btmusic's invites

[superkiller1]

who has all them?

[pone44]

What do you mean"who has them"? Are you asking for a invite? If you are you are in the wrong section. If not then be more specific.

[n00bz0r]

@OP : What are ya on about..eh?

[The_Martinator]

Me.

Wait a sec while I clear my inbox, lol.

[superkiller1]

my bad i mean who do they hand out invites to.....

[The_Martinator]

my bad i mean who do they hand out invites to.....

Uploaders and VIPs afaik.

[Falkirm]

VIPs and above.

[Yoann64]

They removed all invites below "Uploader class", because of traders/cheaters etc...
They thought that it's more easy to watch a little part of members, and i think that it's not a bad thing.

[dukezoro]

VIPs and above.

[n00bz0r]

VIPs and above.
:pinch:
ignorance is bliss..:shifty:


PS: getting back to topic..
invites are handed out to uploaders and above.

[ca_aok]

VIPs and above.
Don't give out information if you have no idea what you're talking about.

Uploaders get 1 invite/month, VIPs have unlimited.

[sez]

^^ you basically said the same thing as the guy you are tryin to shit on.

[Yoann64]

VIPs and above.
Don't give out information if you have no idea what you're talking about.

Uploaders get 1 invite/month, VIPs have unlimited.

^^ you basically said the same thing as the guy you are tryin to shit on.
No he didn't, because "Uploader class" is below "Vip class". :whistling

[sez]

^^ that's what you are made to believe :whistling:

[Night0wl]

Well I think it was a really shitty thing to do to longtime members. I have been onthe tracker for well over 100 weeks and still got my inviting privileges taken away for being below uploader class. I can understand changing the 100 days rule to a higher number, maybe to a year or something like that, but I really don't think taken them away from every normal user is a good thing. It makes the tracker stagnate.

[Falkirm]

Well, The invites are only distributed to IPs and above.
Is that OK? :dabs:

[Night0wl]

Since I have 0 invites in my account and haven't since that stupid rule was put in place, no not really. I may not have been an uploader on there ever, but I sure have invited people who have uploaded new stuff and have kept lots of things alive for a long long time... well that is until I started getting overseeding warnings for being the only seeder on 8 month old stuff and someone grabbing it putting me over 3.0 ratio limit. I got so pissed off, I deleted most torrents and went on a hit n' run downloading spree to get to around 2.0 ratio.

Why feel bad about shutting your client down, when that's how much you are appreciated at some of the sites.

I love quality of uploads on Pedro's, but with some of the politics in running the site, I have to wonder what the purpose of being a member is. It's not like a site with uploaders, VIP and staff only would run very well.

And IPs? I haven't got the faintest idea what that is.

[Yoann64]

And IPs? I haven't got the faintest idea what that is.
he wanted to say "VIPs"

[n00bz0r]

ahh.. thanks for decrypting that message :D

[Yoann64]

ahh.. thanks for decrypting that message :D
I was really pleased to help you to understand these strange words :P

[ca_aok]

I love quality of uploads on Pedro's, but with some of the politics in running the site, I have to wonder what the purpose of being a member is. It's not like a site with uploaders, VIP and staff only would run very well.
You'd be surprised. That's more or less how E runs.

You seem to be under the impression that you "deserve" invites just because you have an old account. Not sure how you got that impression, quite frankly I was surprised they had that system in the first place. Invites are a privilege, not a right. They were taken a way in part because too many crappy people were being invited.

You want invites? Try uploading. You only have to upload one CD every 3 months to maintain the status... if that's a huge burden for you perhaps you should rethink how committed you are to the site.

As for overseeding, don't even get me started on that.

[sez]

^^ well said.

[Night0wl]

Actually it isn't how E runs. I have never felt that way about E. I have never got my ratio red from seeding too much from albums, that I seeded for ages and often as only seed. I have had one invite request rejected, but after talking it over with staff explaining my motives, I was asked to apply for same invite again, this time being granted.

If you think my ratio went red on Pedro's from seedboxing new torrents then think again.

Those sites are not comparable at all.



I love quality of uploads on Pedro's, but with some of the politics in running the site, I have to wonder what the purpose of being a member is. It's not like a site with uploaders, VIP and staff only would run very well.
You'd be surprised. That's more or less how E runs.

You seem to be under the impression that you "deserve" invites just because you have an old account. Not sure how you got that impression, quite frankly I was surprised they had that system in the first place. Invites are a privilege, not a right. They were taken a way in part because too many crappy people were being invited.

You want invites? Try uploading. You only have to upload one CD every 3 months to maintain the status... if that's a huge burden for you perhaps you should rethink how committed you are to the site.

As for overseeding, don't even get me started on that.

[ca_aok]

Regardless as to whether you're an uploader there, E is completely driven by its uploaders/VIP as half the staff are either inactive or apathetic towards the site. The vast majority of posts, comments, and downloads are from Uploaders+, and I'd estimate at least 50% of the active userbase of the site is Uploader+, if not more. You might feel less oppressed there (due to their lack of overseeding rules), but that doesn't make your statements more true.

As for your issues with overseeding at Pedro's, I sympathize with your plight. If you check the threads on overseeding at E (and at Pedro's if they weren't deleted after the staff incident a few months back) you'll see I was vocally outspoken against the overseeding arguments.

[NippleCake]

you cannot request invites because you aer a noob. so wait your turn to transgress to the next userclass. Reported.

[aen]

i'm not sure that Pedro's need people who aren't uploaders or/and power users = users who make a donation. Uploading 1 cd per 13 weeks isn't so difficult. And yeah i realy respect their overseeding policy. It's just a great example of a tracker there you don't need a seedbox to keep a good ratio.

[lisabritpop]

only uploaders and above can invite ppls to get there

btw:as far as i know...Pedro's is better for those whose connection speed isn't that good...

[pretend]

Speed doesn't matter at all. Any idiot capable of slowing down it in client if it's really that high.
Those, who has speedy connection, may wait another hour while downloading from slow peer, if they really care about music and not about traffic.

[kukushka]

Speed doesn't matter at all. Any idiot capable of slowing down it in client if it's really that high.
Those, who has speedy connection, may wait another hour while downloading from slow peer, if they really care about music and not about traffic.
aha. and if they really really really care, they will cross the world and follow the favourite band on their tour. as i said at their forums, i don't mind about protecting low speed peers but there are better ways to protect them without fearing of the high speeds by tuning the ratio system, while instead of that, btm just require extra attention from its users. the tracker should be around music, not around ratio problems, don't you think?

[Bad-Day]

only uploaders and above can invite ppls to get there
Making the invite, a reward for those who really do something around there.


btw:as far as i know...Pedro's is better for those whose connection speed isn't that good... :stars: ( if youre there, you shouldn't be )
___________________________________________________________________
Again, i want to be invited because i heard, you guys can make my pennis bigger.

[pretend]

the tracker should be around music, not around ratio problems, don't you think?

I think that only retarded can't spend a minute to ensure torrent won't go over 3.

[Bad-Day]

I think that only retarded can't spend a minute to ensure torrent won't go over 3.
only a retard would say that... or at least someone whit nothing to do all day...

[pretend]

No offence to anyone. It's just too easy to be a reason for complaining.

[kukushka]

I think that only retarded can't spend a minute to ensure torrent won't go over 3.
only a retard would say that... or at least someone whit nothing to do all day...
lol nice quoting :lol:

[sez]

I think that only retarded can't spend a minute to ensure torrent won't go over 3.
only a retard would say that... or at least someone whit nothing to do all day...

:lol: :lol:
moving on, I think Ps ratio system is great,though am of the opinion that its upto the tracker to develop the necessary tech(if its even possible)to ensure nobody's ratio goes past 3.0

[Bad-Day]

LOl, did not notice it :D

cmon look at me, its normal :D

[ovisan]

Does it worth making a request then??

[pretend]

Does it worth making a request then??

On P's invitation? Depends on your likings.


I think Ps ratio system is great,though am of the opinion that its upto the tracker to develop the necessary tech(if its even possible)to ensure nobody's ratio goes past 3.0
It's quite impossible. Tracker helps peers to connect and gathers stats, but it hardly can (if can at all) take any control of traffic amount transferred to prevent from overseeding.

[Night0wl]

Well that's not impossible at all. There is absolutely nothing preventing a tracker from collecting stats on any single torrent on every user, transferring anything over 3.0 ratio to other users who downloaded the same torrent.

Site coders mess around with upload/download stats on torrents all the time. Sites keep single torrent data. Site staff can change your upload/download amount. It's simply automating the process.

Then people can seed to their hearts content and will be helping others out in the process.

[pretend]

Stats can be altered, but not actual data transfer limited.

[Night0wl]

Stats can be altered, but not actual data transfer limited.

Ok I forgot about this post so major bumpage, but that is the most stupid argument I have ever heard.

The problem with overseeding isn't that people can't upload enough data, because of fast users. The problem is that they don't get enough upload credit, because of fast users.

[pretend]

Ok I forgot about this post so major bumpage, but that is the most stupid argument I have ever heard.

Why? This is not an argument, this is a fact. I didn't say overseeding can't be dealt with altering numbers instead of limiting actual amount of data transfered, I just understood (or misunderstood) previous posts as proposal to limit actual data.


Tell me how you see that math on up/dl stats? User with fat pipe can give 3x, or 10x, but his uploaded stats after that will be no more 3x? Slow-speeders can up 0.8x, or 0, but they all be given extra amount of upload?
Any ways of giving extra amount of up to people who does not actually upload will result in more people hit-and-running or limiting up speed to something like 2kbps. It's no way good.

I'm not implying on anything, nor saying it's impossible to do more clever way then described above, however I'm not quite understand how do you propose to manipulate stat numbers without destroying whole purpose of ratio system. And I'd be glad if someone took one's time to clarify it to me.

Regards

[Night0wl]

I'll gladly take a moment to clarify.

On a torrent that's not overseeded a system like the one I proposed will make zero difference. In fact it can even be made to only be activated if certain criteria are filled e.g. only active on torrents less than 1 month, so people who keep things alive for ages will be rewarded properly for doing that.

Also it can take into account that it only awards the ratio over 3.0 to users, who have actually reported to the tracker that they are seeding the torrent in a specific time period E.g if you snatched the torrent and have reported activity within the last 3 days you get awarded the overseeded ratio, if not then you get none of it. And if the only seeder, who has been active within the 3 day period is the user, who has the above 3.0 ratio, then he gets all the upload.

You say destroy the whole purpose of the ratio system. What exactly do you see as the purpose of a ratio system? If the purpose is to have anyone without a seedbox or fiber fighting for dear life or get banned for low ratio, then yes. If you see the ratio system as a way to encourage seeding and speeds, then it doesn't in any way destroy it.

As the system is right now, with overseeding rules, the fast users will in many case just delete the torrent from the client, which in turn will have bad effects on seeding and speeds. Many users on fast pipes don't seed solely for getting a large buffer, and those who do shouldn't be awarded for it.

The system I propose would eliminate all worries fast users have about overseeding. And good riddance to the ones, who only seed for large buffers.

Edit: There will always be assholes, who take advantage of the system, no matter what the system is, so the limiting of upload is a mute point. Also if users start limiting their upload any, leftover upload above 3.0 ratio will not be enough to keep them afloat.

Lets make a small example. 5 seeders, 1 fast, 3 slow but not limiting their upload, 1 limits the upload. a 500MB torrent, which is fitting for the FLAC sites.

1. Has already a 3.0 ratio just for seeding the swarm
2., 3. and 4. have seeded 0.3 each
5. who limited his/her upload has 0.1

Now a leecher comes along.

1. uploads 400MB but gets nothing in return but the joy of sharing
2., 3. and 4. have seeded 30MB each, because they didn't limit their upload + 100MB each from 1.
5. uploaded 10MB + 100MB from 1.

----
With the system
1. has 3.0 ratio
2., 3. and 4. have 0.56 ratio
5. has 0.32 ratio

Without the system
1. has 3.8
2., 3. and 4. have 0.36 (but not for lack of trying)
5. has 0.12
----

Who would you think gets booted for low ratio first in both cases?