Posts made by blackdid

Because, amice, they first made a confusion with an "offline" user, thinking that if he was "offline" he won't seed anymore.

This is why I started a long reply yesterday afternoon, but before posting it, I found my sentences were too…energetic. As I didn't want to appear rude, I didn't post my reply but sent it to mgr only, asking him kindly to read my long answer and tell me if it was suitable to answer that way...or not.
After the little chat we had yesterday evening with Mgr and MrMazda, it appears that Mgr is thinking a lot of this "jump on" thing and he'll probably add some comments sooner or later.

My answer (that I saved in the Draft folder) started with...

Hi all,
I don't understand what you mean by "the seeder is offline"
Offline means not connected to GT web site or to GT Forum, and an uploader doesn't need to be online during seeding.

Apparently you mean the seeder is not "connectible" which hasn't the same meaning at all. Even if he's not connectible, he will upload to others, but not as much as if he was connectible (in fact, he'll get all new leechers names each 30 min, when he connects to GT tracker each 30 min, and will be able to upload to them only at that time)

... the rest of the answer is in Mgr's inbox...

Thanks for your kind message, p90
You see, days and weeks pass by and Tim can't be forgotten.
I'm sure others feel the same way, each time I login here I have a thought for him.

He liked to help with all his heart, and he shared with you his happiness, making you feel happy.
How do you want to forget a guy that was so kind, moving and generous ?

Trukr, Uwe, MrMazda : thanks for your input  

@beercan:

…I'm not sure but i suspect this might work to prevent "jump-in".
making minor alterations to the file you have should cause the file to acquire a different characteristic and whoever trying to perform the jump may find that their existing file lost.
theoretical and might generate some bad blood. I'd prefer if there's no need for such a measure but ... personal preference prevails.

eg.
-editing the file to change the size. (adding/cutting a 5 second intro or credit)
-change the encoding.
-[contributor input]

Beercan, this is exactly what I was experimenting !

1) 1st try : alter the last byte of an .avi file (with an hexadecimal editor able to re-write part of files…or even sectors on your hard drive, that's a dangerous program !)

This 1st try didn't give good results, why you ask ?
Because the altered avi file kept its original size and only 1 byte is altered in it, so the "jump-on" guy (who has a copy of the non altered movie) will have his torrent client program download...only the last block of the file (which contains the altered byte) then immediately seed the whole altered movie : he'll jump on your torrent after 1 second, instead of jumping on it after 0 seconds, so you won't get rid of him with this 1st try.

Also, some movies (like mp4 files) need important informations found at the very end of the file, so it maybe dangerous to alter the last byte if you're not sure of its "importance", depending on the file extension.

2) 2nd try : alter the whole .avi file by cutting 1/10th of seconds at the end of the file.
This can be done with good multimedia programs who extract parts of the movie without any recompression (though I guess all key frames are rewritten, but the movie itself stays unchanged) . It takes a bunch of seconds to extract 1GB, depending on your hard drive speed.

You can verify the extraction went fine by playing the altered movie in Vlc (for example), dragging the cursor to fastforward to any part of the movie : the new scene should appear immediately, as when you did it with the original movie.

Now the "jump-on" guy won't be able to be added as "seeder" until he downloads a complete copy of the altered file.

3) I didn't try the merge of 2 files (i.e the original movie + the last duplicated second of the movie that you extracted in a separated short movie file)

It should work too, but why complicate things and add a phase (i.e extract 1 second at the end of the movie with a multimedia splitter program, THEN combine the original movie + the duplicated last second with a multimedia joiner program that doesn't recompress the movie)

If test #2 worked, I won't try test #3…even if I'm very curious  
Because it's not only theorical tests, I took the place of a "jump-on" member, re-downloading from GT a couple of my own torrents (the ones I uploaded) to analyze what will happen when the client program (utorrent) finds an altered copy of the movie (like in tests #1 and #2)

PS: I don't see any interest in changing the encoding : if I have to wait many minutes (or hours) to transform an avi to a wmv (for example) WITH image quality degradation, it's not worth any more : you're not sure a "jump-on" guy will jump on your torrent, so why losing a long time to prevent this. I accept to lose 1-2 min before a new upload, by cutting the last 1/10th of second in the movie, but I won't accept to lose 1 hour (and degrade the image quality) for this...

...though I'm not sure this isn't been done on purpose by some guys : when your ratio is going bad and you don't have anything to upload, it looks tempting to re-encode any movie you got into another extension : that's why I don't really agree with one of GT rule that allows to "upload already existing content when the file is a different size or version (i.e, avi instead of wmv)"

But that's another question  

@blackdid:

…because they answered "No" to the 1st warning, instead of answering "No" to the 2nd warning.

No, no, that's wrong and I can't edit  :cry2:

• 1st warning : answer YES
• 2nd warning : answer NO

Mgr is sure wondering why he prepared pics and we didn't follow his instructions 

Hi elektrotek  

Maybe the following link could help you, Mgr explained with pics what had to be done, Tiptoe didn't follow his instructions and couldn't enter the chatroom because he answered "No" to the 1st warning, instead of answering "No" to the 2nd warning.

After this mistake, Tiptoe couldn't enter the chatroom anymore, no matter how many times he tried (it's your case now) . The solution was to uninstall Java, then reinstall it, answering "Yes" to the 1st warning, then "No" to the 2nd warning…and all went fine.

http://forum.gaytorrent.ru/index.php?topic=13531.0

Hi Dstone 

You'll find it here :
http://tracker.gaytorrent.ru/details.php?id=29078

It's alive ? That's real good news !
Keep shining, MrMazda 

Hi MrMazda  
Im not into Mac, but I googled this :
"ftp client"  "compatable mac os 9.1"

It displayed several links, first of them in french (glad you know french)
hXXp://forums.macgeneration.com/internet-et-reseau/exite-t-il-un-client-ftp-gratuit-pour-mac-os-9-1-a-38157.html

They're talking about a client program named "Fetch", which should be downloadable (after you create a free account)…well good luck if it works  

I just read it's shareware with a 15 days trial period, it could be enough for your urgent upload.
Maybe Fetch  [4.0.3]  found in next link (compat OS 8/9) but not Fetch  [5.5.3] which works only with OS X :
hXXp://telecharger.caloga.com/logiciel-mac-os-internet-ftp.html

So let's try to google on :
"download Fetch 4.0.3"

=> Better news :
hXXp://fetchsoftworks.com/fetch/download/

then click on :
Download Fetch 4.0.3 – for Mac OS 9, Mac OS 8, System 7
I downloaded it lol

Also the corresponding doc is downloadable :
Supporting Documentation
Fetch 4.0.3 – Help (PDF)

Free for 15 days, what to ask for more ?  

I was about to add a comment but it was so sooooooo long that I just saved it as draft, waiting to be re-worked lol

Congratulations MrMazda  :clap2:
And Uwe's bauble isn't crying anymore…at least apparently :hug2:

In this Christmas Eve, I have a double thought :

• For Tim, who left us too early. I'm sure he's watching us now, smiling as only he could smile…
  Tim you'll never be forgotten.

• For Tom, let's hope he'll be back soon (my fingers are aching as they are so crossed)
  Tom, whenever you're ready, we'd like a lot to have you back.

Merry Christmas to all of you  :hug2:

Thanks Mgr, it was a real pleasure preparing it, you're a real GREAT staff there.
Merry Christmas everybody and may all your wishes come true 

Thx amice  

You'll probably delete all these 5 last messages (starting with yours, asking if there was a problem to merge)
After those 5 messages are deleted, please delete also the last line(s) of my last message, starting with :
"PS: I'd like to add a link to an older "jump-on" topic …"

(these last lines are different from the ones you already scratched, where you wrote : "amice: this posting got inaccurate after merging, will be deleted somewhat later...")

Also, stealfire got 2 dup messages (just before trukr message) with only the 1st line being different between them. Please feel free to delete one of them.

Thanks a lot for your hard work and sorry for the inconvenience  

Well this is really interesting now, thanks to newcomers in this topic, mrmazda, beercan, stealfire (thanks for your kind PM),  trukr (who really should be more present in this forum, see how interesting is his last message and the good questions he asks) 

Trukr asks : "What if someone is uploading at turtle speed, crippled handicapped turtle speed even? No one likes slow downloads"
( I laughed so much, reading "crippled handicapped turtle speed even" :rotfl: )
Well it's sure that having an avg upload speed of 214Kb/s (as shown under your avatar in the left column, also it's probably a bit greater while you upload a fresh torrent) can't compare to my 28Kb/s maximum (same for MrMazda I guess, and many others)

So "turtle speed" is sure very relative, depending on each user's avg ul/dl speeds.
That's why each user should know what is the maximum size of any fresh torrent he should be allowed to upload, so other users won't have to wait indefinitely. I remember having asked this to a Mod who told me 1Gb should be my max (i.e 28Kb/s => 100Mb/h => 1Gb/10h)

And in fact I stick to this rule : if you search for "blackdid" (unquoted) in the torrent search window, sorted by torrent size descending, I never uploaded anything bigger than 600Mb in my 31 uploads…because I don't want downloaders to wait too long before they got a full copy of the torrent.

I remember too that a new discussion in another topic showed that Uwe, Mgr etc... hadn't a problem while waiting many hours / days during a single download, in case they wanted the torrent really bad ("torrent = patience" they said lol)

So it's a real difficult question , but if guys who have a "slow" upload connection (like mine, constant 28Kb/s) know that they shouldn't upload BIG torrents of 2 or 3GB (not talking about full DVD's) then there's no reason for us to accept that a "jump on" seeder appears too early (i.e. until 3-4 leechers snatched my fresh torrent) , not talking about all the torrent preparation done by the original uploader.

I have a suggestion : maybe our profile should reflect if we agree (or not) to have a "jump-on" seeder in our fresh torrents : this could be an additional field in our profile and each one could answer yes or no.

• In case you have a great upload speed, you could answer yes
• In case you got a low upload speed but absolutely no ratio problem, you could also answer yes
• In case you got a low upload speed and ratio problem, you could answer no

Well each one would answer as he likes, and each one could change his "no" to "yes" the day his ratio issue has been solved. This, added to a programmed condition (if fresh torrent => if 2nd seeder => check profile : if user doesn't accept "jump-on" => if snatched = 0 => reject 2nd seeder cause he is a "jump-on" seeder) could maybe help ?

This solution could also answer your 2nd question : "What if the uploader already has a decent enough ratio and someone jumped on the torrent who has a very poor ratio and is trying to repair it?"
In case the uploader has a decent enough ratio, he could have selected "Yes, I accept jump-on" in his profile 

@MrMazda:

…I personally take a viewpoint of it's not a nice thing to jump on to seeding a new upload because it cheats the uploader of the full credit of the 1.000 ratio of the file. That being said however, I cannot say that my personal view is nescessarily that of this site. Perhaps mgr can shed some light on the subject at some point.

Hey MrMazda  
Then I guess we all agree it's not a nice thing at all to jump on during a fresh upload.
You're asking about Mgr's opinion : he clearly wrote this in his 1st answer : "jumping on a new upload is extremely unfair too!"
Better not talk about Uwe who can't stand it, when he writes in the precedent attached pic : "That is clearly something we do not like to see!"

Btw, you note both of them ended their sentences with exclamation marks, and let me tell you that when those 2 quiet guys use exclamation marks, it's because they don't like at all this situation.

What bothers me in jump-on is not only the ratio problem : I spend a long time preparing the descriptive pics, more than you'll imagine. Why should we accept that a guy who hasn't prepared anything jumps on our fresh torrents when he didn't prepare anything (description, torrent preparation, PICS prepared, numbered and sorted etc…)

As I did for my last "jumped-on" torrent, I prefer 100 times to delete my fresh torrent after 10 minutes of upload, as soon as I notice a jump-on user, instead of letting him seed with me and take credit for something he hasn't prepared at all.
It's a pity for the leechers who started to download and don't understand why their download stopped suddenly (the torrent being deleted) . It's a pity too in case the "jump-on" seeder was honest (as described in my precedent message), that's why a technical possibility would be welcome in case it allows to reject seeder #2 when there are 0 snatchers.

Also, as you suggested, it would be great to resume this "jump-on" situation in GT rules / FAQ , so all users would be warned (ok ok, many users don't read rules / FAQ but that's their problem : they're supposed to read them and they agreed with them when they registered)

Btw, why not sending from time to time a grouped message to ALL GT users ?
Something like : "Warning : in case you already got (from another source than GT) a movie that is currently uploaded by a user, don't add yourself as seeder in his torrent until his torrent has been snatched 3-4 times. If you don't respect this rule, you're "jumping on" his fresh torrent, taking his credits and this is NOT tolerated. If you're caught doing this etc..."

I'm sure that if ALL users receive this same message, the few "jump-on" users who do it intentionnaly will think twice before doing it again...unless they're poker players.

Also I would like to make a clear distinction between two different things :

1. When a user is uploading a fresh torrent, he's asked to keep on seeding until there are 3-4 seeders (i.e 3 other seeders + him), then only he can stop seeding (when he sees THREE other seeders)

2. When a user wants to "jump on" a torrent, he should (imho) only check how many users have snatched the torrent. Do we agree with that ?
   If he finds that 3 users already snatched the torrent, then he should be allowed to add himself as seeder...even if there is only 1 seeder. This should solve both cases :

• If it's a new torrent, and it has been snatched 3 times (or more), there will certainly be more than one seeder.
• But if it's an old torrent, it's possible that there is only 1 seeder (plus many snatchers)

My point is the number of "snatchers" is much more important than the number of seeders, when it comes to the "jump on" issue.
In case I'm mistaken, please let me know, thanks 

Hi Michael 
Afaik he's known as "Wood"

In case one wants to download his serie of 30 hi-res pics, he's #24 in the following link :
http://tracker.gaytorrent.ru/details.php?id=86516&filelist=1#filelist

@leatherbear:

They say it is the thought that counts and this was a wonderful present from you Blackdid and I am sure it took much work to create.

Thank you Michael  
You know, time doesn't really count when it's for people like you and some great guys here on the site.

I sent this last copy to Mgr, let's wait until Dec 24th to see how he will manage to make it work (he got 2 copies of it, one is 449Kb and the 2nd one is 252Kb to be accepted by BitBucket : my 2 wishes are that Mgr uses the 449Kb, and also that BitBucket will accept one day files up to 512 Kb, so it would harmonize with attached pics in the forum whose max sizes are 512Kb)

@mgr:

Sorry for being a bit late with my answer  

So you like that blushing icon, uh ?
Lol remember how I told you it would be useful  

@mgr:

As a first thing let me say something about the usage of my expression "denunciation". In my posting i intentionally wrote that in apostrophes to express that I prefer technical possibilities to stop unfair behavior opposed to member reports (with or without proof).

I got an idea, what about this technical possibillity ?
A control to add during NEW torrents only : as soon as seeder #2 appears, the program controls how many persons already snatched the torrent : if you find 0, then seeder #2 is a "jump-on" seeder.
Well…it seems too simple to be the solution, right ?

Someone should detail ALL the different existing cases when you're 100% sure a 2nd seeder is a "jump-on" seeder (not forgetting dead torrents who are reactivated etc... though these torrents should have more than 0 snatcher, no ?)

But what intrigues me a bit is this : when a user logs in to GT, what is he going to do in most cases ?
1) He wants to download something new, so he'll enter the torrent search window and check what's new since his last visit, then starts to download if he's interested by a new movie he doesn't already get : this is an easy case.

2) OR he wants to upload a NEW movie, so he'll enter the torrent search window to search for duplicates, and when he's sure there are not, he will start to prepare his new upload : this is also an easy case.

(I won't describe another possible situation which consists of not entering GT, but simply add an OLD torrent in the client program to seed it again : that's easy too and will never harm anyone)

3) Now I think of another case that might end in a voluntarily…or involuntarily "jump-on"
During 1) or 2) , when the user is searching in the torrent window, he suddenly finds a hot torrent and this may happen :

3a) Whether the user KNOWS 100% that he got the movie on his hard drive (maybe he was in case 2) [checking for dups] and it is the EXACT movie he was checking for dups before he uploads it but, alas, another user was quicker than him and already uploaded it as a fresh torrent. Or maybe he was in case 1) [searching what to download] and realized while browsing [for downloads], that he too had this fresh torrent on his hard drive and intented to upload it later)

Now this user may be a bit "angry" because he won't be able to upload his new torrent (as another user just did it before him) and he'll "jump-on" the original uploader (probably after having checked the file size to make sure it's exactly the same movie, which isn't innocent at all), no matter how many users have already snatched this file or not, no matter if he takes credits from the original uploader or not.

Btw, I got a question : are the  "jump-on" rules clearly explained in GT rules or FAQ ?
Because I searched right now and didn't find them anymore (all I know about "jump-on" comes from Mgr, Uwe and other Mods, but it's all Forum related, not GT rules/faq related)

The only thing I found concerning "jump on" in Rules or FAQ is the following link…but it has nothing to do with the "upload jump-on" we're talking now, because this FAQ link concerns "download jump-on" :
http://tracker.gaytorrent.ru/faq.php#46

In case a "jump-on" rule ("join seeding" or "re-seed") has to be added in the FAQ, why not using one of Mgr's preceding explanations, or Uwe's 1st chapter in the attached pic, where he explains it really well ? (btw, this attached pic is a part of a Forum topic, so there's no problem with user names in it)

So as you see, a possibility is the user is honest and doesn't know he's harming anyone when doing a "jump-on", in case it's not clearly stated in the Rules / FAQ , not everyone consult how many persons have aready snatched the torrent etc…
Or the user knows exactly he's doing a wrong thing, but how can we be sure if the user is honest or not ?

3b) Whether the user DOESN'T REMEMBER he already downloaded this movie from another site (so he got a full copy on his hard drive) and now he clicks on the torrent, thinking honestly he's starting to download it from GT (when in fact he'll join seeding a fresh torrent !)

So all of this isn't simple at all, what do you think ?
Mgr will certainly tell us if the (too easy ?) technical solution I described could help or not : this would help GT to get rid of jump-on users, whether these "jumps-on" are voluntary or not.

J-2 !
A 3rd try (probably the last one) : 5 SIG, Language or Local Mods added on the tree

That could be a nice game lol : who has been added ?
Well…the 5 of them had no avatars so there's some improvisation in there

Thanks Michael, we owe you so much, you are "la joie de vivre" of this site.
I'm sure everybody likes and needs to help you  :hug2:

I'd like to paste some great lyrics of Carole King who composed "You've got a friend" in 1970
Then James Taylor sung it so well too  

When you're down and troubled
And you need a helping hand
And nothing, nothing is going right
Close your eyes and think of me
And soon I will be there
To brighten up even your darkest night

You just call out my name
And you know wherever I am
I'll come running to see you again
Winter, spring, summer or fall
All you have to do is call
And I'll be there, yeah, yeah, yeah.
You've got a friend…