There are currently 42 photo galleries and 27 videos on Sock Blocked.com, and although there is no update information in the members' area here, the site does advertise an update being added once a week. The presentation of this site is very good indeed. The models' index is the best part, bunching together all the contributions from that model, but also giving her a short biography as well as some vital statistics about that model. The design of the site was also very good, but I think the site could have done with better descriptions on the photo galleries and videos.
All of the photo galleries on this site come with a ZIP gallery download although all photos come in just one size, that being 1064x1600px. The video options here are really great, though, even if they all only address full length videos. The formats are available in Flash, .WMV, .MOV and .MP4 formats for streaming and downloading, with the very best quality videos playing at 1280x720px. Download speeds were very good indeed, though, and there were no DRM restrictions on any of the videos.
Maybe I'm just completely out of the loop with things, but I'd only heard the phrase 'cock blocked' for the first time a couple of months ago! But regardless of how much of an ignoramus I happen to be, there is no such activity going on here and this is a strictly softcore site that is completely dedicated to a sock and legwear fetish. They also happen to use models that are not big stars but are quite well known in some circles.
The fact is though that some people might not quite get what they want from this site. I know that a lot of people have very specific legwear fetishes, and people will come here just looking for socks and not necessarily nylons and stockings like you quite often get here. For those who are not quite so discerning though, this really is a very good little site that, hopefully, will continue to grow pretty well. As for the girls, there is absolutely no-one here that could be regarded as a disappointment - they are stunning!
Sock Blocked Review
Views
80
Review:
August 5, 2011,
reviewer Steve