Please do not stop the "Hi Family" greeting s. For me a reminder is a good thing for us all. That line alone says so much about Tim's character and his feelings for the membership here t GT.ru. I intend to use it as often as I can .
I'm curious and really would like to know WHEN did GT start ?
LOL you got the first support thread of our (old) forum software. But the site started only some months earlier, early in 2006. We don't have an exact date though any longer - so we set the 1st April as GayTorrent.ru's birthday (nope, no april joke :) ). At least that is the date where we tried to have a birthday party in the last years :)
Btw, Admins were very tasty in their movies choice when they embedded the logo : I remember how much I like(d) the kind of movies they embedded, thinking each time I saw a new one : "What? Gaytorrent.ru AGAIN ! Those guys are GREAT !!!" :D
Thanks. I found that logo in the German version of QaF and was really surprised how many episodes I found on the net (those years ago) with that embedded logo. :) It also shows, that this kind of advertising was a good idea - it brought the idea to learn about torrents and get the videos directly from the site (and I'm still proud that I can now say: "our site").
Another thought: Jumping on is only possible to files which have been shared elsewhere already. uploading torrents for own genuine movie versions makes jumping on impossible.
Exactly, so why is someone who obtained their copy of movie from someone/some place else claiming that it is THEIRS. All of the stuff I upload, I obtain elsewhere on the net and if someone else has the exact same copy, I can't complain about them helping to seed the torrent. It doesn't belong to me, not legally, not morally; no reasonable person would claim that.
For people that live in industrialized countries and have slow upload speeds, here's a clue: either fix your client/system settings or get a decent ISP. Hell, there are hundreds (maybe thousands) of guys on here from third world countries will good upload speeds so there is no reason why most people shouldn't have a good upload speed. You will always have ratio problems if you insist on using dial-up speeds. I don't understand why the rest of us (who know how to fix our settings/have good ISPs) should be restricted. If the admin/mods want to pander to these kind of people, then use some of NeoStrada's suggestions, don't penalize the rest of us.
LOL - I just had to search through my to-do lists to find that topic again. Alas it is not really simple - we could forbid the http:// textstring (or replace it with hxxp:// automatically - but this :cens: word list is unconditional and does not allow exemptions for our own servers - not taking in account that the automatic link function is a complex function (alas not even in a single place but distributed among a couple of different source files :( ) a first test two years ago convinced me that this function is not a good solution for our forum.
"Uploading a DVD Folder structure :
This is a much simpler option. You just have to take care of some naming conventions:
Create a folder named like the DVD. This will be the folder to create the torrent from (like the root of the DVD).
Inside this folder must be at least one other folder, named VIDEO_TS" etc…
This is exactly what you explained, great to remember it :)
I liked that sentence of yours : "Here's an example of a time bomb waiting for a client program to screw up"
Wish my english was good enough to write this kind of sentence lol
…As an added bonus, you can add your preview pics to the folder too, and it will help keep others from jumping on your upload until you have finished uploading a whole copy.
I'd like to be 100% sure of that.
If anyone already got the same structure of your upload, with all same VOB's IFO's and BUP's , and the only difference is an additional pic in your upload, what will happen if a member jumps-on your torrent ?
He will download your little torrent file, indicate to his client program where is the parent folder on his HD, having exactly the same structure of your uploaded torrent, then ?
Will his client program only download the missing pic and immediately adds him as a seeder ?
Or will his client program have to download all the VOB's IFO's and BUP's, overwriting everything on his HD ?
What you say is option 2) will happen, have you tested it ?
Because one of my test showed this : imagine i uploaded a torrent composed of only 1 file (an avi file 1GB)
Then, a few weeks after, for testing, I modify 1 byte in the movie on my hard drive
Then, re-download the initial torrent, what happens ?
Only 1 block was rewritten on my HD (the block in the avi file where i modified 1 byte) and in a couple of seconds I was added as seeder :(
My question is then : is it so different if you add one pic to the DVD structure ?
Well maybe you're right because, in my example, the movie lenght didn't change (modifying 1 byte in the avi didn't change the movie length)
And a 2nd test I did, where I changed the movie length (by cutting a couple of frames at the very end of the avi file on my HD), then the re-download of the torrent forced the whole avi to be re-downloaded (that's compatible with what you wrote)
So maybe the lenght of the movie(s) is a crucial point, concerning what will be downloaded (just a few blocks or the whole movie)
I don't have enough knowledge to answer this, maybe you or our Mods/Admins do ? :)
Certainly possible and likely on Tom's or mgr's to do list already. :crazy2:
In fact it is - but to implement a real correct solution would imply to create a real table for all future up/download amounts up to the current maximum step > 800 GB download traffic. If someone thinks it is worth to redo the complete calculation (because only regarding the next step is not enough, especially in the lower steps), please let me know.
Up to now I've got the impression that only some (countable) few members are really aware of the rationator rules - how else can you explain the countless complaints about still having taken away their download rights although "Your warning said I need a minimum ratio of 0.2" while their download traffic in the meantime rose from 1.2 GB (at the time of the warning) to more than 25 GB when they complain?