Posts made by eobox91103

@lololulu19 said in Austin Wolf Arrested By FBI For Sending “Hundreds” Of Child Porn Videos, Faces 30 Years In Prison:

I think the primary reason for the laws against underage sexuality is because they don't want girls getting pregnant

That's probably a large part of the reason--people in younger age groups are not fully aware of the consequences of their actions, and hence, in legal terms, can't give consent to having sex.

When in comes to underage porn, the problem is even greater: A 15-year-old enticed by financial payment to be nude or have sex in front of a camera will almost certainly not be aware of the damage this can do to him in later life--as they say, the internet is forever. There have been several "pornograhers," most infamously Sebastian Bleisch, who took shameful advantage of this. Surprisingly, Mr. Bleisch [in Germany] received a sentence of only two and half years. In Canada or the US, it would have been much longer.

@blablarg18 said in Austin Wolf Arrested By FBI For Sending “Hundreds” Of Child Porn Videos, Faces 30 Years In Prison:

17 is indeed a child.

We agree completely, when it comes to porn. Some people, though, when hearing the terms "child porn" or "kiddie porn" will think only of prepubescent persons. Such folk need to know that an adult-looking 17-year-old is still a minor and a having a nude photo of such carries a heavy sanction. This site has a well-written rule about this:

• If a torrent is posted from a studio known to use underage models or if the minimum age of a youthful appearing actor cannot be confirmed to be at least 18 years of age, we reserve the right to remove such content. If you are uploading torrents for videos or pictures for which the original producer or distributor is unknown, then the models must also look over 18 as well as be over 18 years old.

As you suggest, drawing age lines is tricky, and will never satisfy everyone. I recall a conversation with a colleague some year back who grew up in one of the US states where he said he could (legally) drive farm equipment around his farm at 14, drive a car on public roads at 16, vote and go into military service at 18, buy alcohol at 21, and rent a car at 25. One could argue for or against each of those lines, but they still need to be drawn.

@lololulu19 said in Austin Wolf Arrested By FBI For Sending “Hundreds” Of Child Porn Videos, Faces 30 Years In Prison:

There is a big difference between 7 and 17.

That is very true, although both are considered "under age" if photographed in a nude or sexual situation. I prefer to use the term "under age porn" rather than "child porn" or "kiddie porn," because a 17 year old is just as illegal as someone much younger.

The mention of your friend who had sex with an "almost 18" person raises the complicated point that in many jurisdictions, the age of consent for sex can be lower than the age defining under age porn: In Canada, part of the US, and most of Europe, the age of consent is 16. (In Liechtenstein, it's 14!) Nevertheless, the age limit for porn is almost always 18. This means that one could have sex in Canada with a guy who's 16, but they couldn't take or possess a nude photograph of him.

@lololulu19 I don't know why you can't upload, but it's a shame. It sounds like you would be able to add a lot of new material to the site.

@ianfontinell-0 said in Torrent File Sizes:

I don't mind huge torrents as long as they come with contact sheets for everything.

I totally agree, and it's so easy to make contact sheets with the many free batch thumbnail generators available. Whenever I have a torrent with multiple video files, I always do this. I'm not proposing that the site the make this a rule, but I consider it a "best practice." I salute all uploaders (likely yourself among them) who do this.

I do think that downloaders should use caution in downloading all or some files from very large torrents if there's a possibility that the torrent will be deleted before one is finished downloading. This is low risk if all the contents are from individual studios that don't make DMCA complaints, but if it's a mixed bag of files from different studios, containing a file from a studio that is very DMCA-aggressive, there is the risk that the entire torrent will go away before downloading is complete...and one could be left with a lot of unusable material charged against their ratio calculation.

@Titom I'm in general agreement with what you're saying. I do think, though, that it's important to distinguish between file size and torrent size:

I don't think there's any need for a single file to be larger than 30 GB. I often transfer files to a thumb drive to watch on my large screen television, and the most common format for these drives (called FAT32) won't permit files larger than 4 GB. I have software that can break a file into sequential bits, but breaking something into ten pieces is tedious.

As for a torrent containing a large number of video files, such as a sloppy collection called "My Favourite Bareback Films" that is 100 GB, I think it's risky for a downloader to select all of the files, only to get half-way through and have the torrent deleted from the system due to a DMCA request or perhaps just one clip be suspect of having an under-18 model. It would be prudent for downloaders to select only a few of the files on offer, and then when those are complete select a few more. This can help prevent the problem of having downloaded a lot of useless partial files.

Thank you for raising this interesting topic.

Returning to the OP's question about the other site:

It's different from gtor.rent: It has fewer torrents posted per day, in part because everything there is from a studio--no amateur content like spy shots in a locker room or over-the-stall wanking. That site also enforces the rule that each torrent have a description and relevant photos.

Having said that, there is material there that can't be found here. (I won't mention any studio names, since this forum is public.) I think the two sites are complementary, and I like being part of both. Not everyone likes the other site: I've cashed in bonus points there to invite 18 people I "met" on here to join the other site, but only 12 became active users. Nothing pleases everybody.

The forum on the other site has less traffic, although it does have--and enforce--a rule about being civil and respectful of other users

From a purely subjective point of view, I think the format of the other site's torrent listings is better--it seems cleaner and easier to use...but web design preferences can be argued from here to eternity, and even then wouldn't be resolved.

@kalayaan said in Actors' Dick Exposure in Films, Theater and TV:

How's this for your enjoyment

Thank you sir! And that is most definitely not shaved...it's about as full as it gets.

@frostycab said in Actors' Dick Exposure in Films, Theater and TV:

Stringfellow Hawke naked

...and with a nice, full bush. American studios experimented with full frontal nudity in the pre-shaving 1970's, but seem to have largely moved away from it since.

I would have enjoyed a gratuitous frontal in Red, White, and Royal Blue, but I suspect both guys are shaved down under.

Thanks for these.

If you enjoy these pics, check out the video at https://www.gaytor.rent/details.php?id=efa3241a74af1f7e3f627acd8bc2072f61c4f131cec1a639 . Also, you can do a search on "mainstream movies" and find quite a bit. (The torrent cited above isn't picked up in the search because it was titled "maintstream movies."

@john32123666 This is getting tedious. I'm glad you now realise that other people's clients can behave differently from yours. This is a big step forward.

What users should also notice is that each user can set the maximum number of active downloads, 10, 12, 50, 1000, etc. This is helpful information to new users that you could share if you wanted to.

I realize you like to respond quickly to forum posts, but not always with correct or clear information. I'm going to put you on "block" so I don't have to read it. Best wishes to you.

@eobox91103 said in Torrent stalled - Help:
So your earlier statements:

Suddenly adding 20 new torrents will put some of them in a queue until the first 10 or 12 download what you want ... the 13th will red out resulting failure

were incorrect.

Furthermore, when I put 15+ new torrents in the client, the first twelve were downloading and the remainder were queued. Please don't presume that other users' clients will behave exactly as yours does.

@john32123666 That's exactly what I did to test your theory. The first ten to twelve started downloading completely, while the rest were in a grey (not red) queue waiting for some of the first ones to finish before they started. So there's no harm downloading a bunch of new torrents at one, knowing that the system will eventually get to them.

On a more general note, I can understand that there's some satisfaction at quickly answering a question or posed on the forum. But it's important that (a) the answer be correct, and (b) the explanation be understandable to most users, who are not IT specialists and probably speak only English. Please give this some thought.,

@john32123666 A couple of clarifications: A client can have up to 100 torrents listed as leeching, as long as most of them have downloaded everything the user wants to download. Suddenly adding 20 new torrents will put some of them in a queue until the first 10 or 12 download what you want, and then start downloading the rest. There's no need to keep checking back to see if those slots are open.

Also, in uTorrent 3.5.5 (and perhaps other versions or clients), the queued downloads are grey, not red.

@john32123666 said in Torrent stalled - Help:

12 is max leeching d/l that I'm aware of ...

Per the site rules (https://www.gaytor.rent/rules.php, at the bottom:

Users who have donated to the site are allowed 200 torrents at one time.

I recommend using @MrMazda's link for uTorrent 2.2.1. I use 3.5.5 only because that was the easiest fix for me when I was in 3.6 hell. Everything pretty much works now and I'm reluctant to do another version change, but if I were starting from scratch I'd go with 2.2.1.

@tiatbdna4 said in Not Counting Your Shared Ratio:

I only started uploaded torrents 3 months ago

Note that the amount uploaded is your total upload to other users, whether it's a torrent you've created, or one posted by someone else that you've downloaded, and then you're sharing back (uploading) some of that data. It would be possible to have a great ration if a user never posted a torrent, but seeded back lots of what they did download.

Most of my share ratio comes from torrents that I've download only part of (maybe one file out of five), and somehow the system hooks me up with lots of downloaders and I can get a share ratio on that torrent of 50 or greater.. I do upload my own torrents every few weeks, but they usually result in a share ratio (for that torrent) in a ratio of 5 to 10.

@dat1hungdude If you go to the torrent home page ( https://www.gaytor.rent/ ), you'll see a list of users online. You can mouse over the usernames and see their ratio and amount of upload and download. I didn't look at every user, but mousing over one line I saw users at 250 TB and 450 TB. I felt like a slacker with only 36 TB uploaded.

I also noticed that many "high upload" users tend to have share ratios in the 1-2 range, meaning they must also download a lot of stuff. I tend to be selective about what I download.

@brettw97 To install uTorrent 3.5.5 (to replace uTorrent 3.6), I recommend this link: https://www.filesoul.com/software/uTorrent/3-5-5-45271-for-PC-Windows/download/ . There are some links on "old software version" sites that say they will give you 3.5.5, but actually are 3.6.

I suggest that the user be asked to make a single-torrent collection of a bunch of these small files, rather than making each one its own torrent. They do share a common theme, and the new collection torrent could simply be called "Big White Boys" with a few screen grabs for examples. (Or, they could do a thumbnail sheet for each video, but that might be overkill.)