Re-uploading existing torrent instead of re-seeding existing one?
-
Lately I've noticed a couple of torrents someone has uploaded as a new torrent, even though the exact same files are already here as an existing "dead" torrent, instead of simply trying to re-seed the existing one. I can understand some uploaders may not be able to re-seed the existing torrent (I've had that issue myself on occassion), but it sometimes appears that the uploader of a "new" torrent hasn't even bothered to either try or even search on the same existing files here.
What is the policy on this, and how/can such a "new" torrent be reported? It just doesn't make sense to post something as new when an existing torrent can simply be re-seeded.
-
@cinemacapman As I understand it, a new torrent is only a duplicate if there's an existing torrent "with at least one seeder." Duplicating a dead torrent with an identical new one is not a duplicate, if that terminology makes sense.
Uploading a new sort-of-duplicate-of-something's-that-dead has the advantage that it will show up at the top of the search listing, whereas resurrecting a dead torrent by re-seeding it will not. This will expose (!) the new torrent to users who have joined the site since the dead one was posted; such users might not have found the dead torrent otherwise.
I will occasionally upload a new torrent with older material if I think it's of significant value that might be overlooked by other people. I don't do this often, and again, only for something that I think would be of great value to people.
(Sometimes I also take older material and convert it from less popular formats like .flv or .rm, and/or join multiple smaller files into a single file. The torrents resulting from these things would not be considered duplicates even if the source torrents were still live.)
So, I don't think it's necessary to report a new torrent that replaces a dead one, even if the dead one is still in the system. A user could conceivably abuse this process* by uploading a bunch of new torrents, but if other users choose to download the material, perhaps it's a benefit rather than abuse.
- I tried hard to think of some quip connecting torrent abuse to self-abuse, but I couldn't. I need more coffee.
-
@eobox91103 You missed my point, which was not about duplicates but about re-seeding an existing torrent...and as far as it not "showing" at the top, well all one has to do is use the Helpdesk and ask for the torrent to get bumped by staff.
Problem solved. -
@cinemacapman said in Re-uploading existing torrent instead of re-seeding existing one?:
You missed my point,
If your point had been clearer, I wouldn't have missed it.
Was your original question answered? If so, what is that answer?
-
@eobox91103 said in Re-uploading existing torrent instead of re-seeding existing one?:
If your point had been clearer, I wouldn't have missed it.
Was your original question answered? If so, what is that answer?
No, my original question wasn't answered. My point was rather clear in the first and last sentences, which summed it up:
"Lately I've noticed a couple of torrents someone has uploaded as a new torrent, even though the exact same files are already here as an existing "dead" torrent, instead of simply trying to re-seed the existing one."
"It just doesn't make sense to post something as new when an existing torrent can simply be re-seeded."So, back to my original point(s):
- Why re-post identical files when an existing "dead" torrent, with the exact same files, can simply be re-seeded?
- I said nothing about reporting a "new" torrent as a duplicate of an existing "dead" torrent if the files are identical. I meant in the sense of pointing out to staff that the "new" one was unnecessary when the existing "dead" one could simply have been re-seeded.
-
@cinemacapman Resurrecting a dead torrent is harder than it may seem. Even if you have a file with the exact same size, that you can give the exact same name, if it doesn't have the same hash value as the original file it will not seed as the original file.
Uploaders may also be reluctant to resurrect a dead torrent because they won't earn any seed points, the original uploader will.
If you are so inclined you can download the new file, try and resurrect the dead torrent with this new file, and if you can get it seeding again you can report the newer upload as a duplicate and earn yourself 50 SBP in the process!
-
Let's go back to the original post of this thread and break out the three questions that were posed:
-
What is the policy on this? (With "this" defined as posting a new torrent that is essentially identical to one already on the system, but dead.) The policy is that this is acceptable, and further discussion suggests that it can even have some advantages over re-seeding the dead torrent.
-
Can such a "new" torrent be reported? It is not a violation of the site's rules. There is no need to report it. Subsequent discussion said that this "reporting" would not be "reporting a duplicate" but "pointing out to staff that the 'new' one was unnecessary." It's not clear what benefit accrues from doing this.
-
How [would] such a "new" torrent be reported? Using the report link at the bottom of the torrent page, but since there's no violation here, there's not need to do this.
Subsequent posts added a new question:
-
Why re-post identical files? (1) The new torrent will show at the top of the search page and be more obvious to other members, and this will happen automatically without having to involve site staff in recycling the torrent; (2) "Even if you have a file with the exact same size, that you can give the exact same name, if it doesn't have the same hash value as the original file it will not seed as the original file."
But, given that
Problem solved.
...perhaps we're done here.
-
-
With so many annoying practices going on in the site this dude chose to complain about people posting content otherwise unavailable. Why would it matter if you reseed or if you reupload? It's not a duplicate, it'll not have any impact on the original seeder's life nor anyone who's previously downloaded it.
The effort you put into reviving a torrent just so a single individual can download it and then it'll suddenly get lost into the old torrent void... Just reup it already and let it be seen again by people who are not already looking for it.
-
Perhaps a good suggestion would be, if someone can successfully re-seed a dead torrent, the system would automatically bump it back to the top without the need for staff to recycle it manually?
Problem solved...one less torrent in the "old void".
-
@cinemacapman Is this not already the case? I've seen plenty of reseeded torrents bumped to the top of the listings. I assumed that was automatic
I think it could be a good idea to award seed bonus points for reseeding a dead torrent. I know there are plenty of users looking to improve their ratio, so it would be a win-win for the community.
-
@cinemacapman not sure what you'd expect someone to do? Trying to revive a dead torrent in the same form and folder and naming convention as the before would be a nightmare. And it would have to be the same file size so it would literally have to be the same content that had been torrented. Not sure how you'd expect anyone to do all that ground work and prep in order to resurrect something back from the dead.
-
@vanman Not so such a "nightmare". It works quite well and is so enforced on a couple of torrent sites I frequent. It's not as difficult as you believe it to be.
-
@cinemacapman no worries, it will all be moot here soon enough... when 80% of peoples' uploads get removed, the site's days will be numbers as far as engagement and quality goes. Please promote the alternatives and those other sites
