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.

A quick fix that doesn't include penalizing members for seeding would be to bulk freeleech everything from, say, one year ago and older (or two years, or whatever); gives the peeps something to download for free and a crowd to upload to for ratio, doesn't cut the interest in the fresh uploads much (could even boost the interest in fresh uploads, since more peeps will have the ratio to grab it), and the old stuff might even stay seeded longer with the renewed interest. The down side is that once these items have been but in freeleech it'll cause confusion if they get turned back into regular torrents.

Another approach is to increase the seedbonus to upload value, or some measure to the same effect; this benefits members with low upload values (mostly the new members) more than members with big numbers in their upload/download scores. Downside is that it's harder to control, and it favours 24/7 seeders over uptime/downtime seeders.

Of course, you could just dish out handful of gigs upload to everyone every now and again; birthdays, calender events, your sweetie just gave you a dozen roses… This doesn't actually fix anything, but it does stave off the inevitable collapse of a strict ratio tracker where the members' upstream differ by a factor 100 or more.

Penalizing members for uploading cannot be the answer; it goes against the fundamental principle of bittorrent. whatever the solution end up at, it needs to be something else.

…
That aside, I'm either missing something central in this whole debate
...

I assume (because I couldn't find data to the contrary) that 1 gb upload is worth the same to the seeder regardless of whether or not someone else is seeding the same torrent at the same time. 1 gb up = 1 gb up, yes?
...

Looks like that (the 2nd cited paragrap) is what you missed. If (as Uwe already mentioned) the "jumper" has a good bandwith and high upload speed the original uploader can't upload 1 GB because the BitTorrent protocol prefers the "jumper" with a better bandwith/upload speed. Result: the original uploader can't get 1 GB upload traffic but only a small percentage - that makes out of a 1 GB data file may be an upload traffic of only 100 MB - even less if he can't/won't seed his upload continuously for the first time. That is the main promblem with members jumping on a fresh upload.

a) If someone jumps-on during the initial upload, the original uploader will seed only a part of the full file, the other seeder the other part
b) Once a complete copy is out, the torrent "turns" within a few minutes and most of the leecher will become seeder, nothing to upload any more
c) The torrent protocol advantage fast uploader over proportional. A high speed uploader (for example fibre optics, some cable) jumping-on early is a disaster for the original uploader if he needs it to improve his upload, because he will make the majority of the initial upload.
d) This is as well linked to the high minimum ratio requirements here, many members have difficulties to keep them, though seeding hundreds of hours. Uploading new torrents which increase the library to all members benefits is a good way out (if nobody jumps on early).

I'm reading this topic, talk about information overload, as well as intense name-calling, massive outing of fellow members, and PMs reposted in public. I mean, guys, seriously?

That aside, I'm either missing something central in this whole debate (and yes, I've tried to look it up elsewhere in the forum and found nothing to explain it; I may have missed it), but this whole issue appears completely out of proportions. But do feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

I just don't get how someone else pitching in to a fresh upload can be that big a deal.

I assume (because I couldn't find data to the contrary) that 1 gb upload is worth the same to the seeder regardless of whether or not someone else is seeding the same torrent at the same time. 1 gb up = 1 gb up, yes?

I assume (because this issue centers on fresh uploads rather than aging/stale torrents) that having, say, a 50 kbps upstream connection means you can dish out 50 kbps to someone wanting the stuff, and get credit for it. 50 kbps = 50 kbps, yes?

I assume (because this is how it's stated in the FAQ) that seeding for 6 hours gets you the same amount of seed bonus regardless of whether you're the first seed, for some other reason the only seeder, or one of two or more seeders. 6 hours seed bunus = 6 hours sed bonus, yes?

If these assumptions are correct, a second seeder during first seed can only affect the torrent uploader if his presense clears the uploaders initial-seeding/powerseeding flag in the client, with low bandwith or short duation second seed (effectively making the first seed take longer).

Or, what am I missing?

I expect there's an underlying problem here; one that's a known issue on several private trackers with ratio control: Leecher exhaustion. If new members find themselves hard pressed to maintain an acceptable ratio because there aren't enough leechers to max out the new members' allotted upstream, that's a problem that should be handled in the backend, by the site admins and out of public view, either by setting a well-balanced minimum ratio or freeleeching torrents in bulk from the bottom of the pile.

A bittorrent community, or any community that functions by members serving data to other members from their own bandwidth, must never ever chastise its members for serving the expected data to other members. No exceptions.

I don't come here for the torrents (entirely different reasons, not even remotely related to this issue). But I do check in from time to time, as I do at a lot of torrent sites I don't actually visit for the torrents. And a discussion such as this one, especially with the tone it's taken, that's just sad.

So, did I piss someone off? Feel free to tell me in PM if it cannot be phrased within common forum vocabulary. I'm no stranger to being unpopular; it's cool.

On a side note (and kinda off topic) that really made my day.
somewhere up this topic, I read something kinda on these lines: "I posted this coyrighted flick, and that guy stole my upload!"
I forget who posted it, and I shouldn't care to point fingers at any one particular member, anyway. But I just found myself wondering if the poster actually read that particular complaint to himself before pressing 'submit'.

On a second side note (completely off topic) also from somewhere up this topic.
Someone suggested adding extra/dummy files to the torrent file bundle. Please, don't do that. No one (or only a rare few) keep those files. The only thing these added files do is prevent later reseeding of the flick once the original swarm has died out and the peeps who could reseed only has the flick and none of the additional files in the pack.

regards
~ Neo

To rename a movie not in a folder.. When your torrent client asks where you want the movie "SAVED AS" you can change the title.. eg torrent for "[Staxus]-Something 6.avi" can be saved as "Staxus - Something #6.avi" & your torrent client will show the title as "Staxus - Something #6.avi".. If you already have 100% of "Staxus - Something #6.avi" then you will be a seeder of "[Staxus]-Something 6.avi"..

As to renaming when in a folder.. see comments #4 & #5 of http://tracker.gaytor.rent/details.php?id=33646&cpage=0

Lucky for me that the poster did not mind me starting @ 70%..

…In addition, as they got only let's say 98.7% of all the torrent's files, they will show up as leecher (though seeding only) and be more difficult to identify as early jump-oners...

Uwe's comments are really impressive, that's all I can say  
Look at his explanation about an early jump-oner showing as a leecher in the torrent page (in case he already got the movie but unselected the additional pics, not downloading them on purpose), when most of us would have thought that a jump-oner was always seen as a 2nd seeder.

Here is a detailed example of what he explained, as it would show in a torrent page :

Seeders :
1st (the uploader) : completed 100%
no other seeder appears in the torrent page.

Leechers (sorted by completed amount, descending, as shown in the torrent page) :
1st : completed 98.7%
2nd : completed 2.5%
3rd : completed 2.3%
etc…
10th: completed 0.4%

1st leecher is more than likely a jump-on member (because ALL other leechers have completed 2.5% max)
Even if this 1st leecher got an incredible download speed (this should be seen in his line), I don't think he'd be able to download "normally" 98.7% when all other leechers only downloaded 2.5% max.

@Popper:

…If it had been re-named, it doesn't matter...

This sentence I didn't understand it.
I just tested again on one of my uploaded torrents (which includes 4 files) and the file name seems very important.
This is the test I did :

• delete the torrent file from my computer

• delete 3 files out of 4 in my folder

• rename the 4th file from movie4.avi to movie4.abc

• download the torrent from the torrent page

• deselect 3 files out of 4 (keeping only movie4.avi to download)

• receiving folder = the folder where movie4.abc is found on my computer

Then, as utorrent didn't find a movie named "movie4.avi" in my computer folder (which contains a renamed "movie.abc"), it starts to download the complete "movie4.avi" from other peers (though "movie.abc" and "movie.avi" are exactly the same file but utorrent doesn't check this)

So maybe did you mean something else by your sentence : "If it had been re-named, it doesn't matter" ?
Because in my test (and as wombat2 explained) it matters a lot

Oh I see…maybe you wrote "it doesn't matter" because it's very easy to rename a file before downloading the torrent, matching names between the torrent page and the receiving folder ?

As I write this, the jumper has upped their security to make them show up as Anonymous, leaving them as uncontactable, unprofileable, and unknowable, unless you start the torrent and grab their IP from your client.

Or unless you're a moderator and have eyes everywhere to see things other users can't >:D

Speaking of which, after looking at this mystery profile, it would appear that this is not the only torrent the user has done this with. As well, the speeds that this user can transfer at are astronomical compared to the speeds that are registering in your profile. This opens a wide range of possible things that one can frown upon. For example, if the point of uploading is to increase ratio and the tracker will direct more traffic to the faster connection because the system will tend to want to stick with the fastest transfer, this takes away from the amount of data that the original uploader is actually able to crank out.

My opinion is that in this case, such a thing is to be frowned upon if the intent of the original uploader was to increase their ratio, particularly if a low ratio warning either exists or is imminent.

This is happening to me again at http://tracker.gaytor.rent/details.php?id=98520&dllist=1#seeders

I have PM'd the user, explained the situation and asked them to stop. I also provided him a link to this thread.

I was just about to post this link… instead, I changed the link above to show the seeders.

As I write this, the jumper has upped their security to make them show up as Anonymous, leaving them as uncontactable, unprofileable, and unknowable, unless you start the torrent and grab their IP from your client.

Also, the jumper has uploaded over 100GB !, compared to Joe's 0.672 GB.  The jumper is getting over 150 times as much credit as the actual uploader!  I'd say that's a little extreme.

While I really want this, I'm going to wait until there are complete copies out there, so I don't give the pondscum any more credit, even though it will harm my own ratio.

The only programmatic solution that I can think of that might help a bit is to only give seed credit to the original uploader, by uploader name, until there is at least one full copy out there.  Of course, the jumper could selectively download a single small file from the torrent (if there are more than one files in it), and after they have been listed as "finished", then open the sluice gates and dump the whole thing up.  Given that, I'd suggest perhaps making it at least two copies.

a) any re-encoding will reduce the picture and sound quality. Better for AVI is to use VirtualDub with the stream copy option to cut off a few frames (though I don't even like that crunching)

b) it is not a question of hash, jump-oners can just take the torrent from here, deselect the files they don't got and point the download to the file the movie file they've got. If it had been re-named, it doesn't matter. In addition, as they got only let's say 98.7% of all the torrent's files, they will show up as leecher (though seeding only) and be more difficult to identify as early jump -oners. Even if that process may not be mastered, they might just download the additional pictures (1.3% in my example) to seed the rest.

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.

This is happening to me again at http://tracker.gaytor.rent/details.php?id=98520.

I have PM'd the user, explained the situation and asked them to stop. I also provided him a link to this thread. Currently there are no mods online, so I think I've PM'd cumeaternc per his request above.

Since this is at least the third time this has happened in the six weeks since I joined, I guess I will start shaving off a few frames from my initial uploads to alter the hash. A bit of a pain, but problem solved (I think).  :cool2:

The other way you can get around this problem is by adding a few pictures or something to the torrent to make sure that the original hash that someone else is using won't match yours. The only thing they'll be able to even come close to "seeding" is the video file, which will make them show up on the tracker, rather than a leecher.

I guess I will start shaving off a few frames from my initial uploads to alter the hash. A bit of a pain, but problem solved (I think).  :cool2:

For an avi. the only way of being 100% certain is to re-format or convert with a program such as "TMPGEnc" [ie change the dimensions or the video bit rate or the output format] but it would take my comp' about 6 hours to convert your example above.. [It is my understanding that fully working "very extended trial period" versions of TMPGEnc are avaiable on sites like TPB [torrents] & katz.cd [HotFile etc] if you are comfortable getting & installing]..

For wmvs you could try simply changing the format to .asf [for XP.. go to the folder holding the movie & click> Tools > Folder Options > View > empty the box Hide Extension for Known File Types > click Apply.. You should then see the .wmv after the Title.. Click the title once.. after a second click a second time.. move the cursor to after the v in wmv click & backspce out the .wmv & then type .asf
Repeat > Tools to >View & fill the Hide Ext box > Apply..
[NOTE: I have written the previous in a way that I would want something explained.. I'm not suggesting that YOU are unknowledged.. just showing that I am in need of the step by step method]..

Even though .asf will play on WMP or any other player.. Your torrent client should see it as a different file type & a hash check by the jumper will show 0%.. ie he can't jump on unless he does the above too..

(NB.: Edited the user ID out of the claim)

I have PM'd the user, explained the situation and asked them to stop. I also provided him a link to this thread. Currently there are no mods online, so I think I've PM'd cumeaternc per his request above.

Since this is at least the third time this has happened in the six weeks since I joined, I guess I will start shaving off a few frames from my initial uploads to alter the hash. A bit of a pain, but problem solved (I think).  :cool2:

We can't watch all the initial seed torrents permanently and any action against such rule breaking would be very random and therefore not fair. To install such rule, we would need our system to control such jumping on. However it must be able to distinguish between wanted jumping-on, .
&
To the awarness of members:
Early jumping on is only an issue here, not on public trackers or the .org site which got no minimum ratio rules.

MEGA THANKS for the explanation Uwe.. Finally I understand..

& You are right.. I keep thinking it's the "good old days" when I posted on all 3 sites &  wanted "jumpers on" to help seed.. [ie: "This is the version posted yesterday at "the other place".. If you got it from there please help seed it here"].. I need to change my mind set..

If you face issues connecting here, feel invited to PM me on the .org site. Same user name there.

Another note to your picture:
We don't have a rule against jumping-on during initial seeding, though we don't like it.

The reason is very simple: We can't watch all the initial seed torrents permanently and any action against such rule breaking would be very random and therefore not fair. To install such rule, we would need our system to control such jumping on. However it must be able to distinguish between wanted jumping-on, for example re-seed or supporting  older torrents. To programme such is not as easy as it may sound apparently. There may be even cases were an uploader re-upload an deleted dead torrent with the same hash other members are still running in their torrent programme and will "jump-on" without any intention. We use that on the missing torrent replacement as a wanted "feature".

To the awarness of members:
Early jumping on is only an issue here, not on public trackers or the .org site which got no minimum ratio rules.

Early in this flow, it was suggested to PM the early jumper to request to stop his seeding until the initial upload phase is finished. That is the best measure to take by any member seeing his initial seed being jumped on and not liking it. Please in a friendly member.

Because of the missing rule, Staff can't do much more than sending a PM, too. In addition early jumping on needs to be followed in a close timely manner, which easy acn be missed by the non-availability of the Staff.

We have as well no technical means to stop he seeding temporary, even if we would warn an account or force a passkey change. The torrent clients know already the peers IPs and will continue to be connected between each other. Besides that, those measures are to hard for members who may even don't know that they do something not nice to other members.

The answer is really quite simple..
I, like the vast majority of members, am in the habit of clicking “Browse” from the “Home Page” to get straight to the pr0n &, normally, have no interest in reading the “Forum” [see below].. or read the “Toolbar” beyond “Browse”..

.. Which is why [IMO & to get back on topic] it would be more friendly / helpful / effective for blackdid to add a jpg similar to the attached [note typo] in his torrent post where even idiots, like myself, would have to see it.. Surely it's better to educate, in a place it will be seen, & thereby avoid the rule break, rather that punish after the event..

The average “user” will only try to get help when he can't get his daily fix of Pr0n..
or, as in my case, wants to ask a question once every 3 years.. & do it in the wrong way through ignorance or apathy..

When the site first started & the membership was much smaller mods etc were more accepting of members mistakes & the forum was more relaxed & inviting.. Now that the membership is high the mods, understandably, can not spare the time to diplomatically explain for the 400th time an obvious solution to a problem.. The forum is a much more “shoot from the hip” / “say it as it is” / “take it or leave it” sort of place..

The fun & entertainment for both the mods & members has mostly gone on ALL Forum sites as members now “tweet” & “face book” amongst themselves.. Even the .org “shoutbox” is drying up..
Forums & shoutboxes , ircs etc are now mainly a place for just “preaching to the converted” or “brown nosing” to the mods & admins..

PS.. @ mgr: I actually considered PMing you on the .org site about my problem accessing the Forum here.. but decided it might not be a good idea to disturb your few minutes of “down time” over there with my problem here.. & I'm sooooo glad I didn't.. & THANKS to the mod & the ex-mod who both PMed me “there” with the advise:
“This problem sometimes occurs with MSIE. Close all Internet Explorer windows and open Internet Options in the control panel. Click the Delete Cookies button. You should now be able to login.”

I couldn't work out how to do it in Firefox.. but I appreciate the attempts at helping.. & MEGA THANKS to rocco for his solution:

Click "Profile" on the blue bar at the top of the page
Scroll to the end of the page and change your password, then click "Submit Changes"
Log out and log back in (actually last time it happened I didn't even have to logout just submit change of password.
Now try to get to the forum using the option on the blue bar at the top of the page and it should work fine

[off-topic]Message sent via an an Android powered phone and I just realized I can't use the quote option. Anyone else having the same issue?[/off-topic]

@mgr:

Sometimes I ask myself: how the f*** are users able to direct a simple support question (which btw can easily be answered when that users read the low-ratio warning they got) directly to an admin (in spite of the warning to don't do so) but are not able to ask why a menu item does not work for them???

It's a lost case mgr - a question that can't be answered (if maintaining the polite side of human nature :))

It is a rather interesting subject to how humanity is both doomed by its own stupidity and fundamentally insane. After all, we drum up ways of justifying the slaughter of the masses. Why do you think we invented politics and religion? :rotfl:

Sometimes I ask myself: how the f*** are users able to direct a simple support question (which btw can easily be answered when that users read the low-ratio warning they got) directly to an admin (in spite of the warning to don't do so) but are not able to ask why a menu item does not work for them???

It's a lost case mgr - a question that can't be answered (if maintaining the polite side of human nature :))

…
The main problem is that the vast majority of members don't, or can't, visit the Forum _..
…

Well - if you had used our help desk (or our chat) to ask that question - my reply template is the same since 2008 (when I was promoted to admin) and used thousands of times in the meantime.

Sometimes I ask myself: how the f*** are users able to direct a simple support question (which btw can easily be answered when that users read the low-ratio warning they got) directly to an admin (in spite of the warning to don't do so) but are not able to ask why a menu item does not work for them???_

Peace  :hug:

:hug:

To add to the richness of the debate.

What is worse than a jump-on seeder?
Answer: A duplicate seeder.

I posted a torrent two days ago. It was popuplar. Then interest died. C'est la vie.
I posted its follow up today.
Doing the obligatory search I found the first had been duplicated.

Of course mistakes happen, and I'm lucky that I'm not in desperate need of the bandwidth and points that duplicate took.
( That's 122 seed points, taking their gifted total to over 18,300 - that isn't a typo - and 1.83 GB of upload bandwidth, if you're interested )

Just food for thought and too tempting not to share with you.  :hug:

I think jumping on a torrent is immature as waiting for someone to make a nice meal and then stealing it from them.

If you are a victim of jumping on the do the following:

• PM the user and politely ask them to stop seeding your torrent until 3 or 4 other users have snatched it.

• PM and online mod and make us aware of the situation.  We will usually PM the user and note in there profile that they are jumping on torrents.

• Save screenshots of your torrent as proof.(Don't wait to long or other "real" leechers may snag you torrent)

From there the staff will deal with it. This is a pet peeve of mine so please let us know if we can help.

Hi Brandon, I like what you wrote and totally agree with it.
Would it be possible to include it in GT's rules ?

Dear wombat2 

I really think we should stop this now or it will never end.
But you force me to reply, as I notice that you read only what you want to read, why you ask ?

You're wrong when you write : "I offered you a  :hug: @ 10:43:07.. you then edited you post & added the "Btw" @ 10:52:08 & then accepted my :hug:  @ 10:54:24.."

Because I didn't add only a "Btw" sentence, I added 2 LONG chapters starting with "And I'm not, as you say, "on a witch hunt.. " plus another one starting with "(though I was 100% sure the same movie…", just re-read better my 2 quoted paragraphs you pasted in your message !

It took me several minutes to add/edit these paragraphs and you had already answered at 10h43 when I was still editing my message : you got to understand that if I start to edit my message at, let's say, 10h42, then your answer is not in the Forum, as demonstrated right now, here :
http://community.gaytor.rent/index.php?topic=14325.msg62594#msg62594

(you see i posted a test message at 6:00pm and immediately edited it, waiting patiently more than 10 min, just to make sure that the "Edit time" is the time when you END the edit and not when you START the edit)

So yes, while I was modifying my message, you posted your reply (that I couldn't see) and at 10h52, when I ended my editing, I read your answer and immediately hugged you at 10h54

Concerning the "ban" thing : I never wrote that a user should be banned the FIRST time he's been caught jumping-on a fresh torrent.

Read again what you quoted : "Staff  warns the user who jumps on (with a pic proof in Staff's hands) and in case same user is caught a 2nd time…"
Where do you read I want someone banned when he's caught jumpin-on for the 1st time ?

Also, why don't you quote what I answered Amice yestersday : "it should be possible to block (momentarily) his access to GT tracker ?"

Do you see this "momentarily" word that makes all the difference ?

I'm not for banning anyone without warnings (ok, maybe 2 warnings should be better than one), but if there was an explicit rule concerning this jump-on issue, and same members who have been warned once or twice keep on jumping-on, what would you like to do ? To let them endlessly jump-on fresh torrents, no matter how many warnings they got ?
Sorry I don't agree with that point of view.

Concerning the "Thanks" given by leechers to the original poster : I would like to tell you that, believe it or not, I got several great uploaders who thank ME (not on porn sites) because I thank them not only by a cold "thanks" but with long public passionate answers (concerning for example a Stevie Wonder concert or any kind of concert or movie or album that I really enjoyed), explaining them what moved me in this special event and sharing my passion with all. They tell me it's because of detailed answers like that they enjoy uploading stuff, because robotic "thanks" are really too cold, at least for me.

And If I was "selfish" as you said, I won't give away all my Seed bonus points to members or Mods (the ones who gift users) . I've been kindly gifted SBP by great members, so it's normal to give all my SBP (present and future) to these persons.

Well, this being said, why not trying to forget all this and keep this place cool ?
I've heard that you're a great poster with genuine torrents and I respect that.

What drives me nuts is that there are no strict rules to prevent this jump-on issue.
I'm very happy (more than you'll ever think) that joeblow123 could upload his torrent and fix a bit his ratio issue because I like it when people are happy, it's a warm feeling when you feel that people are happy, don't you feel same ?

What made me really sad is joeblow123's 1st message (and its crying icon) and to know that a guy like him, having a ratio issue, couldn't upload his torrent by himself because some "helping hands" jumped on his torrent in its initial phase.

That's why I would like Brandon's great sentences (quoted at the beginning of this message) become a rule in this site, then only "jump-on" members will understand, after being PM, that they're doing something wrong.

Peace  :hug: