviewers seem to mention it if only to carp about having to subscribe long-term to see it. I think without Gold access the site might seem a bit tame to a bungee-jumping reviewer.
Personality wise I'm again not sure if you can reconcile a clean interface with a chirpy demeanor. Especially since the daily model commentary may occasionally clank to the ear of a newcomer -- for instance "looks outside Must be Tuesday" or "Ah well, enough prevaricating. Here's the rest of the utterly delectable Ella" is cute when you already know the writers involved, but it probably sounds like presenting naked ladies is a bit of a chore to the uninitiated.
Also, Abby, if it's not instantly clear to newcomers who you are then it's time to bite the bullet and start yapping it up again. You don't necessarily have to *type* mind you -- once a week you could try dictating your impressions-of-the-week to Jamie or VD and let them plug it in for you. Or you and maybe Jamie could call Arsby (Collect? Surely he wouldn't mind. :-)) and yak with him about who's coming up next week and let him edit things down write them up for you. But one way or another you may want to re-establish that you're a proud porn-positive dyke with an attitude and an eye for lighting who shoots and edits everything herself, and hates pluck-jobs, make-up, fake boobs, high-heels, and loves (uggh!) pee scenes.
Note: I'm not knocking VD's commentary, by the way. I know how hard it gets to say something interesting about what sometimes must amount to the same old thing only piled higher and deeper. Still, it's a big part of people's reception of the site so its important.
Sigh. If I had more time *I'd* volunteer me for the job instead of Arsby. :-)
I like writing the Raves each day, though it's true that some days there just isn't anything to write. After coming up with the little descriptors for each set, and sweetening the Bios (which we all write, variously, ourselves. Cass, Jamie, me, Abby, Elvaar, we all have our hand in there), by the time it comes to the Rave I'm all adjective'd out.
But when I read intros on other sites, they tend to be either outrageously crude and simplistic, or unusually elaborate and silly. Or worse, technical and dull. We try to be real, but fun. I guess that's kind of different to what newcomers might expect.
"by the time it comes to the Rave I'm all adjective'd out."
Yup, that's why I really wasn't knocking you personally -- six raves a week times fifty-two weeks a year really adds (multiplies?) up. Sooner or later it's always going to be hard to say something fresh.
"[other sites's intros] tend to be either outrageously crude and simplistic, or unusually elaborate and silly. Or worse, technical and dull."
And I *really* appreciate that nobody at AW.COM gets outright crude about your models! Thanks.
This is why I prefer sites and magazines where all the staff/reviewers give the product a socre or comment and then average it out. I saw a Swiss music mag that did this once. Surely it is better because then you get to see which reviewer likes similar things to you and then can look out for their reviews more often. Also I hope people pay attention to what we say on the boards and the customer testimonials. This is just one guy who clearly hasn't bothered to look around here much. Who's Abby? Well for goodnes sake you even included a description of the camera equiptment you use for shoots on your page. Perhaps to be fair though, some of us are a bit biased the other way, in favour of your site, I dunno? Personally I think we're just a bunch of people with extremely good taste.
Dear, Oh Dear, Oh Dear, I go away for a week and look what happens. I find that my wife is having cyber rumpy-pumpy with another member of this board and that the sky has fallen on our heads !
BTW Arsby, sink me ! you scoundrel ! will it be pistols or swords at dawn?
Adultrey aside, I can't help but agree with Arsby and I smell a rat. "Gordon" should indeed reveal his own predilections before giving a subjective assessment. For all we know he gets his rocks off by viewing clueless east European girls getting their vacant faces blasted with sperm from callow, sinewy youths with care-in-the-comminity haircuts.
Just as important, its a slur on us, the paying viewer. "Gordon", by implication is saying we like mediocrity and that we accept charisma-free adult entertainment when in fact one of the reasons that we pay our hard earned cash here is that AW.com has personality way above anything else in the genre. Deplorable.
This has spurned me on to do something that I have never done something before. I have started to post endorsements of AW.com at the review sites.(I'm sorry did I hear Abby groaning? Don't fear o scented one, you can trust me - just wish you would answer a past query of mine img tag disable, use attachment mgr/system to add images to postshttp://www.abbywinters.com/discus/clipart/happy.gif )
It might help if m'learned friends write to Richard's Realm and put him staight. Don't be abusive as the reader will loose the substance of any reasoned argument you might have.
BTW, despite the two initial "R"'s in the Richard's Realm, it has absolutely no connection with me !
Having now had a siesta, I am fully refreshed and consquently am thinking in a more lucid manner. This can only be of benefit to AW and its community.
I have given the matter of Richard's Realm's erroneous review some more thought and have reached a disturbing conclusion.
At first I thought that "Gordon" may in fact be homosexual. This is possible, as up to now he has veiwed only bland pictures of somewhat artificial girls of no discernible personality. On encountering the brutally honest images of the fine young ladies at AW.com, his repressed homosexuality took fright at the reality of womanhood and in denial, sought refuge in his disparaging remarks and overall rating of this excellent site.
Then I thought, maybe, it was simply that "Gordon" is a moron - not difficult to assume as his ignorance of the basic rules of objective reveiwing is evident for all to see.
Of course, the next logical possibility is that "Gordon" could very well be a homosexual moron and in this Abby and her dedicated staff are unfortunate in having "Gordon" as the reviewer of this site.
Alas though, I fear I am being fanciful, for after giving this matter thoughtful and forensic analysis, I regret to say that reason for this disgraceful slur on Abby, her staff and m'learned friends lies with the British Goverment.
This has to be rectified immediatley. I shall write to the appropriate authorities.........
I'll go with repressed sexuality leading to his inability to appreciate naturally pretty young women. My guess is that he's the type who screams at waitresses.
The Rt Hon Patricia Hewitt PC MP
Secretary of State for Trade and Industry
1 Victoria Street
London
SW1H 0ET
Minister,
May I trouble you for a few minutes and draw your attention to the British produced internet site, www.richards-realm.com.
The site is a "showcase" and review portal depicting a wide spectrum of all matters sexual.
I am sure after you peruse the site's subject matter ranging from anal fisting through to zoophilia, you will agree, as a member of Her Majesty's government and as a married mother, that it is deplorable for a British company to show such despicable disregard to correct and objective reviewing. This is typical of the sloppy standards prevalent in British industry today. The Goverment must encourage firms to spend more on research and developement before they make available its products to the market-place.
I must also comment that the goverment must directly take the blame for giving the lead in encouraging British industry's poor standard of reviewing. I am of course refering to the recent situation in Iraq where the Joint Intelligence Committee's report "No Weapons Here" was transmogrified by the government to "Forty-five Minutes to Armageddom", no doubt caused by your political colleagues' sloppy reveiwing.
The Goverment has a lot to answer when decent, wholesome sites like abbywinters.com which show artistic renditions of young single women discovering the potential of their bodies through masturbation (and with other girls too! check it out !) can be slandered by repressed shirt-lifting scribes.
Comment