On Tue, 08 Jan 2019 09:06:18 -0500, Buck <Buck@Scanners.Inc> wrote:
>On Mon, 07 Jan 2019 12:54:14 -0600, SL <SerpentLord@Evil.Incarn8>
>posted: "Re: SBEWP_Nelly A - Stovika 010 [MA].jpg [9/9] - yEnc (1/2)"
>
>>On 7 Jan 2019 11:12:39 GMT, Buck@Scanners.Inc (Buck) wrote:
>>
>> No offense to the poster...
>> What Spybird didn't realize is that a lot of his walls don't
>>make good desktop wp! In this series, Stovika, 6 & 7 are basically
>>the same photo. I can understand how this happens with your
>>infatuation with the model. I'm sure I've done it, but I've also
>>realized too that sometimes no picture in a set would make a good
>>wall.
>
>I've questioned some of his choices for wallpaper. But then that's
>what he likes.
>
He was trying something different. I'll give him that.
"I'm more of a well-wisher, in that I mean him no specific
harm." Moe Szyslak(referring to Homer)
>
>> We have different tastes in women too so that makes it easy to
>>be critical. My idea, most importantly, of a good erotic wall is to
>>show the girls assets. None of this laying on her side, with her back
>>to us. We're all but seeing that the slutty way some dress daily!
>>{...OH(!), but don't objectify them.}
>
>Tastes is what makes all the difference. Without it we would have
>nothing to write about or share. One of the things that is important
>to me is a woman's ass(ets). So a backside view is just what I want to
>see. Breasts for me come in the form of firmness not size. Anything
>over a mouth full is a waste. When I make a judgment about a woman's
>looks I'm looking at her overall attractiveness, not whether this or
>that is smaller or bigger. As for dress, IMO some women look more
>attractive when dressed than in the nude.
>
Remember, we're talking about wp! What I(underline) think
makes a good wp. I, in no way, meant to imply I don't like a good
rear view. And a rear view can show all of a woman's assets.
>
>> That's the best reason I had for quitting my Glamour Girl
>>series in .wallpaper. Trying to be tasteful over there among
>>"respectable" people. I'm sure my name is in a lot of KF folders for
>>it. Rule #1 was always NO PENETRATIONS!!! & NO LABIAL
>>SPREADS!!!(well, almost never on that last one). ;-)
>> I've kept several of Spy's walls, but only for picture
>>content.
>
>Don't worry about what other people think. Post what you like or feel
>you should share. If someone doesn't like it they don't have to
>download it. No matter what someone out there will always bitch about
>it. It always comes down to opinions and you know what they say about
>that. Opinions are like ass holes, everyone's got one and most of them
>stink.
>
No, once I started posting over here I was walling the same
content. I gave pointers and some of the viewers knew it already.
(see, I have no shame)Mostly because I'd fucked up and sent things to
the wrong groups on several occasions! (SLAP!)
I'm not the only one manipulating images and nor should I be.
So, if you know I'm posting the sets here, do your own walls. I do
97% of my walling with Irfanview...cropping, resizing. Easy enough.
They don't need nor want pRon over there! And I agree.
There's enough pRon everywhere else. The purpose of that group is
their little weekly contest. I wouldn't take that away from them for
anything.
Maybe you remember the geek posting all the homo crap over
there? That was over-the-top. There were many very artistic people
in that group at one time and another turd, by way of debasement &
debauchery, made a lot of the girls leave. I fucking hate him for
that because they're not coming back. I am QUITE sad.
Btw, you know you can look at all of that on one of Ariane's
flickr(?) pages...somebody set up a Walrus database. Ask her.
Anyway, I didn't feel pressured or anything like that to quit.
I wasn't the first to start walling the girls. I meant to do it a
little more tastefully. I don't know how well I accomplished that. It
may have even started to devolve because of the original content. So
bye.
|
|
')){kind=link}