Actually, there's another reason for sometimes not getting back up to 100% on an individual file. People often include images as well as videos. Those people often include them at the same folder level as the video. People like me don't want / need other peoples' images so delete them.

However, the way files are split in a torrent, the last chunk of a video file may well have been uploaded/downloaded within the image file next to it. Hence, if you no longer have the video file you may also find that the video files above and below it only recheck to 99% or so each.

This may not be an issue if you haven't originally downloaded the image file at all, or it may be. You'll often see part of a file shows as downloaded even if you've unticked it. I'm not sure if that means the full video file has therefore downloaded and be retained.

I get around this by redownloading the images if I get a reseed request, and someone does have the images too, so I become a fully fledged seeder again. Their size is normally minor in comparison to the video files.

@john32123666 Absolutely agree. That's why my two bones of contention are clarity and consistency.

Clarity: If the powers that be have decided .mkv and .mp4 are the same, fine(ish). Just make it clear within the published rules covering duplicates rather than letting someone go through the work of creating a torrent - within the published rules - then nuking it, or requiring a huge amount of work to find it buried in a thread like this. Publishing a reference point should also lead to consistency. Two of my nuked torrents were not duplicates, judged by what has been said here, yet they WERE nuked as duplicates and remained so, even after I queried this.

Consistency: Primarily out of curiosity, as you say, if .mp4 is considered the same as ,mkv, then why isn't .avi, .wmv, etc.?

If the idea is to stop the site getting bogged down with multiple torrents with, essentially, the same files, perhaps file type shouldn't even be a differentiator. There are a plethora of file converter apps - many free - for those of us hung up on all files in our collection being the same type.

The different "format" should be resolution: 480p, 720p, 1080p, etc. If a 720p file already exists, whatever the file type, an upload of a similarly sized file is a duplicate, regardless of file type.

@frostycab Yeah. I was optimistic when @ianfontinell mentioned having created a search filter to automatically exclude them, but the only version I've been able to identify is a "Saved Search", which needs reapplying every time, even if it's saved. I tried that for a bit, but it's more of a pain than having to visually skip over these torrents when browsing a list.

Ideally, it would be great to be able to block uploads by a specific individual. I'm sure this could be done without needing to reveal to the blocker the actual name of the member being blocked.

Alternatively, perhaps being able to add a facility to automatically mark as "Hidden" either by a Title word search or by (Anonymous) user. Or, perhaps, even both.

@trueform yes im having the same issue. some will only go to 99% and stop. I just gave up on them and went to reseeding something else in my collection. Im mainly reseeding whole files. It will still reseed if its a partial right?

Getting notified of a reseed request, and getting a reseeded torrent back to 100% progress at your end are two different things.

So long as at some point you've registered as a seeder (see comment above about which list the torrent is on) then you'll be notified. Once you're on the seeder list, you're on it, even if you can't quite seed everything.

But you don't have to have downloaded every file in a torrent to actually seed it. I've got a recent one where I only downloaded one file of three - I've now uploaded about six times what I downloaded.

If you're returning to a torrent, rather than leeching it initially, one possible cause of the 99.8% issue is that - in my qBittorrent at least - I sometimes get a "torrent complete" notification before it actually is. If I look at my download speed, there's often a time when it says "100% progress" but it''s still showing a falling speed before it finally registers as zero. The difference is nowhere near enough to interfere with a file's playability, so likely wouldn't be noticed... until you try to reseed. Then, the fact you've really only downloaded 1.86gb instead of 1.87gb will make a difference.

@Lancej Why not simply take a look at the lists at the bottom of your Profile, under "User Details"?

All the torrents that you are currently seeding are shown under "Show seeding torrents", and those you're still leeching under "Show leeching torrents"..

The totals of each should be the same as the numbers shown in the middle of the bar at the top of the site:

Beneath these, is "Show completed torrents". When you stop seeding a torrent that has fully completed - e.g. you pause it, or delete the torrent from your client - that torrent will move from "Seeding" to "Completed". If the torrent you're interested in is in either "Seeding" or "Completed", you should get notified of any reseed request. If it's still in "leeching", or not shown at all, you won't be.

@Lancej If you appear to have fully grabbed a torrent - i.e. progress hits 100% - and you switch to being a seeder not a leecher, then whether you got all, some or none of the files from this site is irrelevant. Once you have the files and you have been noted as a seeder then, yes, you'll be alerted to any reseed requests.

@john32123666 Mas mahirap maging matalino kung akala mo alam mo na ang lahat.

@john32123666 No problem. I WAS talking to a member of the team. I simply responded to your comment when you joined in the conversation. Glad you're done, as you seem to have totally missed the point, and not really added any value in this case.

@john32123666 That doesn't address the point I'm making.

@john32123666 And as I said, I'm not talking about whether they ARE, I'm talking about how they're treated HERE. These are two different things.

I did confuse the issue earlier when talking to MrMazda by including .srt files in the equation. I'm talking about a straight .mkv file compared to a straight .mp4 file compared to s straight .avi file compared to a straight... which all contain exactly the same information.

If .mp4 and .mkv files are NOT considered the same format HERE, then - according to the rules - they're not duplicates. And, following that logic, why are other file types ("formats") not considered so. Or maybe they would be if the file's size also matched.

Yet I've had a torrent with exactly that scenario removed, and another where a single .mkv file containing multiple soft coded subs was nuked as a duplicate because a .mp4 with separate .srt files existed.

@john32123666

"2. DUPLICATE files are not allowed and will be removed. You are expected to run a search for duplicates prior to submitting a torrent. Duplicates may be accepted when part of a themed collection.A file is considered a duplicate if an existing torrent has the same format and similar size (<10% difference) and has at least one seeder."

Still doesn't answer the question of whether .mkv are considered the same format as .mp4. I've had torrents deleted because they are. Yet other file types - "formats" - seem unaffected. Which seems inconsistent.

I'm mainly seeking clarity so that I can correctly follow the rules and, believe that it should be stated in "The Rules", to which people look for guidance, and not buried somewhere in a topic thread or two.

@ianfontinell said:

get the hell out of here with that stupid ass off-topic discussion please

Given that the very first sentence that started this thread was "what are these? its a reupload of same file but little smaller. whats the point of this? [Convert to AV1 format using ab-av1]", I don't believe a discussion of what is, and is not, considered a duplicate and why that is, is "off-topic".

@john32123666 I'm not sure I get you point but, sticking with your analogy, I'm asking that the supervisors / decision makers give clearer, more explicit guidelines.

IDK I think they evaluate different format with resolution type not on format container ...

@john32123666 Nope, not in my experience. And that's my point. Clear advice / guidelines are needed, not ambiguity or the possibility of different interpretations depending on who is making the decision.

@john32123666 OK. These are technical differences, and very well explained. Thank you. But I'm specifically talking about / asking about how they're considered here. In your explanation, you state

The Most Common Video Formats...
MP4 (MPEG-4): The most popular video format in the world. I...
MOV (QuickTime Movie): Developed by Apple fo...
MKV (Matroska): A highly flexible, open-source format....

So a surface read of this says that .mkv files ARE a different format to .mp4, as are .avi, .wmv, .mov, etc.

Yet my experience is that they're treated here as being the same as .mp4, unlike the other formats. A 1080p .mkv video file with hard coded English subs will be considered a duplicate of a similarly sized 1080p .mp4 file that also has hard coded English subs. This doesn't seem to be the case with other formats, such as .wmv or .avi.

Perhaps different people have different understanding of what is meant by "format", which I've assumed to be file type, as opposed to 1080p/720p/480p, which I understand as "resolution".

What it comes down to is whether a .mkv file that's identical in every other way to a .mp4 file is a duplicate. And, if it is, why doesn't the same hold true for .avi, .wmv, etc.? Or does it, and I've not yet come across an example of it? In which case, the guide note for duplicates should read "resolution", not "format", or have an explanatory qualifier "...format (i.e. 1080p, 720p, etc.)".

@MrMazda I've only recently added port forwarding via a new VPN service. I know it's correct not just because I've double-checked the settings, but also since setting it up I'm now seeding several torrents that I couldn't before, where I'm the only seeder (or in a couple of cases one of two) and someone has been sat unable to leech for ages, but they've now started working.

It could, of course, be that the causes for @willow1 and myself are different, and I really do struggle to understand how it can be down to site changes here, but they're most definitely interesting coincidences.

@MrMazda Thanks for the detailed explanation. To be honest, though, I still don't understand if an .mkv is considered a different format to an .mp4.

Assuming they're otherwise the same, but one torrent contains a single .mkv file with soft coded English and French subs, while the other torrent contains three files - 1 x .mp4, 1x .en.srt, and 1x .fr.srt, are they duplicates?

I get that if the .mkv contains four set of subs - English, French, Chinese and Thai - then it isn't, but that it's the responsibility of the uploader to make any differences clear in the description to help mods, but if in the former case they're considered duplicates, I feel this should be made clear in the "rules". I'm sure I'm not alone in simply assuming - until now - that if the file type is different, it's a different format.

@frostycab Oh. I misunderstood. Does the PM you received, when viewed on site, come from "Anonymous"? Yeah, it really should be one or the other for both!

@frostycab Having seen a couple of discussions around this subject, I believe it IS intended behaviour. Hopefully, the uploader gets warned with something like "If you reply to this PM, your username will be revealed", but as it hasn't happened to me yet, I don't know.

Whether or not this should be the intended behaviour is, perhaps, a slightly different question. To which I'd lean towards maintaining anonymity, though perhaps including an option for a dramatic "It's me!! " reveal.

@frostycab Actually, one thing I've just realised: On the old site, formatting didn't carry through to the often shortened description within multiple torrent lists - e.g. search - and only became apparent once you went into the full description.

From your screenshot, that appears to have changed. I don't see that view anymore as I've gone from absolutely hating the grid layout when I first saw it to now absolutely loving it and refusing to consider anything else even worth looking at.