Jump-on / re-seed during new uploads

[blackdid]

@mgr:

…Of course you are right: jumping on a new upload is extremely unfair too!

Hi Mgr,

Thx for your concern, I know (and you wrote it) that you don't like at all this "jumping on" situation, same for all Mods here. I PM both users, and a kind Mod did same from helpdesk.

Mgr, in your answer, you're writing : "which mainly rely on "denunciation"
But denunciation is when you can't prove anything and you make something public by giving only names.

Now if you got the proof in your hand (as the attached pic you will find at the end of this message, though I greyed their both names because we're on the Forum) and if this proof goes to Admins and Mods (as I sent this pic to the helpdesk…with users names showing of course), it's not denunciation for me.

The only way to catch "jump on" users is in real time, while the torrent is uploaded until it has been snatched 3-4 times.
If the concerned uploader doesn't do it, who will do it and alert Mods ?
Because if nothing is done, a user who jumps on once will do it again and again : he doesn't prepare anything (the pics, description, torrent...) and takes all credit and ratio that was supposed to go to the original uploader, it is BAD 

Mods don't have time to control from time to time the torrent search window, in case they find a new torrent with 2-3 seeders, when the Snatched column shows 0 : this could be a jump on torrent and it should be immediately controlled.

Anyway, before I paste here what I wrote in my PM to both "jump on" users, and the reply I got from one of them, I would like to say that something has to be done about this situation : personnaly I just did 2 tries to avoid this situation so no one will be able to "jump on" my future new torrents uploads. First try wasn't really successful but 2nd try was more promising : I feel that you won't like this 2nd method but if I have to keep on uploading torrents with a clear mind and not track jump-on users until my torrent has been snatched by 3-4 users, ending in deleting my own torrent after a few minutes because of jump-on users, then I'll use this 2nd method.

---

From blackdid to both "jump-on" users

Hi xxx,

Why you and yyy jump on my torrent after 5 min I start a new upload ?
[Alphamale] Pumped And Fucked (2010)

You force me to delete it immediately because I don't want you and yyy to take credit of my torrent.
Now I placed a message in the Forum, took a real time pic of your 2 names as "jump on" seeders and certainly Staff will ask me that pic.

It's not fair at all to jump on new uploads :

• You don't let me upload a whole copie of the torrent
• You use my preparation (especially the pics preparation, the description), i.e all my work to prepare.
• As my upload speed is low, I won't gain nothing in the end
• It's very impolite.

The RULE is : if you already got the movie (as you had) you can join as seeder only when there are 3-4 users who downloaded the movie totally (i.e. the original uploader, me, was able to upload at least a whole copy of the movie). If they are at least 3-4 who snatched the torrent and 3-4 seeders, then you can add yourself as seeder and jump on a torrent, in case you already got a full copy of the movie.

But with your jump-on (and yyy who did same as you), maybe in the end I upload 20% of the movie, and you 40% and yyy 40%, depending on our respective upload speed.

Especially my upload speed is maximum 28Kb/s !
I hope you understand the situation and never do it again

Thx
blackdid

---

Reply from user xxx to blackdid

Hi my dear friend.

Yes, i know the rules. Let me tell you two things:

• When i start upload, its already been seeded by 3 users.
• Take a look in my upload list. Most of my files have been "jumped on" by a infinite number of members of GT. I make contact with the mods and i was informed that nothing could be done. Like a infinite number of uploads, i take a look at the number of seeders before start upload.  Im sorry if you're been offended, my intention its not take your credit, its help with upload, just if. Like i said, I've gone through this before.

My best regards.

xxx

---

2nd PM from blackdid to xxx

Hi xxx

Thx for your reply
Here are 2 links :

---

(here a link of the attached pic, but showing their both names)

You notice in the precedent pic that :

• It was seeded by 2 users (including me) and not 3 users as you wrote in your reply
• What is more important is this when you write : "I take a look at the number of seeders before start upload"

But you're mistaken in doing that because there are 2 very different situations :

1. If it's a NEW torrent (as it is in the pic), you have to take a look at the number of users who SNATCHED the torrent (i.e who downloaded it completely from me)

What do you see in the pic ?
You see that ZERO users have snatched the torrent, which means that nobody has downloaded the movie from me at the moment the pic is taken !
In that case, you and yyy know exactly what you are doing (jumping on) when you add yourself as seeders, and this is very bad because you both will take all the credit instead of me (i.e you won't allow me to upload a full copy of the movie, which isn't acceptable at all)

2. If it is an OLD torrent, then you will see many users who already SNATCHED the torrent
   Then there is absolutely no problem to add yourself as seeder, no matter if you already got a full copy of the movie.

---

(here a link of the thread we are now)

This is the Forum link I opened as I was so angry of this situation, you will see Mgr's anwer (he's one of the 2 Admins of the site) and though he can't technically stop it, he doesn't like this situation at all as you will read him

---

You write : "Most of my files have been "jumped on" by a infinite number of members of GT"
No I don't think so, what you mean is, after your downloaders have got their copy from your new upload, they start to seed it and you are many seeders : this is the NORMAL way in torrents, many seeders who seed the same file after they download it from the original uploader !!!
It happens with me all the time and it's 100% normal.

What is NOT normal, is to add yourself as seeder when there is ZERO snatcher like in the attached pic : this means you already had a full copy of the movie when you added yourself as seeder.

In case you want to do that, you have to verify how many persons SNATCHED the torrent ?
If you find there are 3-4 then you can add yourself as seeder because you will know that the original uploader was able to upload a full copy of his torrent to these 3-4 users, and probably in a few seconds there will be many other seeders (because other users have certainly downloaded already 97-98% of the file)

In case this is not very clear, don't hesitate to ask more or to reply in the Forum : all Mods or Mgr will confirm you what I wrote now

Merry Christmas xxx,
blackdid

---

Mgr, Mods, in case I wrote some wrong technical info to user xxx, please let us know so we'll improve our knowledge.
Thanks

[blackdid]

Now that we started this "jump on" thread, I have to let you know the following of our PM with xxx (who answered me just right now)

---

2nd PM from xxx to blackdid

HI!
Let's clear a few misunderstood. I'm not a new user, and i know the rules, ok?
I really made a mistake, offending you. I have been warned and my download-rights have been taken.
This doesnt mean that I act to harm you, or wanted to offend you, it was an act without thinking.
I'm sorry, ok? Its not an excuse for what happened, but I've already been punished. It was a big misunderstood. Won't happen again.
Like i said, I've gone through this before. A NEW upload, not an old, I started seed my file and a few moments later, appear 2 seeders with 100% complete. They already had the same file. I know what is it, i'm not stupid.
Sorry again, and i hope we can pass through this.

Merry Christmas for you too, and a happy new year.

My best regards.
xxx

---

I won't answer xxx anymore because one has to know when to stop a conversation, there's no need to make things get worse by arguing, which doesn't not mean I agree with him, because I don't.

Why is that ?
Because in his first PM he wrote : "Most of my files have been "jumped on" by a infinite number of members of GT"
And in his 2nd PM : "A NEW upload, not an old, I started seed my file and a few moments later, appear 2 seeders with 100% complete"

So you understand now, in his 2nd answer, that it happened to him already (to be "jumped on") but it probably happened a FEW times. Alas in his 1st PM he said he had been "jumped on" in MOST of his files by an INFINITE numbers of users, which seems impossible !!!

Who is going to believe that in "most of your new uploads" there are "infinite" users who already got the same file you started to upload and "jump on" your new uploads before 3-4 leechers completed a full download ?

His erroneous sentence in his 1st PM made me think he was mistaken and didn't know what "jump on" means etc…

---

Ok, he seems to be a nice guy, he apologized and wrote he "won't do it again"
I'm sorry his download rights have been disabled for a few days, but isn't it the only way for users to learn what to do and what not to do when they don't follow the rules ?
In case one day I do same "jump on" on anyone, I ask officially to be punished same way !

During my 32 uploads, I've been "jumped on" twice.
First time was in attached pics 1-2, when user zzz jumped on my fresh torrent : please note in pic 1 that my torrent hasn't been snatched (snatched = 0) and user zzz is a "jump on" seeder, also note the best leecher downloaded 63% of the torrent.

In pic 2, you'll notice the best leecher has downloaded 94% of the file and what are my stats ?
I hardly uploaded 288Mb (when the movie size is 549MB as shown in pic 1)  :cry2:
And my "jump on" seeder zzz proudly uploaded 465MB
A few minutes later, many leechers had complete their download, which means I had been able to upload only 50% of my OWN movie (instead of 100% or more), because of jump-on seeder zzz  

Pic3 shows another problem and this is maybe what Mgr meant : this pic doesn't concern me at all but I found a "jump on" user while browsing in the torrent search window.

My question is : what are the options you have when you discover nadvertently the situation described in pic 3 ?

1. You do nothing ("it doesn't concern me, why should I interfere and alert anyone ?")
2. Or you immediately send a message to HelpDesk (without sending them any pic) and let Mods solve that issue.
3. Or you take a snapshot, upload it on BitBucket, alert HelpDesk (including the Bitbucket link) and let Mods solve that issue with a proof in their hands.

Though I don't like a lot options 2) and 3) because it seems to be a kind of "denunciation" (as named it Mgr) I don't like at all option 1) which is : "why should I do anything if it doesn't concern me ?"

Ok it doesn't concern you, but this guy you caught "jumping on"  could one day jump on YOUR torrent, then you'll regret you hadn't done anything in time, when you caught him with proof, even if it didn't concern one of your torrent.

How do you want to get rid of "jump on" users if members who catch them in real-time don't alert Mods immediately ?
Guys, in case you have suggestions concerning this issue, please feel free to express your point of view.

[mgr]

Sorry for being a bit late with my answer  

As a first thing let me say something about the usage of my expression "denunciation". In my posting i intentionally wrote that in apostrophes to express that I prefer technical possibilities to stop unfair behavior opposed to member reports (with or without proof).

And just at the start:
@blackdid:

My question is : what are the options you have when you discover nadvertently the situation described in pic 3 ?

1. You do nothing ("it doesn't concern me, why should I interfere and alert anyone ?")
2. Or you immediately send a message to HelpDesk (without sending them any pic) and let Mods solve that issue.
3. Or you take a snapshot, upload it on BitBucket, alert HelpDesk (including the Bitbucket link) and let Mods solve that issue with a proof in their hands.

1. isn't an option IMHO - that is why we have the report button in our forum, in user profiles, in PM handling, in torrent details …

Not to mention your already stated reasons against this option.

The problem with the report solution and your option 2 is in fact the proof. Not all mods on the site can react immediately on such requests (reports or help desk request) - so it may take a couple of hours until we can see the torrent file - only after the visible proof is gone and the only remaining solution is to deduct what has happened some hours ago. Of course there are "easy" cases where the torrent is still not snatched and several seeders, but in other cases there are 200 seeders already and more than 500 entries in the snatched list. It takes a lot of efforts to find a "jumping on" seeder then - if ever possible.

BTW: you can also include a bitbucket link in a report-reason

So: the only remaining option to handle such cases is your option 3) or, the solution you selected too, to PM that seeder directly. I hope that such problems can be resolved also in that way

As you can see we (staff) try to solve such problems as best as we can. As I said at the start of my reply: I prefer technical solutions over reports, but alas the BitTorrent protocol does not offer such a solution and to manually search for such cases might be possible if we have 30 moderators additionally who are experienced enough to watch new uploads for their first seeding time to detect those cases - but: have a look at our staff page - we have enough problems to approve uploaded torrents in a timely manner and, additionally, check samples of auto approved uploads

[leatherbear]

Well, because the evidence in this case was so obvious I reacted quickly and harshly on purpose.

5 days warning and 5 days with out download rights. Both users no better and so I hammered them harder than I might have done with 2 other members. It is also my intentions to do this in every case I come across with the evidence to prove the claim.

If I am wrong and need to be corrected now is the time for that talk…..........

BTW: I only heard from one of the accused so I am assuming they both got the message.

[blackdid]

@mgr:

Sorry for being a bit late with my answer  

So you like that blushing icon, uh ?
Lol remember how I told you it would be useful  

@mgr:

As a first thing let me say something about the usage of my expression "denunciation". In my posting i intentionally wrote that in apostrophes to express that I prefer technical possibilities to stop unfair behavior opposed to member reports (with or without proof).

I got an idea, what about this technical possibillity ?
A control to add during NEW torrents only : as soon as seeder #2 appears, the program controls how many persons already snatched the torrent : if you find 0, then seeder #2 is a "jump-on" seeder.
Well…it seems too simple to be the solution, right ?

Someone should detail ALL the different existing cases when you're 100% sure a 2nd seeder is a "jump-on" seeder (not forgetting dead torrents who are reactivated etc... though these torrents should have more than 0 snatcher, no ?)

But what intrigues me a bit is this : when a user logs in to GT, what is he going to do in most cases ?
1) He wants to download something new, so he'll enter the torrent search window and check what's new since his last visit, then starts to download if he's interested by a new movie he doesn't already get : this is an easy case.

2) OR he wants to upload a NEW movie, so he'll enter the torrent search window to search for duplicates, and when he's sure there are not, he will start to prepare his new upload : this is also an easy case.

(I won't describe another possible situation which consists of not entering GT, but simply add an OLD torrent in the client program to seed it again : that's easy too and will never harm anyone)

3) Now I think of another case that might end in a voluntarily…or involuntarily "jump-on"
During 1) or 2) , when the user is searching in the torrent window, he suddenly finds a hot torrent and this may happen :

3a) Whether the user KNOWS 100% that he got the movie on his hard drive (maybe he was in case 2) [checking for dups] and it is the EXACT movie he was checking for dups before he uploads it but, alas, another user was quicker than him and already uploaded it as a fresh torrent. Or maybe he was in case 1) [searching what to download] and realized while browsing [for downloads], that he too had this fresh torrent on his hard drive and intented to upload it later)

Now this user may be a bit "angry" because he won't be able to upload his new torrent (as another user just did it before him) and he'll "jump-on" the original uploader (probably after having checked the file size to make sure it's exactly the same movie, which isn't innocent at all), no matter how many users have already snatched this file or not, no matter if he takes credits from the original uploader or not.

Btw, I got a question : are the  "jump-on" rules clearly explained in GT rules or FAQ ?
Because I searched right now and didn't find them anymore (all I know about "jump-on" comes from Mgr, Uwe and other Mods, but it's all Forum related, not GT rules/faq related)

The only thing I found concerning "jump on" in Rules or FAQ is the following link…but it has nothing to do with the "upload jump-on" we're talking now, because this FAQ link concerns "download jump-on" :
http://tracker.gaytor.rent/faq.php#46

In case a "jump-on" rule ("join seeding" or "re-seed") has to be added in the FAQ, why not using one of Mgr's preceding explanations, or Uwe's 1st chapter in the attached pic, where he explains it really well ? (btw, this attached pic is a part of a Forum topic, so there's no problem with user names in it)

So as you see, a possibility is the user is honest and doesn't know he's harming anyone when doing a "jump-on", in case it's not clearly stated in the Rules / FAQ , not everyone consult how many persons have aready snatched the torrent etc…
Or the user knows exactly he's doing a wrong thing, but how can we be sure if the user is honest or not ?

3b) Whether the user DOESN'T REMEMBER he already downloaded this movie from another site (so he got a full copy on his hard drive) and now he clicks on the torrent, thinking honestly he's starting to download it from GT (when in fact he'll join seeding a fresh torrent !)

So all of this isn't simple at all, what do you think ?
Mgr will certainly tell us if the (too easy ?) technical solution I described could help or not : this would help GT to get rid of jump-on users, whether these "jumps-on" are voluntary or not.

[MrMazda]

Blackdid:

As far as my understanding goes, the rules of jump-on are more "implied rules". Some staff may argue that we are a filesharing site, so really sharing files is the whole point of the mattter. Other staff may not view jump on seeders very kindly on a new upload. It would also depend on the nature of the jump on. I personally take a viewpoint of it's not a nice thing to jump on to seeding a new upload because it cheats the uploader of the full credit of the 1.000 ratio of the file. That being said however, I cannot say that my personal view is nescessarily that of this site. Perhaps mgr can shed some light on the subject at some point.

Either way, jump on seeders don't bother me because I have a seedbox (which I'm expanding), which maintains my ratio on an upward incline on its own giving me 12 SBP / day. I cannot say that it is fair to expect all users to have the same kind of setup for a variety of reasons. So really, that's kind of a subject that I'd like to see a a more even loosely described rule regarding jump on seeders.

[blackdid]

@MrMazda:

…I personally take a viewpoint of it's not a nice thing to jump on to seeding a new upload because it cheats the uploader of the full credit of the 1.000 ratio of the file. That being said however, I cannot say that my personal view is nescessarily that of this site. Perhaps mgr can shed some light on the subject at some point.

Hey MrMazda  
Then I guess we all agree it's not a nice thing at all to jump on during a fresh upload.
You're asking about Mgr's opinion : he clearly wrote this in his 1st answer : "jumping on a new upload is extremely unfair too!"
Better not talk about Uwe who can't stand it, when he writes in the precedent attached pic : "That is clearly something we do not like to see!"

Btw, you note both of them ended their sentences with exclamation marks, and let me tell you that when those 2 quiet guys use exclamation marks, it's because they don't like at all this situation.

What bothers me in jump-on is not only the ratio problem : I spend a long time preparing the descriptive pics, more than you'll imagine. Why should we accept that a guy who hasn't prepared anything jumps on our fresh torrents when he didn't prepare anything (description, torrent preparation, PICS prepared, numbered and sorted etc…)

As I did for my last "jumped-on" torrent, I prefer 100 times to delete my fresh torrent after 10 minutes of upload, as soon as I notice a jump-on user, instead of letting him seed with me and take credit for something he hasn't prepared at all.
It's a pity for the leechers who started to download and don't understand why their download stopped suddenly (the torrent being deleted) . It's a pity too in case the "jump-on" seeder was honest (as described in my precedent message), that's why a technical possibility would be welcome in case it allows to reject seeder #2 when there are 0 snatchers.

Also, as you suggested, it would be great to resume this "jump-on" situation in GT rules / FAQ , so all users would be warned (ok ok, many users don't read rules / FAQ but that's their problem : they're supposed to read them and they agreed with them when they registered)

Btw, why not sending from time to time a grouped message to ALL GT users ?
Something like : "Warning : in case you already got (from another source than GT) a movie that is currently uploaded by a user, don't add yourself as seeder in his torrent until his torrent has been snatched 3-4 times. If you don't respect this rule, you're "jumping on" his fresh torrent, taking his credits and this is NOT tolerated. If you're caught doing this etc..."

I'm sure that if ALL users receive this same message, the few "jump-on" users who do it intentionnaly will think twice before doing it again...unless they're poker players.

---

Also I would like to make a clear distinction between two different things :

1. When a user is uploading a fresh torrent, he's asked to keep on seeding until there are 3-4 seeders (i.e 3 other seeders + him), then only he can stop seeding (when he sees THREE other seeders)

2. When a user wants to "jump on" a torrent, he should (imho) only check how many users have snatched the torrent. Do we agree with that ?
   If he finds that 3 users already snatched the torrent, then he should be allowed to add himself as seeder...even if there is only 1 seeder. This should solve both cases :

• If it's a new torrent, and it has been snatched 3 times (or more), there will certainly be more than one seeder.
• But if it's an old torrent, it's possible that there is only 1 seeder (plus many snatchers)

My point is the number of "snatchers" is much more important than the number of seeders, when it comes to the "jump on" issue.
In case I'm mistaken, please let me know, thanks 

[leatherbear]

This situation will take some time to fix but we ( Staff ) must attack this problem with serious intentions to end this practice.

Certainly the rules need to include a firm warning not to practice this "jumping on" and a specific punishment for the first offense and etc….. And needs to be announced on the front page as a warning to read this newly revised rule.

I am not sure how easily this Mass PM is with our system. Only Mike could answer that question.

[beercan]

1 question that got me confused … if they have the file from elsewhere, why don't they just create and take credit for it?
why wait for some1 else to create?

I'm not sure but i suspect this might work to prevent "jump-in".
making minor alterations to the file you have should cause the file to acquire a different characteristic and whoever trying to perform the jump may find that their existing file lost.
theoretical and might generate some bad blood. I'd prefer if there's no need for such a measure but ... personal preference prevails.

eg.
-editing the file to change the size. (adding/cutting a 5 second intro or credit)
-change the encoding.
-[contributor input]

p/s: if you choose to add stuff, please refrain from adding too much redundant stuff. I had the misfortune of download some files that turned out 1/2 the video was repeating itself!
turned out that the video was only 1gb but downloaders were forced to leech 2gb++ just to watch. :cry2:

[stealfire]

This is not an unusual marketing ploy.  Many studios, such as Falcon, repackage their videos in various collections and "specials".  For them, it's all about the money.

[stealfire]

..pretty pictures aside, back to the main issue Pleeeze: 
There are many things software cannot pick up, which is all the reason for rules to be in place.  Software can't recognize images of under age actors, so we have a rule forbidding these things and depend on the vigilance of our members to enforce the rules. There's no reason a rule against seed stealing shouldn't be in place.  Policing may not be consistent, but a rule in place will give initial seeders the option to report such behavior.  With no rule, the reporting of seed stealing appears a mere whiney complaint.  With a rule in place, reporting the activity is a legitimate attempt to keep all in check and hold members responsible for their behavior. Certainly moderators and staff have not previously hesitated to add to the list of rules currently in place - with or without mention of source code.

As with the original poster, I take the time to create and upload torrents and expect to receive the benefits that go along with doing so.  Not out of some sort of greed or need to be a hero, but because balancing my ratio is a basic necessity to remaining an active, responsible member and is necessary to moving on up the Gaytorrent ladder (I upload and upload, and have yet to be allowed more than a 2 torrent limit;  And the rank of "power user" seems like pie in the sky at this point. But, I digress…).

Before reading this forum, I had no idea that seed stealing was a problem (or even possible).  Apparently neither did the seed stealer in question: He was merely attempting to super seed. With no rule in place he had no idea what he was doing is wrong - or at least frowned upon.  Isn't this what rules are for: a listing of what is and is not allowed?  No source code changes or even additional programing required.

I sincerely enjoy these serious discussions and enjoy members actually taking the time to discuss and debate issues relevant to the site. Apathy is such an easy pussy cop out.

[trukr]

I'm happy when people help me seed my uploads. Even more so now that my ISP is enforcing a 300GB data cap (up/down).

It is bad practice to cut in front of people who are trying to fix their ratio, I agree. I don't think this should be added to the rules tho.
What if someone is uploading at turtle speed, crippled handicapped turtle speed even? No one likes slow downloads.
What if the uploader already has a decent enough ratio and someone jumped on the torrent who has a very poor ratio and is trying to repair it?

I'd prefer to develop a guideline rather than enforce a rule.

@beercan:

1 question that got me confused … if they have the file from elsewhere, why don't they just create and take credit for it?
why wait for some1 else to create?

No need to wait IMO. Odds are it's bound to happen anyhow, and the majority time the "original" uploader got it from somewhere else himself instead of ripping it. People should upload here first anyways, right? ;D

@beercan:

p/s: if you choose to add stuff, please refrain from adding too much redundant stuff. I had the misfortune of download some files that turned out 1/2 the video was repeating itself!
turned out that the video was only 1gb but downloaders were forced to leech 2gb++ just to watch. :cry2:

Are those torrents here? Do you remember which ones they are?

[blackdid]

Well this is really interesting now, thanks to newcomers in this topic, mrmazda, beercan, stealfire (thanks for your kind PM),  trukr (who really should be more present in this forum, see how interesting is his last message and the good questions he asks) 

Trukr asks : "What if someone is uploading at turtle speed, crippled handicapped turtle speed even? No one likes slow downloads"
( I laughed so much, reading "crippled handicapped turtle speed even" :rotfl: )
Well it's sure that having an avg upload speed of 214Kb/s (as shown under your avatar in the left column, also it's probably a bit greater while you upload a fresh torrent) can't compare to my 28Kb/s maximum (same for MrMazda I guess, and many others)

So "turtle speed" is sure very relative, depending on each user's avg ul/dl speeds.
That's why each user should know what is the maximum size of any fresh torrent he should be allowed to upload, so other users won't have to wait indefinitely. I remember having asked this to a Mod who told me 1Gb should be my max (i.e 28Kb/s => 100Mb/h => 1Gb/10h)

And in fact I stick to this rule : if you search for "blackdid" (unquoted) in the torrent search window, sorted by torrent size descending, I never uploaded anything bigger than 600Mb in my 31 uploads…because I don't want downloaders to wait too long before they got a full copy of the torrent.

I remember too that a new discussion in another topic showed that Uwe, Mgr etc... hadn't a problem while waiting many hours / days during a single download, in case they wanted the torrent really bad ("torrent = patience" they said lol)

So it's a real difficult question , but if guys who have a "slow" upload connection (like mine, constant 28Kb/s) know that they shouldn't upload BIG torrents of 2 or 3GB (not talking about full DVD's) then there's no reason for us to accept that a "jump on" seeder appears too early (i.e. until 3-4 leechers snatched my fresh torrent) , not talking about all the torrent preparation done by the original uploader.

I have a suggestion : maybe our profile should reflect if we agree (or not) to have a "jump-on" seeder in our fresh torrents : this could be an additional field in our profile and each one could answer yes or no.

• In case you have a great upload speed, you could answer yes
• In case you got a low upload speed but absolutely no ratio problem, you could also answer yes
• In case you got a low upload speed and ratio problem, you could answer no

Well each one would answer as he likes, and each one could change his "no" to "yes" the day his ratio issue has been solved. This, added to a programmed condition (if fresh torrent => if 2nd seeder => check profile : if user doesn't accept "jump-on" => if snatched = 0 => reject 2nd seeder cause he is a "jump-on" seeder) could maybe help ?

This solution could also answer your 2nd question : "What if the uploader already has a decent enough ratio and someone jumped on the torrent who has a very poor ratio and is trying to repair it?"
In case the uploader has a decent enough ratio, he could have selected "Yes, I accept jump-on" in his profile 

[blackdid]

Thx amice  

You'll probably delete all these 5 last messages (starting with yours, asking if there was a problem to merge)
After those 5 messages are deleted, please delete also the last line(s) of my last message, starting with :
"PS: I'd like to add a link to an older "jump-on" topic …"

(these last lines are different from the ones you already scratched, where you wrote : "amice: this posting got inaccurate after merging, will be deleted somewhat later...")

Also, stealfire got 2 dup messages (just before trukr message) with only the 1st line being different between them. Please feel free to delete one of them.

Thanks a lot for your hard work and sorry for the inconvenience  

[MrMazda]

I think it won't exactly be easy to establish a clear cut guideline on the subject. There are many factors to take into account with jump-on torrents. Upload speeds only begins to scratch the surface. File size, the user's ratio, etc. are all contributing factors to whether or not such a practice is acceptable.

While there lies the arguement of it increases the download speed because nobody likes a slow download, this is not the only factor involved. I think taking a look at the ratio of both the uploader and the jump on seeder is an essential key to take into account. For example, if a user is trying to fix their ratio because of a low ratio warning and a jump on seeder with a ratio of like 6.2 for example jumps on to try and cheat the user out of good and fair ratio, personally, I'd want to punch the jump on in the face. No… I don't condone violence, but sometimes it is nescessary to give users a few light slams every now and then :rotfl:

On the other hand, you could argue that this is a file sharing site, and as such, the purpose of this site is to share files. If the purpose of this site is to share files, then in theory a jump on seeder would be a much praised thing. That being said however, as previously mentioned, not all circumstances ar the same. As a filesharing site, I believe it to be in everyone's best interest to establish a more set guideline. Where's the distinguishing point between acceptable use and crossing the line of "No acts of douchebaggery"?

So... All things taken into account, again I go back to the same question. What is the ratio and objective of the uploader in this case, and what is the ratio of the jump on seeder? Is there an act of douchebaggery in this case?

[trukr]

Some users don't finish seeding their torrents, or don't seed straight on through at least until they've distributed 3-4 copies.
Jumping on such torrents ensures their availability. Just another example of where jumping on a torrent can help.
Of course no one can predict what the uploader will do.

I think that the people who jump on torrents mean well in most cases.

I'd like to see evidence that this is some sort of crisis before we work on making more rules. We have plenty enough rules already.
I'm not against forming a guideline or rule for this if there is a true need for it.

IMO people who jump on torrents help everyone out way more often than they hurt an uploader, and I have my doubts as to how often uploaders are really hurt by people jumping on their torrent.

@blackdid:

Well this is really interesting now, thanks to newcomers in this topic, mrmazda, beercan, stealfire (thanks for your kind PM),  trukr (who really should be more present in this forum, see how interesting is his last message and the good questions he asks)  

I'd like to have time to be here more, for months I haven't been able to. There were times where I haven't been here in over a month. My BF had some serious health problems (and still has some), it's busy season on my real job, and I had some nasty problems at work too. I hope to be here regularly again soon. Things seem to be settling down, which is good because I don't think I could have taken much more stress.

@blackdid:

Trukr asks : "What if someone is uploading at turtle speed, crippled handicapped turtle speed even? No one likes slow downloads"
( I laughed so much, reading "crippled handicapped turtle speed even" :rotfl: )
Well it's sure that having an avg upload speed of 214Kb/s (as shown under your avatar in the left column, also it's probably a bit greater while you upload a fresh torrent) can't compare to my 28Kb/s maximum (same for MrMazda I guess, and many others)

So "turtle speed" is sure very relative, depending on each user's avg ul/dl speeds.
That's why each user should know what is the maximum size of any fresh torrent he should be allowed to upload, so other users won't have to wait indefinitely. I remember having asked this to a Mod who told me 1Gb should be my max (i.e 28Kb/s => 100Mb/h => 1Gb/10h)

And in fact I stick to this rule : if you search for "blackdid" (unquoted) in the torrent search window, sorted by torrent size descending, I never uploaded anything bigger than 600Mb in my 31 uploads…because I don't want downloaders to wait too long before they got a full copy of the torrent.

I remember too that a new discussion in another topic showed that Uwe, Mgr etc... hadn't a problem while waiting many hours / days during a single download, in case they wanted the torrent really bad ("torrent = patience" they said lol)

So it's a real difficult question , but if guys who have a "slow" upload connection (like mine, constant 28Kb/s) know that they shouldn't upload BIG torrents of 2 or 3GB (not talking about full DVD's) then there's no reason for us to accept that a "jump on" seeder appears too early (i.e. until 3-4 leechers snatched my fresh torrent) , not talking about all the torrent preparation done by the original uploader.

Your upload speed isn't as slow as what I had in mind for a turtle…or crippled turtle. I was thinking about people who upload at -2kB to 5kB max.
In that situation I think leechers would love people jumping on the torrent to help them out (file sharing isn't ALL about the uploader ;)).

I don't agree with you having any upload restrictions being placed on you concerning the file size. It would be OK if you uploaded much larger files such as full DVD for example, or even a site rip of several GB. Getting stuff slowly, eventually, one day, is better than never at all.
Ignore the mod who has enslaved you!!  :nutki::P I have set you free!   I have blessed you with my divine permission to do so.   Carry on.
Seriously tho, I don't agree with that, and there is no rule or guideline even. Most of all, it doesn't make sense. Anyone can upload what they want size-wise (as long as no rules are broken such as the collection rules), and leechers can be patient and hope other seeders join in if it's slow going.

I agree with most of the rest of your post regarding a guideline.
IMO the programming part wouldn't be beneficial overall for the reasons I've already given throughout my posts. It would hurt the community while maybe helping only a few.

[blackdid]

I was about to add a comment but it was so sooooooo long that I just saved it as draft, waiting to be re-worked lol

[Popper]

I even don't see why you shouldn't upload DVD (including double layer). In 2 to 4 days it is all done and the 'slow' download speed concerns only the initial upload period.

[MrMazda]

I would tend to agree with Uwe on that one. As far as the download goes, once one or two users have snagged it, there are more available people with the whole file to download from

[blackdid]

Trukr, Uwe, MrMazda : thanks for your input  

@beercan:

…I'm not sure but i suspect this might work to prevent "jump-in".
making minor alterations to the file you have should cause the file to acquire a different characteristic and whoever trying to perform the jump may find that their existing file lost.
theoretical and might generate some bad blood. I'd prefer if there's no need for such a measure but ... personal preference prevails.

eg.
-editing the file to change the size. (adding/cutting a 5 second intro or credit)
-change the encoding.
-[contributor input]

Beercan, this is exactly what I was experimenting !

1) 1st try : alter the last byte of an .avi file (with an hexadecimal editor able to re-write part of files…or even sectors on your hard drive, that's a dangerous program !)

This 1st try didn't give good results, why you ask ?
Because the altered avi file kept its original size and only 1 byte is altered in it, so the "jump-on" guy (who has a copy of the non altered movie) will have his torrent client program download...only the last block of the file (which contains the altered byte) then immediately seed the whole altered movie : he'll jump on your torrent after 1 second, instead of jumping on it after 0 seconds, so you won't get rid of him with this 1st try.

Also, some movies (like mp4 files) need important informations found at the very end of the file, so it maybe dangerous to alter the last byte if you're not sure of its "importance", depending on the file extension.

2) 2nd try : alter the whole .avi file by cutting 1/10th of seconds at the end of the file.
This can be done with good multimedia programs who extract parts of the movie without any recompression (though I guess all key frames are rewritten, but the movie itself stays unchanged) . It takes a bunch of seconds to extract 1GB, depending on your hard drive speed.

You can verify the extraction went fine by playing the altered movie in Vlc (for example), dragging the cursor to fastforward to any part of the movie : the new scene should appear immediately, as when you did it with the original movie.

Now the "jump-on" guy won't be able to be added as "seeder" until he downloads a complete copy of the altered file.

3) I didn't try the merge of 2 files (i.e the original movie + the last duplicated second of the movie that you extracted in a separated short movie file)

It should work too, but why complicate things and add a phase (i.e extract 1 second at the end of the movie with a multimedia splitter program, THEN combine the original movie + the duplicated last second with a multimedia joiner program that doesn't recompress the movie)

If test #2 worked, I won't try test #3…even if I'm very curious  
Because it's not only theorical tests, I took the place of a "jump-on" member, re-downloading from GT a couple of my own torrents (the ones I uploaded) to analyze what will happen when the client program (utorrent) finds an altered copy of the movie (like in tests #1 and #2)

PS: I don't see any interest in changing the encoding : if I have to wait many minutes (or hours) to transform an avi to a wmv (for example) WITH image quality degradation, it's not worth any more : you're not sure a "jump-on" guy will jump on your torrent, so why losing a long time to prevent this. I accept to lose 1-2 min before a new upload, by cutting the last 1/10th of second in the movie, but I won't accept to lose 1 hour (and degrade the image quality) for this...

...though I'm not sure this isn't been done on purpose by some guys : when your ratio is going bad and you don't have anything to upload, it looks tempting to re-encode any movie you got into another extension : that's why I don't really agree with one of GT rule that allows to "upload already existing content when the file is a different size or version (i.e, avi instead of wmv)"

But that's another question