Comments on: Is BitTorrent share-ratio enforcement really necessary?

By: Jorge

Jorge — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 16:00:00 +0000

Great article soul

By: Xtripit

Xtripit — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 16:00:00 +0000

I really wish everything was as easy as that but you need to take into account all the people who ‘gift out of fear’. If there was no ratio on some sites then good luck finding what you look for.

I not talking about the top of the charts 2006 stuff here but more the old hard to get stuff. I have had many disappointments with those hard to get albums. When finally stumbling across one you find only leechers because there is no ratio and the download peak has passed. Also this only takes a few days to happen which is very sad.

If there should be no need for ratio then the egocentric user better have a change of hart first

By: Xtripit

Xtripit — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 16:00:00 +0000

past is supposed to be passed

I request an edit function

By: soulxtc

soulxtc — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 16:00:00 +0000

Fixed it for you there “Webster”…………

and yeah is nice for older content but chances are a person isnt seeding it because of ratio concerns but to be nice unless its one of those dam 400MB .FLAC encoded albums…what a scam those are….I cant tell the difference between it and .MP3

By: Xtripit

Xtripit — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 16:00:00 +0000

Actually people that share those usually keep them alive for a while. It’s more the high bitrate mp3 torrents that often get dumped quite quickly

I prefer .FLAC because I do hear the difference between high bitrate .mp3 and .FLAC after burning to disk. I know many don’t I even have friends that cannot grasp why I don’t just copy the mp3 version from them instead of hunting down those large level8 FLAC torrents.

I sometimes wonder myself

By: soulxtc

soulxtc — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 16:00:00 +0000

yah considering the way OINK is a big stickler for share-ratios and the incessant need to UL as much as you DL I can only imagine the headache of having to keep UL’ing 500MB all the time to compensate for downloading a single album.

But I guess if u only DL and UL .FLAC albums you wouldnt be so bad off. .

By: Xtripit

Xtripit — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 16:00:00 +0000

One site that I’m on has a really cool approach to ratio. They have different limits for different levels. Think I even got 1 GB upload without upload it when registering and something like 0.1 ratio demand up to 2 GB download. Then as amount downloaded grows the ratio has to get higher and higher (highest being 1.0). If you for some reason can’t keep up with the ratio then you can donate to the site to get more free upload.

There are servers and dedicated uploaders who only upload. It’s legal. Only Bootlegs and live gigs and all .flac or DVD. Very strict on new uploads you need to be sure that the content is not copyrighted.

Like now there is a special:

The holiday season is among us. We are having a special that ends December 25th 2006 12:00 AM EST. All donations of $25 or more will receive 2.5 GB of upload credit for every $1. Send $30 get 75 GB credit!

You can check it out if you want

http://zombtracker.the-zomb.com/

More sites should start operating like that not that I personally have problems keeping up with ratio. I just like the system they use. Like the future of ratio and bit torrent

By: negatyve

negatyve — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 16:00:00 +0000

[quote]A private Pirate Bay anyone?[/quote]
Demonoid. It’s not that great of a tracker.