@kco I also have display issues these last two days.
I'm on macos Sequoia using Safari.
See what the main window (www.gaytor.rent/picbrowse.php) looks like:
Some elements are missing, such as info and camera icons.
Also this is how the (old) search window looks like:
@john32123666 You're right but this rule remains theoretical.
I was wondering whether it's possible to implement a mechanism that would automatically reject a picture that is less than 200 pixels wide (or high) for example. 
@lololulu19 I don't want to blame this particular torrent since it happens much often elsewhere, but my example above comes from this recent Ali Rush & Angel Santana.
I can't tell if it comes from a collage, maybe a low-res screen capture?
I don't remember a time when such minuscule images were that frequent.
I've observed that, these last months, more and more uploaded pics are small, even ridiculously small, not to say indecipherable.
Here's an example:
55 × 82 pixels only (which is ~ 0.16 % of my screen area!)…
Could there be some rule to get at least a minimum size?
@lololulu19 I'm no technician at all but, according to Wikipedia, .jfi/.jfif seems to be a slight variant of .jpg: the algorithm used to compress the image is the same but extra info is store differently (as far as I could understand).
As for other file formats I have also experienced positively the upload on gaytor.rent of files with extension .heic (which is Apple renaming for .heif).
While JPEG algorithm is lossy, .heif can be set to encode losslessly, as for .png (while producing smaller files than .png).
Also, .png has a nice advantage over the former formats: it can preserve transparency. A feature which is however useless on gaytor.rent since every uploaded image is automatically converted to .jpg (and transparency → white…).
I concur with the observations above: sine 1~2 days most torrents are in trouble…
Quite strangely, the day after my first message, my upload speed came back to normal (~ 500 Mb/s) and remained such till today.
I've waited 3 days before experimenting to freeleech anything; I chose to freeleech a rather small torrent today.
At the very moment I did that, my upload speed fell again at <1Mb/s!!! (I've checked on www.speedtest.net and some other similar sites.)
I'm left with two hypotheses:
— my ISP is delivering an instable upload trafic when I freeleech something (3rd time in a row…);
— there's an obscure unexpected interaction between gaytor.rent & my fiber box (the speed of transfers between the computer and the box, using FTP, doesn't seem to be affected)… 🤯
@john32123666
No, I definitely have a real trouble; at the beginning of the week my upload would reach 200 Mbps at moments.
I'll keep investigate. Maybe a damaged optical-fiber cable?
Thanks for taking the time to read and answer me. 
@john32123666
After some tests it seems that I actually have an upload issue. I've tested my download at 876 Mb/s, but my upload is stuck at 0.2 Mb/s 
At the beginning of the week I did not have this trouble: I remember having freeleeched a torrent and uploaded more than 40 gigabytes within a few hours.
After 2,5 hours of freeleech, I have 31 leechers, who are at ~ 22 % completion; thus I'll continue to seed until everyone reaches 100 %…
(And I have now to solve my upload enigma.)
I've freeleched a torrent about 1 hour ago, for which I'm the only seeder. There are currently 12 leechers trying to grab, it but my upload speed has just fallen to ~zero!
Quite oddly the same phenomenon occurred two days ago when I freeleeched another torrent for which I was also the only seeder. I then tried many things, such as rebooting my internet box, even my computer. Nothing helped…
I will add that my upload speed is zero whichever client I use; see the two window captures (one from Transmission, the other from BitTorrent):
Does anyone has some clue to solve this very new issue? (at least to me…)
@jjazz44 Eight months ago I installed NordVPN and it totally blocked my torrenting client Transmission. I wrote to them and got a quick answer saying that they don't implement port-forwarding “for security reasons” but that they seriously think about it for the future…
I then asked for a refund, which I obtained some days later.
@mihaig110 Same thing happened to me exactly 8 days ago. The takedown was so swift (maybe 1 or 2 minutes) that no user got enough time to even attempt a connection!
As usual my torrent (2 vids) had thumbnails, description & screenshots, which usually gets through with no problem…
During the 80 minutes preceding that very takedown, I had two more (older) torrents also DMCAed!
(Three unrelated torrents deleted in that short interval of time 
!!!)
@john32123666 You wrote: “It should only works if both torrent has a seeder.”
Actually the rules say otherwise.
It is enough that the original torrent has seeders; which was the case.
As a matter of fact, some hours after this conversation the duplicate was removed (thanks to MrMazda).
@drekkin I'm not that stressed at all… 
It's just that this reporting precisely (though renewed several times) has no effect; while I've done some others more recently, which were all taken into account.
I was rather curious to know what is special about this peculiar one. But I agree with you: it's a minor matter.
I have reported multiple times this torrent:
https://www.gaytor.rent/details.php?id=3f5cd23d7ec5608313fdca579e25a0ffd0973e634891791b
as a duplicate.
The original upload being:
https://www.gaytor.rent/details.php?id=25805b83bef5466813fdca579e25a0ffd5bae6215c9a1335
However my reports have no effect.
Seven weeks ago the staff suggested that I try again; which I've done at least 4 or 5 times since then…
@john32123666
Your reply has nothing to do with my question.
I was pointing out that the site rule regarding the size comparison is lacking accuracy.
Namely the expression “similar size (<10 % difference)”, that you are quoting has two possible meanings.
Rephrasing my 1rst message: if two files have respective sizes 1,000 and 1,105 then, depending on how one proceeds, the so-called “difference” may be considered as > 10 %, or < 10 %…
@Douseikekkon
Sorry for the blunder in the title… 
Of course ducliacates → duplicates.
The sentence in the title above is ambiguous.
Suppose torrent A has size 1105 and torrent B has size 1000. Can they be considered duplicates?
— On one hand: size(A)÷size(B)=1.105, so A exceeds B by more than 10 %; ⇒ not dupes.
— On the other hand: size(B)÷(size(A)=0.90497…, so B is only 9.5 % smaller than A; ⇒ potential dupes.
@urx585
I have the same issue (using Transmission on mac).
Here is an example of a torrent which is declared as “invalid” by Transmission, and has no .pad file inside:
https://www.gaytor.rent/details.php?id=60032beb6c08a7e113fdca579e25a0ff996dd7cc60dbd838&hit=1
@lololulu19
Well… I have one fiber box and an ethernet cable between it and the mac.
Among other experiments, I followed a procedure which makes use of an .opvn file to configure the box.
Nothing worked.
I have received today an answer (in French) from Nord, which says:
« NordVPN n'offre actuellement pas de fonctionnalité de port-forwarding pour des raisons de sécurité, mais nous discutons activement de la possibilité de l'inclure ultérieurement dans la configuration de notre serveur. »
Roughly : “NordVPN does not currently offer port-forwarding functionality, for the sake of security, but we are actively considering its inclusion in our server's configuration in the future.”
According to the mail I should be refunded within 10 days…
P. S.: I'd included in my mail this image of Transmission preferences, with all ports obstinately shut by NordVPN.
