Have to agree with this also, up to a certain point.Quote:
Originally Posted by Corey
Need more quality users than quantity of users.
Printable View
Have to agree with this also, up to a certain point.Quote:
Originally Posted by Corey
Need more quality users than quantity of users.
Actually. I think it depends on the sort of site. Take OiNK for example. That's a very good music site and has over 120,000 users.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hanz™
definitely depends on the site. the only reason oink is so great, with so many users, is because the staff is on top of things, and the rules are strict. there's a standard of quality that's required, and if you don't follow those standards, there are consequences.
more the better.
I would agree with that, what are the reasons for restricting the number of users? 2000 users doesn't necessarily mean 2000 well behaved users.Quote:
Originally Posted by Corey
depends on the site, but 10 000 is good
Yeah, and when you goto grab a popular file downloads faster than anything I've ever seen. Try to grab back your ratio? With 500 seeders you're only contributing 0-2kbps. :ermm:Quote:
Originally Posted by Hanz™
That's why it's so hard to maintain a good ratio at Oink now. At least for new users...
That's great though. I just leave all 200 torrents seeding and slowly I get back up.Quote:
Originally Posted by HairbauttYeah, and when you goto grab a popular file downloads faster than anything I've ever seen. Try to grab back your ratio? With 500 seeders you're only contributing 0-2kbps. :ermm:Quote:
Originally Posted by Hanz™
That's why it's so hard to maintain a good ratio at Oink now. At least for new users...
I only have 30KB/s upload at most - and split between many sites its very hard for me to keep ratios, but I do.
5000 to 10000 is perfect in my opinion, not too many, nor too little so it's hard to keep a good ratio.
i agree with you, but i would raise the max number to 15k ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by YangLing