Measured porn stars??

[strivingforperfection]

eric john measured 7,6, maybe 8 ?

video ;

https://monsterwhitecock.com/penelope-looking-for-the-biggest-dick-of-city/

Side measurememnts are usually .5 more than on top, but the difference can be more if "side bone pressed". In this case is is worse, we cannot even see where the tape begins. Eric John has been shown to be around 7 inches anyway though earlier on this thread.

 

[deleted978960]

Bottle is 9.2 inches according to amazon.

Diamond looks around 2 inch less than bottle. (1.5 shorter, but it is on the side which adds around .5 inches usually). That means he is around 7.2 inches. 7.25 was the common estimate around here, Fiodor guessed 7.35 which looks highly possible too.

We can say with certainty he is more than 7 inches, but less than 7.5.

can u post a link of the product on amazon ???

 

[deleted978960]

SCOTT NAILS Dildo ( I guess...)

https://www.amazon.com/Riodong-Liqu...e=UTF8&qid=1489076863&sr=1-7&keywords=riodong


View attachment 763457

 

[Shackleford]

Isn't the whole point to try to figure out the size? Many "measured pics" have flaws themselves.

It is one thing if people are just guessing, but if someone is using a clear measurement pic or pics to deduce their conclusion, then what is the problem. We should look at everyone's guesses including measured pics but also just pics that show the erect penis in general, and then we can decide which we agree or disagree with,

I don't understand this attitude.

What's so difficult to understand? The title of the thread is "Measured porn stars." The flow sheet is pretty simple:

"Is there a measured porn star is this photo or video?"

Yes--> It's on topic. Post & discuss.
No--> It's not on topic. Put it somewhere else.

The second sentence of the entire thread, right there in the opening post, is:

Accuracy of measurements is another subject entirely.

 

[Zaromski]

What's so difficult to understand? The title of the thread is "Measured porn stars." The flow sheet is pretty simple:

"Is there a measured porn star is this photo or video?"

Yes--> It's on topic. Post & discuss.
No--> It's not on topic. Put it somewhere else.

The second sentence of the entire thread, right there in the opening post, is:

I think the most important thing to keep in mind is the goal of this thread - and that is to come to accurate conclusions on pornstars length and/or girth. Whether this is through a measured pic (usually in its most flattering angle) or through photogrammetric analysis is not really important as they both contribute to this thread in their own way.

If you don't like Fiodors analysis for example, just don't read his posts, as I for one appreciate his effort to calculate the length and in particular girth of pornstars, as accurate girth measurements are even rarer than accurate length measurements.

 

[Shackleford]

I think the most important thing to keep in mind is the goal of this thread - and that is to come to accurate conclusions on pornstars length and/or girth.

That statement is the exact opposite of what I just quoted from the origin of the thread.

I give up. Carry on.

 

[strivingforperfection]

That statement is the exact opposite of what I just quoted from the origin of the thread.

I give up. Carry on.

Good. Thanks.

 

[strivingforperfection]

What's so difficult to understand? The title of the thread is "Measured porn stars." The flow sheet is pretty simple:

"Is there a measured porn star is this photo or video?"

Yes--> It's on topic. Post & discuss.
No--> It's not on topic. Put it somewhere else.

The second sentence of the entire thread, right there in the opening post, is:

Do you bring this pedantic attitude to every aspect of your life?

 

[Shackleford]

Do you bring this pedantic attitude to every aspect of your life?

If I took my vehicle in for an 10-minute oil change, and the mechanic took it upon himself to do a tune up and replace the tires because that's what he thought an "oil change" meant, yes, I'd totally call bullshit and not pay him.

 

[strivingforperfection]

If I took my vehicle in for an 10-minute oil change, and the mechanic took it upon himself to do a tune up and replace the tires because that's what he thought an "oil change" meant, yes, I'd totally call bullshit and not pay him.

Hilariously flawed analogy

 

[Shackleford]

Hilariously flawed analogy

No, because in both cases someone is taking it upon themselves to change the meaning of a request simply because it's what they want to do.

Over 300 pages ago, a thread titled "Measured porn stars" opened with the exact words "Accuracy of measurements is another subject entirely." Now we're being told by people who like to read their own theses that that the reason the thread exists is to determine the actual sizes of as many people as possible, and if no measured video or photo exists, well, fuck it, they're just gonna do it in this thread anyway.

I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you. I'm not going to waste any more time engaging in this. Just do what you want, because you're going to anyway.

 

[FIODOR]

I come to give some peace in the thread ... Shackleford is right in its starting point, the thread began by asking about the stars that have been measured, regardless of whether or not the measures were right.
What happens is that really few actors have really been measured, and every time a photo is hung, users spend several pages arguing about which estimate is more accurate. Therefore, the thread has finally become a means by which users try to get right with the measurements, either by photos or other calculation systems. Striving is right in the same way when he confesses not to understand the attitude of many. And I ask myself: what problem is there if we calculate one way and some other? We all based on photos and videos, and I believe that instead of discussing we should all help each other to achieve the most accurate figures. If we do not do so, the thread will end because there are not many photos to comment, and because the photos are often untrustworthy and need to be corrected. My goal has always been to try to help with my calculations and to corroborate or contradict the photos of actors being measured.
And by the way ..... LIVE THE WORLD GAY PRIDE MADRID! Today capital of tolerance

 

[FIODOR]

Bottle is 9.2 inches according to amazon.

Diamond looks around 2 inch less than bottle. (1.5 shorter, but it is on the side which adds around .5 inches usually). That means he is around 7.2 inches. 7.25 was the common estimate around here, Fiodor guessed 7.35 which looks highly possible too.

We can say with certainty he is more than 7 inches, but less than 7.5.

Yessss! I said in other post he is 7,3

 

[FIODOR]

LOL. Do u think he is Scott Nails too?

 

[Zaromski]

Fiodor have you done a calculation on Charlie Macc's length and/or girth. I think he is very well endowed possibly more so than he looks in proportion as he is listed as 6 foot 2 according to iafd.

http://www.iafd.com/person.rme/perfid=CharlieMac/gender=M/charlie-macc.htm

 

[969235]

Jays

 

[deleted978960]

Jays
View attachment 764810

6.5", who is this ???

 

[969235]

New actor from bangbros , his twitter https://twitter.com/jaysxxxworld?lang=fr

 

[TinyPrincess]

View attachment 764992
New actor from bangbros , his twitter https://twitter.com/jaysxxxworld?lang=fr

Wauw - 42.5" must be the biggest cock ever

 

[Ocine]

Wauw - 42.5" must be the biggest cock ever

I guess, if you look at her face