Posts made by MrMazda

I know that this is kind of an old post now, but there is some issue with Google as of late….

See... Google first implemented the use of SPF record checking to verify that the email's origin is legitimate. Since then however, they have started to forcibly cram DKIM bullshit down the throats of mail server administrators. The sad thing is that even with a proper SPF record and a properly DKIM signed email message to verify its origin, Google seems to bounce emails at random with the error code 550-5.7.1, claiming that it's been bounced because it's "Most Likely SPAM". Of course, as a mail administrator myself, this is a bit of a piss off because there does not seem to be any rhyme or reason to when or why they bounce messages, and of course, absolutely no way in which to contact them.

This could be a part of the problem.

The short answer to your question is yes…. Approximately evey 30 minutes, your torrent client updates with the tracker and tells it how much data has been transferred since the last update. For this reason, it may take some time for information that you have transferred to actually be reflected on the tracker.

That being said, also be aware that the total UL/DL stats that you see in your torrent client also include network overhead traffic. As such, you may notice a small difference between what your torrent client reads, and what the tracker reads. Lastly, there's also the issue of session history. When you stop a torrent in your torrent client, your torrent client will still show that you've got some data transferred. When you start the torrent again, the numbers will not match because your torrent client will have kept track of the session stats for that particular torrent as it sits in your torrent client, however the tracker will keep track of the stats for that particular session, which gets reset every time you stop the torrent.

Just a heads up...

There is also a request re-seed button. A lot of times, this is an effective way of reviving such a torrent.

This seems to be a classic case of the common proxy issue that a lot of users are experiencing.

In short, most proxy servers will not work to connect to the system's back-end because of technical changes to the way that it works. In a nut shell, there is a re-direct that occurrs, which most proxy servers are incapable of picking up, which causes the packet to be dropped. Your best bet honestly is to invest a monthly fee into a VPN (PPTP Preferred) in order to get around this. It will stop you from being directly exposed to copyright trolls, but at the same time, will still allow you to connect to the servers.

It would appear that the torrent client that you're using does have some issue with SSL connections. Your best bet is to check the setings in your torrent client, and force it to accept the tracker's SSL cert.

Also, depending on what OS you're running and whether or not you can install apps, it may be worth while to try qBitTorrent. It's available on most platforms, yet is quite simple to work with.

There is also another possible reason why this may happen sometimes. If you're using a proxy server instead of a VPN, some of them are a little picky. Simply put, the site is now behind a protection system of its own. Because of this, there is use of JavaScript redirects to be able to properly reach the site and tracker. The down side to this is that if you're running a proxy server that is configured like most, the JavaScript re-direct is lost as it passes through the Proxy on the user's end, which has been known to cause this very issue.

My suggestion here is that if this does not work directly, try it temporarily without the use of the proxy server. If that does work, then I would suggest getting a full VPN service (PPTP preferred), which will still hide your identity the same way that the proxy will, however it tunnels ALL of your internet traffic through the VPN. This allows for maximum protection against copyright trolls, while at the same time, allowing you to still access the site and tracker.

Just a thought…

@trukr:

PIA Port Forwarding Servers:
Netherlands
Switzerland
CA North York
CA Toronto
Romania
Sweden
France
Germany

Bahahahaha!!! That's HILARIOUS!! Are you aware that North York IS Toronto? :lolp:

You might be surprised as to what people believe at this day and age actually… The sad reality is that there are some peole who still believe that exchanging a simple hug or a kiss with someone who is HIV+ will infect them, even though this is not so.

By the same token, there are also people out there who believe that it's only something that affects gay men, which is also quite incorrect. HIV doesn't descriminate, so why should you? :lolp:

@spiderr:

In oral sex the risk is lower than anal/vaginal sex.
http://www.thebody.com/cgi-bin/bbs/showflat.php?Board=infected&Number=81409

Saludos

This is correct… What this post also does not mention is that saliva actually contains a naturali enzime that kills HIV believe it or not. This is a large part as to why oral sex presents next to NO risk for HIV transmission. In fact, there has not been so much as one single documented case where HIV transmission has occurred solely from oral sex. That alone should speak for itself.

There's also risk factors to take into account…. As I've said before, the biggest factor in the equation is the HIV+ person's viral load.... There's also other factors, such as the length and roughnes of the sex, and whether or not tearing of the bodily (anal or vaginal) tissues occurrs. That being said though, proper education is a good start and not having to fear it because you don't understand it.

I completely agree with the concept of a little education goes a long way.

There's also more to the equation at this day and age… One must take into account the HIV+ person's viral load at the time. The lower the viral load, the less likely infection is. By the same token, when they have reached an undetectable viral load, even unprotected sex poses next to no actual risk.

By the same token, there are many other factors to take into account... If the bottom isn't used to takeing such a large cock, and you're not careful, you can cause tearing of the anal tissues, which will elevate the risk of possibility for infection by the virtue of introducing blood into the equation. Even at this though, the risk is still minimal. In fact, an undetectable viral load bareback is actually a lower risk than a high viral load with a condom..... Just some food for thought.

What you need to understand when answering this question is that there's a difference between possibility and probability. In reality, anything is possible, however it doesn't mean it's likely. In this case, in theory, it is possible to contract HIV from pre-cum, however the reality is that there is no real medical evidence that points to the presence of HIV in pre-cum. By the same token, there is no evidence that directly concludes that it is not present either.

The reality is that although possible in theory, the actual odds and probability of it are virtually nonexistent.

The general rule is once it's dry, you're safe. If blood is still wet, it stands a chance at still being active, but if left exposed to air over time, in smaller amounts, it will dry quicker, and as it dries, yes…. It is correct that the HIV virus itself does die.

I know this is kind of a late reply, but the short answer is NO…. Regardless of the viral load, piss is NEVER an issue. With an undetectable viral load, it's practically impossible to infect someone, even through unprotected anal sex.

I have recently noticed some issues with the chat box on the main page. Namely, that the chat box is not the size it should be, and the banner does not seem to be displaying at the same width as the box. I have attached the following just in case this is an isolated thing to one specific browser/os….

O/S: Ubuntu 14.04 LTS (x86)
Processor: Intel Core Duo CPU T2450 @ 2.00GHz × 2
RAM: 4GB (DDR II)
Browser: Mozilla Firefox 33.0 (Ubuntu Canonical 1.0)
Visual Error:

Is this supposed to happen, or is this something specific to my system or browser confifuration? Does anyone have any ideas? This only seems to be the issue for me while running Firefox and has only stated within the last couple of days. When I load the page in Google Chrome (Version 38.0.2125.122) it all seems to work fine. Any thoughts on if this is my machine or some sort of actual bug?

Quelle torrent est-ce que vous voudrais modifier? Je pouvais le faire pour vous.

Sadly, that's the state that we're in these days. We have some independent providers here, but they're just wholesale re-sellers of the same service essentially…. just at a lower price. You get far less support from the bigwig company though if something ever goes wrong.

The "closed-door meetings" they refer to in this video are what are known in Canada as CRTC meetings, and known in the USA as FCC meetings. The board of directors at the CRTC consist of some of the same board of directors as the big boy providers who collectively own the monopoly. Can we say "Conflict of Interest" ? LOL :crazy2:

I stumbled across this on Facebook of all places the other day. I thought it was so true that I just had to Youtube the bitch and share it here

Check this out! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6r-ee5FAINc

What's that cock doing not caged up?

The general rule on this is that if the aspect of being LTBTQ is somehow depicted, even if just in general, then it is considered gay themed. The only problem is there are some films that need to be avoided for legal reasons.