Help us finding duplicate torrents and get seedbonus points as reward
-
To keep our index clean we kindly ask you to help us finding duplicate uploads.
if you find any duplicate file please report this with our new duplicate report function.
the link can be found on every torrent details page at the bottom
on this page all you have todo is to supply the url (link) to the original torrent
submit it - and you are done.
if we remove the file, you will get 10 seedbonus points as reward. if more people report the same torrent, all users get 50 pointsthx and enjoy the system
-
!!! GREAT idea !!!
Thank you very much! ^^
-
We had some issues with the internal duplicate follow up tool, but anyway this duplicate reporting looks to be a big sucess. :cheers:
-
Please note, reporters.
When you find duplicate torrents, check the both torrent-id instead of timestamp.
Original torrent should be smaller id numbered. -
you should be able to post the url… without a problem
-
This thread says that the reward is 10 SBP but the homepage says it's 50 SBP. Which one is correct?
-
Tom did change the reward to 50 Seed Bonus Points, following my suggestion. I've therefore edited the opening topic yesterday at 21:34:46 .
-
@tom:
you should be able to post the url… without a problem
Both torrent id and URL reporting are working. smithdn's post is made, because we promote torrents to the top of the list, which changes the date. Therefore the promoted earlier torrent can have the later date, but should have edited to the beginning of the description it's original upload date.
Comparing the torrent id's allows to be sure, the earlier id is the original.
-
QUESTION: What qualifies as a duplicate? Does this include uploads of the same content in a different format?
EXAMPLE: LEANMEAT.mp4 (torrent-id = 00001) and LEANMEAT.mov (torrent-id = 00002)
Does this mean that LEANMEAT.mov (torrent-id = 00002) is a duplicate of LEANMEAT.mp4 (torrent-id = 00001) and therefore, should be reported as such?
-
Different formats are not a duplicate, must be same format and size.
-
I have spotted many duplicates of dead torrents, meaning the original torrent is dead. Amice told me not to report those torrents because there was some technical issue. He suggested that I kept a list of those torrents somewhere. Well, I have, but what do I do with that list? Do I send it to the helpdesk, do I post it here? What exactly?
I must also add that in many cases the original torrent seems to be a failed upload that has no chance of resurrection. In those cases I think the original must be deleted and the "duplicate" be kept. -
If the dead original is less than 3 days ago uploaded, please don't report it. Most likely it will never been seed and cleaned out anyway.
Keep the list of older dead originals with their duplicates in a warm corner. Currently, besides that the internal handling tool needs some improvements, we are overwhelmed by the shear amount of duplicate reports and can't keep pace.
Report them later and you'll get the 50 Seed Bonus Points each.
-
Thanks, Uwe! All those in my list are old dead originals. Let me know when you'll be ready…
-
lol just kinda did my own thing, I kept the slightly bigger file as the origional and the slightly smaller sized file as the duplicate;;
I'm not sure if you're strict on 'must be exactly the same size' – so I'm wondering ;; if one includes screenshots and the other doesn't -- even though they're the same format -- is that still considered as a duplicate or no? I've run acrossed quite a few that sit on that boundry -- where the preview images are different/promo shots and the videos themselves are identical lol.
Also, kudos for adding this, in the past I've often thought of offering to do this lol
-
Including some screenshots or covers doesn't make up for a different version. However we allow "Collections" to include already available files through other torrents and vice versa. We shall become more strict on the "well defined common theme" requirement for collections in future though.
@Dax: you can start to report duplicate to dead originals, the big initial wave is over. Please only 5 per day. Dead originals require more complex handling and we have still about 500 duplicates pending final treatment (user note, user notification, deleting, …).
-
Thanks Uwe! I'll start reporting them as of now. 5 per day as you said…
-
Different formats are not a duplicate, must be same format and size.
What if there are better rips with higher resolution and better image quality? I don't mean ISOs with 4GB, but for example an improvement of a 500MB VHS rip to a 1GB DVD rip. No matter if it's the same format or not, it makes no sense keeping the older, worse version. Most people are able to download a 1GB file with common broadband internet access nowadays.
-
Different formats are not a duplicate, must be same format and size.
What if there are better rips with higher resolution and better image quality? I don't mean ISOs with 4GB, but for example an improvement of a 500MB VHS rip to a 1GB DVD rip. No matter if it's the same format or not, it makes no sense keeping the older, worse version. Most people are able to download a 1GB file with common broadband internet access nowadays.
Sure, that sounds fine to me and probably many others too, but there are still people stuck with slow connections and/or terrible data caps so some people prefer smaller sized torrents where possible.
-
Actually that smaller less quality VHSrip in the example should die a natural death …
I know there are sites that don't allow to upload torrents for lower quality versions of something existing already in better quality, but then, you need to know the source media, format and quality (definition, bit rates, codecs) and all uploaded versions details about format and quality. Such detailed information requirements are missing for the existing torrents and asking for them for new would be a major obstacle for uploads.
In practice that would be possible only by starting a new site from scratch: good luck ...
-
@Uwe:
Comparing the torrent id's allows to be sure, the earlier id is the original.
Unless I'm missing something, the new address system (urls) doesn't allow users to identify which copy is the earliest any more