|
Minimum DC Hub Share? (pg. 3)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Devbert |
| If there could be a way to set it up so that the minimum share is what you downloaded in the past month, I think that would be a good way to get rid of leechers. Also, anyone who uploads at over 10 K per second should have to have at least 2 slots open. |
|
|
| Nadi |
| arg. You know whats worst than people who have the bare minimum of files to share? The people who have a lot but wont send them to you because there "going to slow". If you have your connection on all the time then theres no reason to make it so people cant dl from you (in this case I assume it was on all the time because i had been dling for a few hours). I have nothing against people with little or even no files, as long as when they get em they share em. |
|
|
| SmellsExcellent |
To all who say that they want it to say the same: I understand where you are comming from. As far as leechers go... I think that that is just going to happen, but eventually they will get more and more, and if we kick everyeon <200 thats <200*x people that we will not have sharing. I do want to raise the minimum, but I feel that ti wouldnt be fair kinda. The one thing is that people with small shares should share as much and as often with people with 100GB... There are many of us who stay on as much as possible to have a steady base of music... we need this from everyone possible!
Also, Chris (Bizz) is out of town so his box is probably full and wont get your PMs.. he'll see this though.
Another issue about leechers is the fact that people are now signing up for the boards just to get on the hub. Ive gotten many PMs asking to join from people wth 0 posts... what the is that all about.
anyways, issues will eb resolved eventually!
-marc |
|
|
| Coup |
| Just tell them to piss off then! we get it all the time in the chatroom, how i join the hub blah blah! i have around 1.3 gig on my hd, and ive been out all day so i put in my latest 2 cd-r's and shared around 2.5 gig, as much as poss! |
|
|
| miss_e |
i understand about the leechers but keep it the same...
in my case...my computer got formatted meaning i lost all my ing trance...couldn't join the hub..but thats not the problem now anyways.
why be selfish... |
|
|
| ali92 |
I think it should either STAY AT 200 MB or go LOWER to 100 MB. After all, some people are just getting started in all this. Raising the share minimum would just encourage more junk sharing. My shares vary but, it's because of my connection and HDD size. I'm on a less-than-56K connection so, that's why I'm sharing very little compared to some people on here. You HAVE to give people a chance.
One final word: DON'T RAISE IT! THERE WILL BE A RIOT IN HERE AND IN THE HUB IF IT IS! AND WHO'S GOING TO START IT? ME! TAKE A GUESS WHY... |
|
|
| ali92 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Devbert
That is true, a member who can only share 200 megs is just as dedicated as someone who shares 20000 megs. The difference isn't in the dedication, it's in the size of the contribution.
Very few people who use the hub can't afford to give up a gig of space. They have very small hard drives. I respect that.
However, for every person who can only share 200 MB, there are 5 Leechers who can afford to share 20 Gigs, yet they share 200 MB and only leave one upload open.
So you see, for the convenience of a few, like yourself, we're allowing a lot of people to leech the out of everyone else.
I share almost 100 Gigs with 3 open spots (my upload isn't that great). Would it be fair if I shared 200 MB, and just pulled off everyone else all day?
I think it's important to have veteran TA's part of the hub, so it's tough to have a solution for this. |
My opinion on this: If the people who share VERY little (<800 MB) are on high speed connections like 256K and up, I would ban them for 15 days. During that time, they should collect enough to get a reasonable amount to share. Then, let'em back in and see how well they do. For low speed (like 64/128K ISDN, 56K or less analogue modem) users, they should be excluded from what you call "leeching" business because they have slow connections and if they upload ANYTHING, it kills their bandwidth. They should be allowed to share as much or as little as they want. It's only fair to them. I'm on 28.8/33.6K and I was sharing 15+ GB in the beginning but, I couldn't DL ANYTHING because some people would just kill my slot THE SECOND I GET ON. Even if I had 56K, it would be the same way because it's still SLOW. |
|
|
| Coup |
| quote: | Originally posted by ali92
For low speed (like 64/128K ISDN, 56K or less analogue modem) users, they should be excluded from what you call "leeching" business because they have slow connections and if they upload ANYTHING, it kills their bandwidth |
I agree with you here, but..
| quote: | | My opinion on this: If the people who share VERY little (<800 MB) are on high speed connections like 256K and up, I would ban them for 15 days. During that time, they should collect enough to get a reasonable amount to share. Then, let'em back in and see how well they do. |
wtf is this? u wana be excused from limit sharing but then ban everyone else who doesnt share enough for you to have a good brouse around? real ta sharing spirit there!
And was ur previous post entirly ness?
:) |
|
|
| ali92 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Coup
I agree with you here, but..
wtf is this? u wana be excused from limit sharing but then ban everyone else who doesnt share enough for you to have a good brouse around? real ta sharing spirit there!
And was ur previous post entirly ness?
:) |
OK, SCRATCH THE BANS... That obviously was a BAD idea. Keep it at 200 MB and that's it. The end........ |
|
|
| evil_bastard |
I voted 500MB minimum, although I was tempted to vote keeping it the same.
What is the point in rising it? Think. This hub can only survive through sharing, but people on slow modems who have only a couple of hundred MB's aren't usually the type of people who introduce rare new tracks or sets to the hub.
By raising the limit, all it will achieve is forcing some 56K'ers to download some typical songs and typical sets to get their shares up. What good is this to anyone? Most tracks and most sets you can download straight away, and newbies with tiny hard drives are highly unlikely to bring in rare new tunes or rips.
On the issue of 'leechers', I can see some reasoning behind this, but raising to any more than 1GB would harm more people than it would help. Let's not forget that many people have small hard drives. Mine is only 15GB, but I have only about 7GB of music (all of which I share) because it is a family computer and the rest of my family need to use it (plus computer games take up a lot of memory too). I doubt I am the only person in this position. To tackle the problem of leechers all I can suggest is keeping our eyes open (by that I mean, if someone has a T-3 connection and shares only 500MB, and 2 weeks later they have the same, then ask them some hard questions) and possibly increasing the minimum slots. I also voted for 500MB because I do recognise that leeching is a potential problem, and 500MB isn't too much trouble for even the smallest harddrives and slowest connections. 500MB would be a reasonable compromise in my opinion. |
|
|
| fieroavian |
| i share 48gb but still, i say keep it as is. raising the bar means people may include crap like fonts, installed games and duplicates. there [i]are[/p] folks who really don't have 1 gig, or even 500mb of trance tunes too, and who knows if they possess rare gems. |
|
|
| DuMonde TrAnCeR |
| i think there should be a minimum of 3 slots for each user, coz to be honest, if ur on dial up modem nobodies gonna d/l off ya anyway! coz ya ! :p |
|
|
|
|
