You guys are full of yourselves.
I would crawl ten miles, naked, across broken glass, just to smell the tire tracks of the laundry truck that carried her soiled panties.
her pussy is so creamy wet
I have been admiring this beautiful Latvian flower for some time now, seduced by her elegant sexuality and head-to-toe perfection. But this set is too much for one man to take. It has put me over the top. I'm taking the next plane to Riga
Diana has such regal, timeless beauty... I know some women like her in real life who only become more beautiful with the passing of time.
It's just a pity she doesn't look more cheerful/happy to be sharing her beauty with us...
beautiful model - boring photographer!
Nice set. Posted 2:07am CDT US, no tags ;o).. Love Diana!
I agree, rockhard.....8:11am CDT, and no tags. There are about 90 tags so far, and that's about enough. I do wonder, however, which math genius entered the "teen" tag; Diana's bio says otherwise.....or, maybe that tagger just can't read. And, the "indoor" tag, doesn't seem to make sense, as does the "bush" tag, unless they were referring to the foliage.
I've sent the following email to Support. Perhaps you guys agree with this suggestion. If so, I invite you to join me! ;)
As an old Met Art fan, and also a niches' fan (specially feet), I'd like to make a suggestion:
What about allowing some niche tags for pics?
Tags could be simple, like "boobs", "feet", "ass" etc (no need to choose between "perfect feet", or "sexy feet", or "nice feet", or "beautiful feet", or "pretty feet"and so forth. Only "feet"!)
The more a given pic is marked with a certain tag, the upper it will appear in this tag's list, so it would be a easier way to measure pics' popularity for each niche!
High noon CDT, and there are about a hundred tags now, half of which have nothing to do with the set or the model:
butterfly labia, gaping pussy, girl cum, hairy pussy, huge labia, tan lines, trimmed, trimmed bush, puffy nipples...
In my opinion, the tags have evolved into a meaningless collection of random garbage phrases now. I will ignore them from now on unless I want a good laugh.
And I agree with YOU, mincer. But one thing has me scratching my head...."8:11am CDT, and no tags. There are about 90 tags so far,"...this seems to be 'self-contradictory'. At the time you mentioned, there had to be either "no tags" or "90 tags"....? ;o)
rockhard: When you posted, 'nice set,' followed by 'no tags,' I thought you were commenting, and adding no tags. I agree, nice set, and I'm posting no tags. There, I hope I got the train back on track. LOL!
hipshot131: Good point.....maybe some dimwit recently discovered CTRL-c and CTRL-v.
Kilroy: And, it would seem some tags would cancel one another....huge labia, or small labia; well, which is it?
Dreadnought: You might be on to something with the hit count.
I think a lot of users on a lot of various sites are getting carried away with the 'tag game.' I get an email from FB, "so-and-so tagged you," and I think, 'yeah, that's me, 55 yards away, on the other side of the field, coaching the soccer team. Don't tag me, tag your daughter, who's involved in the play, just twenty feet in front of you.
Yeah, I don't always make myself clear...lol I was 'stating' that no tags had been 'attached' as yet, at that time. "Nice set" was indeed a "comment", but the rest was a set-up to continue yesterday's discussion of tags... ;o) S'all good!
Also, I thought you were saying there was no tags, but you were saying that you weren't 'leaving any' tags because you thought that's what I was saying.... LOL And now you have me humming "Train to Nowhere"....LOL
Could it be possible someone wants certain sets to have as many tags as possible so that their sets rack up more "hits" than others?
Tags are used to search -- more tags would automatically generate more "hits" on that page of the site. Since websites use programs that "count" the "hits", this might imply that this set, or this model, or this photographer is more popular than others.
If you limit tags to only the essentials -- then you could thoroughly describe any model in 25 words or less.
Since some of the tags are obviously in error, and others don't make sense -- could this just be an indirect way of generating more traffic to any given page?
As any good murder mystery devotee will tell you -- there is always "method" to the madness.
That could make sense dread, but that would mean they think everyone 'hits' the tags to do searches. I think I did that once....about a year ago. Does anyone do that on a regular basis!?
With the tags here, I think it's a LOT more "madness" than "method". To me, more like someone likes to "see" themselves talk...lol I NEVER use tags to do a search, but can't imagine two of them taking you to the same 'page'... The number, and nature of the tags this set has picked up since being posted is comical! "Someone" has an itchin' for some "lickin"! lmao It's all pretty damn silly!
I think there is some cut and pasting going on. There are a ton of tags that don't make any sense for this set.
You just might have something there hipshot. It appears that someone just copied tags from various sets and pasted them in. There sure is some that make no sense whatever for this set. Who can say what goes on in the minds of the mindless...? ;o)
More sets of model Diana G and galleries by Koenart on the Met Art Network: