as far as professional stuff goes… maybe
Allen King (dude exudes sexiness on every level, looks, vocals, attitude, posture, takes it like a champ just damn)
River Elliott
Christian Wilde
Travis (cf: many early scenes are really lame though)
Kayden Gray
ill give a honourable mention to Connor Maguire and SCs Jamie too
…probably... they tend to be pretty good looking too on the side though... esp sexking allen 
huh? i use utorrent 2.2.1 (25130) and it is indeed portable…
ive literally just copypasted the exe from computer to computer over the years... as utorrent 3+ is just pure cancer, and all the other clients are somehow "lacking" in some regard (at least on windows)
http://avidemux.sourceforge.net/
there is builds for windows mac and linux and it is free software.
X264 and X265 are built in, just grab it, open, drag the offending videos into it to open, set video output either to X264 or X265, audio to "copy" and muxer to mp4 muxer… then save.
in the video output configure, just choose a preset (trades speed vs some quality) and ratefactor (trades quality vs filesize). X265 is significantly slower than X264 but is much better for really squeezing files smaller while retaining "acceptable" quality. there is minimal difference between them at higher bitrates though and X264 probably is actually better. but since squeezing is your objective...
personally i use X265 "faster" CRF 22(720), 23(1080) and it takes about 20 minutes per video~ish on an 8 year old i5 and will squish a 1GB 1080p video down to about 200MB while not being riddled with annoying artefacts (just a little loss of super fine detail which imo is fine except for superfaves ;))
for X264, since its notably faster to encode you can use "two pass" mode to set a desired bitrate/end filesize and it will optimise quality given your constraints. X265 is just too slow to use two pass imo but its up to you.
once you have found some quality settings that suit you, you can queue a load to do in a batch one-after-the-other overnight or something.
Therefore, most users rely on freeleech, which as in the example above, are discarded goods that no one wants, but are "free".
there can absolutely be some amazing stuff on freeleech, but you basically have to check the FL list every day; as who has the SBP to waste to make FL for many days in a row.
i have personally found some serious hotties from FL; and if i think something was seriously hot and has some low-file-size copy, i will freeleech that just to share with others. i need a big red "freeleech this!" button my desk XD
also, a secondary (or main) purpose of FL is so you can get something (hopefully popular, because free and maybe also good) to seed yourself and get credit.
considering putting things on FL costs seedbonus, generally i'd think users will not spend SBP on putting things on FL they dont at least personally like or think they will attract download attention from, so aside from the autoFL and modFL i do think the idea of FL being filled with trash isn't too accurate. it really is a mixed bag… sometimes you get lucky.
and the UL credit you get from seeding FL lets you get other stuff.
Four movements, not one general idea of feminism.
i am aware of this; the criticism is levied against contemporary fourth-wave riding on the merits of it's predecessors. maybe i should have been specific.
I proudly support the goals of the first two waves of feminism as correct and just.
agreed; but thereafter is the point when the oft quoted "if you support equality you are a feminist" compatibility with plain egalitarianism ends. there are plenty of old die-hard feminists who are ashamed of what the movement has become.
in that way yes, i am sortof guilty of what i complained about in the sense that i was too lazy to disambiguate between nth wave feminists in a discussion that is certainly geared at the 4th wave malaise. however, the difference is the nth wave feminists use the same singular word to refer to themselves while standing for sometimes very different positions. it's very confusing to anyone who doesn't understand the nuanaces and history of the feminist movements. to joe public, a feminist is a feminist and tumblr feminazis are as, if not more representative of their experience of feminism than those who have worked to real positive social changes.
To say that she speaks for any wave of feminism
i dont think there is an assumption here that she or any "speaks for feminism" in this way unless directly stated or done in the name thereof. she is abusing and betraying the spirit of feminism for her own gain. feminist ideology has led us to a point where legally and socially, this can happen and goes unpunished and unadmonished; almost certainly unintentional in spirit, but inevitable. that is, feminism is to blame for coming to a point where this is possible; regardless of any individual's affiliation, or the intent of the movement as a whole.
tribalism never ends well. be it about gender, race, religion or anything. given an excuse for one group to dehumanise and demonise another and hell will ensue: but once it's started it's extremely difficult to take the high road.
but we can't ignore the fact that the ideology has given those, who want to use it for nothing but petty personal gain sometimes to serious and tragic legal consequences against the spirit of the movement, real legal ammunition and social weight.
also, noone has the right to violence against anyone else. the state has the monopoly on that. the real angering point about this situation is that due to the culture of "taking a woman at her word without question", women can unilaterally invoke state violence against any man of her choosing. if i wrongly (or even rightly, to be fair) locked someone up in my basement for a day i would be criminally charged and sent to jail. And if such a power is to exist for the sake of protecting real victims of rape and domestic violence (and it should), there should be thorough checks and balances for blatant abuse of such a serious power. malicious prosecution IS a crime.
–-
i could make an analogy here about how communism has almost always started with the intent of freeing the oppressed underclass from pseudoslavery and use the resources avaliable to the benefit of the people; and then always ironically become in implementation of the very worst kind of authoritarian dictatorship that indenture and exploit its citizens in a blatant violation of the spirit of the movement in the first place. let's just have a look the shitshow in venezuela right now. Or that mao is by an order of magnitude the greatest butcher and tyrant in history even putting stalin to shame.
i could even say that the spirit of capitalism and free enterprise is slowly being eroded by globalistic corporatism as it is impossible to compete with and is slowly destroying itself and even eroding democracy; while at the same time pointing out that it is a direct product thereof in the same way communism has bred oppressive dictatorships, and feminism that started in the name of equality has bred a class of women who want to abuse their new found "girl power" (read: state power) to oppress men.
and this is why we can't have nice things. all of this, is more than anything: very sad
No point of debate, no personal anecdote, and no attempt at critical thought or persuasion is strengthened by calling a woman a "cunt."
yes, ad hominems do not win arguments, but that was a charged story not an argument and intended to be also an emotional reflection not just a pure academic exercise. i can understand how one might wish to use a term like this in a story with such personal anger and not keep it totally sterile.
wrt. gendered insults in general: they exist. they also all have subtle meanings AND can usually be applied to both genders. a man can be a bitch; but they're usually dicks. men are however, very often cunts; meanwhile women are rarely bastards. maybe this is local language though.
optimal for me is 7-8"
9"+ looks real good and hot AF, but becomes more of a "practical" problem unless he bottoms.
++ on "visual stimulation", although being ROCK HARD i think is more of a effect on that than pure size, 7" rock hard is better than 9" perma-semi.
less than 6 starts to be "visually unstimulating" and if i cant get my hand around it and move up and down at least a decent bit without running off the end then its also "physically unstimulating".
having said that, my own size, when im fresh and hard im just over 7" but if ive wanked like multiple times already i struggle to breach 6-6.5, and that one inch difference is the difference between me looking down and being impressed with myself, and feeling it and feeling huge; and feeling like a tiny worm 
but as i said thats more due to "rockhardness" imo… a good thickness and a protruding "tube" has a HUGE effect on appealingness xD
At what age did you distance yourself from organized religion? In what faith were you raised (if you care to share)? Do you consider yourself today an atheist, agnostic, freethinker, secular humanist
I was not raised to any religion. "figure it out for yourself" was sortof the motto.
My mother and father don't adhere to any religion. My grandmother is a serious (but not intrusive) christian. historically (from grand-generation backwards) my family is a mix of different degrees of protestants and catholics. my grandfather was in name and spirit catholic but was also very aware of and warned of the epic hypocrisy of the institution of the church.
as a child i sometimes went to church with grandma. eventually i decided it was not worth the time and a big show over nothing and church organisation as nothing more than a social club.
it is my opinion that organised religion tends to obscure the better spiritual message in ritual and authority of clergy. and that any truth that was in holy scripture (if you accept that it was once the word of god) has been translated, twisted and dogmatised by mere mortals for their own ends for millenia.
that is: an atheist/agnostic who is a good person is better in the eyes of whatever god/s that may/not exist is more worthy of heaven than someone who does evil despite or in the name of their god.
and that being a good person because it is simply right, rather than out of a fear of judgement and punishment by/or as an appeal to appease a deity is a higher duty than to follow the clergy's word.
any cause/word/dogma can be twisted against its original purpose and religion is neither the sole representative of that, nor exempt from it "because faith".
if i end up at the pearly gates rather than the timeless void upon death, despite being non-religious; i think i could give god a good debate to let me in
–-
If i have to assign myself a religion or philosophy, i would say it's a blend of humanism and daoism. the daoist influence being something akin to: "there is the way, that which is natural and without effort, that which is; "don't worry; be happy", everything happens for a reason, because it must be, because of everything that has ever happened in the universe which is unknowable, just follow the natural order."
the natural order being "what i instinctively feel/know is right".
i think this philosophy would work well for anyone who is not legitimately a psychopath. psychopaths on the other hand need a fear of punishment to be decent because they have no empathy. be that from god or civil institutions.
i feel most people KNOW when they have done something wrong. even dogs know to an extent. and i think religion as a whole gives more reasons to excuse BAD behaviour and outright evil that no good person would otherwise bear on their conscience, than it does give reasons for good.
a sad reality.
and if there is a god, i would like to think of it as "a universal consciousness", an entity that experiences my consciouness, yours, my dogs, everybody and everything. in that way, to maximise the experience of "god's life", we should maximise the experiences of all our fellow man. A gain for me at the expense of another is no net-win for god. God sees 1-1=0 and beholds both the pleasure and the suffering and my win is cancelled by the loss of others.
as an extention of this (and to throw in some gay theme because hey... its a gay site), i had an idea that one of the reasons i prefer sex with men over women i that i can intuitively emphathise with men far better than women on the account of being one, while on the other hand i find womens attitudes and feelings quite unpredictable and sometimes outright confusing. i can put myself in his shoes, and when we fuck or otherwise intimate, i can almost feel the act from both sides at once if i put my mind to it; and that's seriously amplifying and arousing to me; almost like fucking myself xD if god exists, that's what he sees/feels. to raise sex between two, as masturbation of the one who is all.
一は全、全は一.
we need to get away from zero-sum games and look for "benefits as a whole" and make everybody's life better. and to be honest, that's a core message in pretty much every religion.
–-
as a side anecdote, i think there is a gap in spirituality-experience vocabulary that is not bound to one specific religion. english/germans/etc tend to discuss abstract spiritual experiences in inherently christian vocabulary. arabs tend to do it in islamic vocabulary. chinese buddhist or daoist... etc.. because we have no words for the abstract spirituality without an association with a specific religion. religion is awkwardly tied to culture and language for mainly historic and popularity reasons; and that sometimes the different vocabulary used to describe personal experiences that is otherwise devoid of specific-religion meaning can be an artificial barrier.
i had a very extreme migraine once that i could only later describe as "having been fucked by god". collapsed on the stairs unable to move being oppressed by extreme pleasure and pain simultaneously in a pool of sick and stripped of my will hend down by the weight of the universe while feeling like i was attempting to comprehend the reality of everything. what insight i may have gained from that experience was unforunately robbed from me by the particularly cruel sense of divine comedy in epiphanic amnesia. my human brain cannot comprehend. something special happened then though; and i'm still not sure it was actually a migraine (certainly wasn't like the others)
i have no other way to word what happened appropriately without using the word "god". but i don't think it was religious in any sense. yet by using this wording, i believe it will help both religious AND nonreligious people alike at least get "as close as possible" to a vague sense of what happened.
Thanks to recently laws in California, you will now get twice as much punishment for misgendering a person in a nursing home (1 year in jail and/or $1,000 fine) than you will get for intentionally spreading HIV to people without their consent/knowledge (6 months in jail).
Is there still anyone claiming these are "outliers"?
i didn't know this: that is seriously retarded. One of these causes bodily harm, permenant malaise, reduction of lifespan, not to mention financial medical costs. the other hurts somebody's poor feewings. jesus. i seriously weep for the capacity of humanity for basic reason these days.
besides, shouldn't this case be an issue left to "free market dynamics"? if a nursing home is not accomodating to those snowflakes, surely they can go elsewhere to a home that caters to that demographic?
i mean, i personally think the words we use to gender those are for the purposes of the communicator not the communicatee. that is, if it seems like a woman, i will call it one. if it seems like a man, i will call it one. i dont think about it, its subconscious.
not all languages have such distinction; and it doesn't mean much. in german a kitchen is female. in chinese "he/she/it/xe/wtfbbq" are all said "tā" with no distinction. in japanese there are a plethora of pseudo-pronouns that reflect subtly the gender (but more importantly, the social dyamic) between the parties, even for likes like "I, you" never mind "he/she/it"
the point of transgender "passing" is that they automatically register as their intended gender in the minds of others without coersion. and this is a process that does not happen on the logical/conscious level. it's an instantaneous recognition of uncountable features both learnt and hardwired into us. as an anecdote i find it interesting that only woman at a club i actually found attractive and enticing, i later found is trans. she passed well, i didn't know and would have been surprised to find a dick, but clearly my subconscious recognised her "maleness" in attitude, dancing, energy… whatever it is that we notice but don't consciously know.
it's ludicrous to think that you can legally force someone to recognise someone else's opinion. i'm not expert but that sounds unconstitutional and oppression of free speech or worse, free thought!
I really did not know it's gotten that bad in places in the US. I do know the insanity is rife in canadian poltics though.
–-
btw, the whole reason i wanted to call you out on conflating "left" with this dogma is that associating this feminist insanity with what i think are common-sense good social and economic policies (banking reform, housing/healthcare, fair wages, low/no income support (in the face of not just industrial, but service-level automation), collecting tax on corporate multinationals like apple, google etc...) with what is quite frankly, serious break from reality; is character assasination by tangiential association; and ignores the fact that many right wing (but not extreme RW loony for different reasons) institutions and parties follow the exact same feminist dogma.
this is a cancer on society and the rhetoric of public discourse as a whole. it is not a left wing problem, it has been coopted. the sooner we realise who and what we are fighting the better. the very fact that it is unironically termed "social justice" is a bigger irony of itself. the sentence for misgendering vs AIDS is an example of obvious misjustice. (although, i wouldn't be surprised if the fine is issued in all cases rather than a prison sentence, but that it is even capable of being considered a criminal rather than civil case is absolutely bonkers)
i have lost some otherwise very good friends to this (come back after a year trip to find they were indoctrinated out of common sense by uni-girls; and THEY ostracised me not the other way around)
to me, the best you can ask for wrt. inclusiveness is to not harass, demean etc. you can't force someone to LIKE or agree with something; merely "tolerate it"
and the word "tolerance" is being criminally abused for political ends. you tolerate a stinky hobo on the bus. you aren't expected to whiff in the aroma and comment how it is pleasing, but at best retain that oh so british stiff-upper-lip and deal with it so long as you are not actually being harmed.
on the one hand, islam is quite vocal about its opposition to homosexuality (as are the other abrahamics given leviticus, a footnote in the greater sense of "the word") and this should be expected.
on the other hand, selective following of teachings is not uncommon. by strict interpretation the entire banking system and foundation of the global economy (stock market) is sin against god (usery).
it's quite a shame that the better spirit of religious messages is in general drowned out by odeous noise and quite frankly, antiquated barbarism.
there are some very respectable and agreeable messages and values in islam, christianity et al.
those who turn a blind eye to corruption, rape; steal and are not charitable or compassionate and on the other hand condemn that homosexuals should be tortured and/or killed are not good muslims/christians etc.
also let us not forget that the "word of god" such as it is spun as, has had at least 2000 years to be increasingly corrupted by mere mortals even you believe it was pure to begin with.
I was falsely accused of raping a woman because she was pissed that my husband and I (especially me) didn't want to take her out "gay clubbing". I had to spend nearly 24 hour in jail and was only released once the cops watched the CCTV showing I never went near the women's bathroom where she claimed the rape took place.
this is exactly what i mean by the disgusting behaviour of feminists demeaning and devaluing the notion of rape itself by their own schoolground dramas and trivialisations of potentially real serious matters.
the more people hear (even anecdotally) about stories like this the better. the public needs to know when this happens. it needs to be newsworthy. of course, noone will touch it for reasons you have understood.
and if nothing else, despite being maybe misguided, the efforts of good willed feminists (yeah, they do exist) is SERIOUSLY undermined by these petty vindictive bitches trying to get a cheap win; and i think the feminist lobby should seriously publicaly admonish this behaviour and all cases of it if they want their cause to be taken seriously in the long run.
as it stands, i'm glad i can see the general trend of public opinion leaning (running as fast as they fucking can) away from feminist rhetoric after it's period of "coolness". they can only cry wolf so many times before being ignored when the wolf actually comes.
Nothing happened to her by the police for what she did and no lawyer wanted to touch a private/civil case against her because I would look "vindictive".
Yeah, thats not hypocritical. not like she was vindictive at all ![😕](https://community.gaytorrent.ru/assets/plugins/nodebb-plugin-emoji/emoji/apple/1f615.png?v=hvqg2qn0nb4 ":\")
but in the end, its out to the jury. we need public opinion to understand that this can be, and IS abused. And that the ones doing damage to the "rape cause" is these women themselves… not men. awareness of it happening, from friends anecdotally and the media is needed.
I forget the cunt feminist's name, but she said that false rape claims against men are a good learning tool for men.
yeah, a good learning tool that some women apparently don't view their own integrity (individually and representative of a gender as a whole) as more important than scoring a quick win. great PR…
and even up until the 1980's was still a superpower (so was Germany / West Germany). However, they went heavily socialist, and have suffered severely and permanently as a result. A similar phenomenon occurred in Canada.
i'd be interested to know what you consider "socialist" and not, and whether it conflates with communism which is very different. i think the political debate has shifted so far right since the end of WW2 era that what was once considered common-sense-centreground is now considered borderline communism. i dont think policies like free healthcare, housing subsidy and fair wages are at odds with capitalism or even remotely communistic: if anything i think they are required balanced to stop the "profit above all" nature of capitalism from going too far and leading us to a humanitarian crisis where we have more wealth AND poverty than ever at the same time. I certainly don't think the government should plan everything; just the things that are considered life essentials… food, housing, water/heat/electricity, healthcare and now internet access. These things are necessities and there is inherently no free market there. You can't vote with your wallet on those issues, they can do what they want.
also, the waning of superpowers nicely coincided with the waning of the cold war… given there was no longer a huge threat left to fight; im not sure if those associations with socialism are not tangiential or a result of the waning of wartime economy.
thing is i have no issue with capitalism (in the realm of non-essentials); but what we have now is not just capitalism but neoliberal corporatism and globalism; reeking eerily of a cyberpunk dystopia. among other things the digital technological revolution has changed the playing field almost as much as the industrial revolution.
–-
on the topic of rape, i had this nice link today from the increasingly insufferable facebook feed of feminist-homo-public-figure george takei.
accusation. no proof. even if intercourse was proven, it is near impossible to prove lack of consent in the absence of requiring signed contracts for every sexual encounter (talk about romantic). even without any legal repercussions; the mere mention is enough to socially ruin someone. for something that cannot be proven. short of real violence and evidence…
"rape" is quickly becoming the new "witch" word. say it and the mob starts a lynching. no investigation; even questioning the validity of a woman's claims is seen as oppression and rape-apology. No; i dont believe any accusation without merit.
it's tough, because on the one hand sexual assault and violence is obviously wrong and abhorrent. On the other hand, unless there is proof of violence it's such a serious issue you can't just convict someone of something so serious and damning based on word alone (and regardless, we already have repercussions non-legal) And this can quickly become a tool to be seriously abused. Call someone who you don't like a witch and watch your enemy be destroyed by the mob.
And, in the spirit of the thread title; that is power and oppression. A man can't just accuse a woman of something and have her immediately imprisoned on only his word. "equality" my ass. and to preach that women are oppressed still is hypocrisy of the worst kind. because any one man may be capable of physically oppressing a weaker woman (or a weaker man; never mind a whale of a woman could easily physically oppress a rake such as myself) does not mean that they should have the sole capability to institute systematic legal oppression in general.
this makes me sick. not just because real people's lifes can be ruined on heresay (even if it is later investigated and acquitted, the damage is done); but because people can and do abuse something that SHOULD be taken very seriously for their own personal gain. that's a real violation of the spirit of the intent to protect women in the first place.
the idea that a woman cannot lie about these things is a joke. people can and do lie about anything that will give them an advantage. children know this: children are evil little shits. anyone in school knows how to lie to get someone "done". i dont think its farfetched to think that some women might think that "call police, have guys life ruined" might be a good idea: because it is something they CAN do, and have very little backlash for trying.
false accusation (or accusation of "rape" for far less serious offenses of harassment, or worse: simple post-regret) is ironically the greatest disrespect to real rape victims, and i am absolutely sickened by women who abuse this, not just for the obvious sake of ruining someones life; but for the women who have endured real violent sexual assault to have their case trivialised by bitches on a power trip. there are some real sick fucks out there who really do kidnap beat and violate women.
because the more trivialisations of "rape" we have, the more people will stop listening "boy who cried wolf" style, and the REAL problem will sink along with the bullshit. and that will be nothing but the feminists fault.
the rape culture is not here. but it will be; by their own making.
consent will ALWAYS be a grey area until we require written, signed contracts. word-against-word does not and should not fly in a court of law; especially in a case so serious as rape. as a society we have always been predisposed to protect women.
–-
as a last note: i really think that gay men will eventually be the last bastion of sanity against feminism (excluding those who have been drawn in by the cooption of LGB issues by feminists for their own purposes). we are the only ones who aren't beholden to the power of the pussy; and can look at these issues from the outside free from gender partisanship.
my post was so damn long i got a session time out error and it's gone and i can't be bothered retyping it all just now.
If the leftist on this site do respond, we will get to see some of the total fucking insanity of the left to justify this crap.
so just one thing: please do not confuse or conflate "left" with insane feminazi delusion.
and at least here in the UK, with the jokes of what pass for political parties we have, both the "left" and the "right" are either run by feministas OR live in fear of their shadow and make policy accordingly… unless you want to go into UKIP/BNP crazy-territory.
and i think actually one of the things that stings the most about feminism is the sheer and blatant hypocrisy… women got their equality and then some. the original feminists fighting for real votes and rights would be spinning in their graves at the parody of their cause that it has become.
but what does the army do when the wars are won? they are out of a job and must make new ever-trivial wars to fight to keep their inflated sense of purpose going.
we have some very serious social and economic problems that really need sorting; and the issues SJWs and feminists complain about should be so far down that priority list as to be non-issues; and i can't help but feel alot of these are eating up headlines and social-discourse-attention from real problems to be redirected onto the most trivial of matters. not having people homeless and starving would be a real nice start.
watch what/who they look at…
its the only way. anything else is superficial.
for bj dont worry about trying to swallow it all if you can't… take it slow, start shallow and go further and further until you really cant; it just takes practice assuming your throat isnt really sensetive...
but in general you can juts lick/suck the bottom from outside... going all the way down the outside down to the root is something you should definitely do if you cant take it all (should do it anyway but ye)
a friend of mine swears by squeezing the thumb in a fist to stop gagging. doesn't work for me but worth a shot xD in general i think some gagging is inevitable.
as a teenager i used to go crazy for boxers (jersey)… having worn kidbriefs till then the soft, loose material caressing my dick would give me instaboner xD
although i have to cut the buttons off or gets ones that have none, as i dispise them... random hard bit... looks bad... pointless... although i hate buttons in general...
once the new-thing excitement wore off though not so much...
but a good quality pair of trunks/boxerbriefs with that "clean-but-never-washed" feel is soooo good and also insta hardon. once you wash em a few times they lose the magic and feel different.
briefs have the nice feel but just too tight to give me chance to even start to rise
i do love to bottom… when my ass says i can... which is unfortunately not really more regular than once every 2 week/month at best... it can be... uncooperative and scream.
so vers in general i rather top on guys i think are hot, and bottom if they are just "ok" (and my ass says im allowed xD)
but tbh, in general unless the guy is a bottom and im really horny... i actually just prefer suck/frot/hump/edging together...
also i dont think i could be happy for long in a relationship with exclusive roles... it feels wrong for one person to be dedicated to top or bottom... and id miss one or the other either way...
i think there's something to be said of vers that gay sex has the unique ability to be "fair". i dont feel i really done someone unless we did each other
also the "dance/fight" to determine who wants to top (or bottom) the most is half the fun xD
nah.
homo just feels right
Aha, so that's how it works :D, i guess seeding the torrent from two locations at once then would pretty much keep it stuck on ~0 as it would be constantly fighting over a "new session". thanks; guess i was worried over nothing ::)
i just realised though that i can't edit my previous post for some reason: could you as a mod remove the attachment? 
So, if i look in my profile to see torrents i'm seeding, the upload credit is hugely wrong…. i have a torrent with over 22GB seeded and the page shows i have 224MB...
im not sure if this is a bug in the display? or if maybe there is some issue being caused by using the same .torrent file to seed from both my own computer (when i am downloading/seeding local files) and from a seedbox at the same time? maybe this confuses the tracker, i dont know.
if seeding from two boxes at the same time does confuse the tracker, i can try and stop seeding any files that i have on seedbox locally.
image attached with stats from profile and from transmission
i even have 0KB credit shown for a torrent i uploaded myself… which is impossible.
so... can this be fixed? is there a way i can seedbox some torrents without messing it up? or is it just a display bug on the profile page and the credit is counted as normal? either way it's quite concerning.
what would be the best method to secure private torrent seeding?
hard to tell what you really mean by the question: but here.
regardless of whether you have protocol encryption or not: the end peer knows your address and that you are seeding; of course a normal member can't really work out your username from your address.
encryption simply obfuscates the traffic from your isp/middleman to avoid "torrent detection/throttling" etc…
if you want to make sure all connections are encrypted it depends on your client how to do it: for example in utorrent you must set encryption to "forced" and untick "allow incoming legacy connections".
if you want to be actually anonymous, you must use VPN of some sort.