Re: BitHQ's Wall of Shame
Quote:
Originally Posted by
OlegL
But they wrote: "Only people from whom we are 100% sure they cheat, we will show these details." So, bithq staffers show the same respect to their members that what.cd staffers show to theirs. If it's proven that someone is a cheater, he/she will get banned from either tracker.
Except, only one of those trackers demeans and mocks the people at fault publicly. Toting the ability to expose someone online is as bad as the cheating behavior itself. People's punishment for cheating is and has always been banning them from the tracker (and others, too). However, exposing people like this is wrong and if everybody else thinks it's fair because it's a simple pseudonym, I dare you to do it to yourself first.
Imagine how bad it could be if governmental bodies decided to release all the information they had on someone who is a 100% convict. Sinking to the level of scum only makes you scum.
Re: BitHQ's Wall of Shame
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ringhunter
Quote:
Originally Posted by
OlegL
But they wrote: "Only people from whom we are 100% sure they cheat, we will show these details." So, bithq staffers show the same respect to their members that what.cd staffers show to theirs. If it's proven that someone is a cheater, he/she will get banned from either tracker.
Except, only one of those trackers demeans and mocks the people at fault publicly. Toting the ability to expose someone online is as bad as the cheating behavior itself. People's punishment for cheating is and has always been banning them from the tracker (and others, too). However, exposing people like this is
wrong and if everybody else thinks it's fair because it's a simple pseudonym, I dare you to do it to yourself first.
Imagine how bad it could be if governmental bodies decided to release
all the information they had on someone who is a 100% convict. Sinking to the level of scum only makes you scum.
Okay, would it be a stupid thing to say that it's possible to survive on any tracker without cheating?
Re: BitHQ's Wall of Shame
Quote:
Originally Posted by OlegL
Okay, would it be a stupid thing to say that it's possible to survive on any tracker without cheating?
Depends on ISP.
But cheating is not the way to take,also what BitHQ is going to do is more fucked up.
Re: BitHQ's Wall of Shame
someone posted this link in an irc channel, and im glad they did; not because i learned something but because of the hilarious pro-cheater comments posted so far.
the only people complaining about this have either:
1. been kicked off bithq for cheating, or
2. never been on bithq, and have a history of cheating on other sites
...period.
bithq is a source media site, meaning that (with very few exceptions) the site only indexes full DVDs, full Blu-ray discs, and the occasional piece of software. there is little reason for cheaters to download movies of that size and at that level of quality. bithq is also one of the easiest private trackers to maintain ratio on -- they have an insane amount of freeleech, which includes just about every bluray and a large percentage of unique/special dvds.
i hope this "wall of shame" idea gets implemented on other sites. if you cant follow the rules and seed back, get off bittorrent and pay for a unsenet subscription.
Re: BitHQ's Wall of Shame
Quote:
Originally Posted by
echohead
the only people complaining about this have either:
1. been kicked off bithq for cheating, or
2. never been on bithq, and have a history of cheating on other sites
...period.
Wrong on both accounts, and I hope you realize that you're simply trolling or are being incredibly droll just because you think you're in the right. I'm raising a legitimate point here, but you've dubbed me as pro-cheater or a cheater myself. It's not your way or the highway believe it or not. If you are morally accepting of the fact that a user can be bum-raped because they make a mistake (knowingly or not) then I hope it goes around and bites you in the bum eventually when someone finds enough morality, or lack thereof, to do the same to you.
Again, I will attempt to make this sound as sane as possible. The punishment for account/system abuse is the loss of the account in question. It's an equal and opposite reaction to a largely offensive/abusive action. Publicly demeaning users will never be a solution, the people you are truly hurting are the ones who are in the experimental range, not knowing whether they should cheat or not, and largely ignorant to how to hide it properly. By doing this, you're pushing them over the edge, instead of offering to reason with them as you should.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
OlegL
Okay, would it be a stupid thing to say that it's possible to survive on any tracker without cheating?
I have never cheated and keep a (near) perfect record of every kb uploaded/accounted for (seedbox statements, monthly bw etc), in case issues like cheating come up with any given staff. I have survived on every site I've wanted to be a member of using a combination of patience/money and I doubt anyone legitimately has a problem which hinders sharing to the point of being forced to cheat.
However, I'm still willing to accept that there might be a possibility that someone is in such a situation; the solution is to try and help them, offer them alternatives etc. NOT to simply let them cheat. If people like Anon himself don't cheat 100% of the time, that's the biggest slap in the face for people who believe cheaters are inherently evil.
Give me a choice any day, and I'd rather be an acquaintance of a cheater rather than someone who chooses public humiliation as a solution to any given problem.
:closedeye
Re: BitHQ's Wall of Shame
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ringhunter
If people like Anon himself don't cheat 100% of the time, that's the biggest slap in the face for people who believe cheaters are inherently evil.
Are you saying that because Anon doesn't cheat 100% of the time, it wouldn't be a true thing to say that cheaters are inherently evil? :) I am actually really surprised that Anon is a cheater. He seems like a totally nice guy. I don't know why he decided to embrace darkness. :) It doesn't make sense to me that he cheats because his upload speed is 25 kB/sec or a little lower/higher than that.
Re: BitHQ's Wall of Shame
Quote:
Originally Posted by
OlegL
Are you saying that because Anon doesn't cheat 100% of the time, it wouldn't be a true thing to say that cheaters are inherently evil? :)
Correct. If a coder himself finds enough reason to play the rules of the game every now and then, that's proof enough that cheaters are reasonable people that should be reasoned with and not just scrapped. People, whether respectable or not given the eye of the beholder, are not disposable. Any tracker that runs with a modicum of that dogma isn't worth any respect in return.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
OlegL
I am actually really surprised that Anon is a cheater. He seems like a totally nice guy. I don't know why he decided to embrace darkness. :) It doesn't make sense to me that he cheats because his upload speed is 25 kB/sec or a little lower/higher than that.
Google his name and check out the 5th result if you're interested in finding out more. Be smart, though, you don't want it to look like you're snooping around for cheats. Taboo, bad luck etc. :yes:
Re: BitHQ's Wall of Shame
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ringhunter
Google his name and check out the 5th result if you're interested in finding out more. Be smart, though, you don't want it to look like you're snooping around for cheats.
Meaning you should shield yourself against the CSS leak or just use a PHP proxy to access the forum.
On a sidenote, the fourth result has nothing to do with me :D
Re: BitHQ's Wall of Shame
Quote:
Originally Posted by BitHQ
Only people from whom we are 100% sure they cheat, we will show these details. If you give back what you took, like you should when torrenting, you have nothing to fear.
this "wall of shame" is a way to fairly deal with people who took it upon themselves to disrespect a site and its peers, as well as possibly the beginnings of a way for private trackers to publicly share email and ip blocklists with each other. the process of adding people to the list obviously wont be automated, so one can only assume that the root of peoples' concerns is that other sites will add the wall of shame ip/email info to their blacklists. and they should. disagreeing with an uninformed, selfishly motivated opinion doesnt make me a "troll" -- it makes you seem childish for using the "I'm rubber and you're glue" argument to justify why cheaters should be given second and third chances to poison bittorrent swarms.
but then again, i suppose i could end up coming back to this topic and apologizing to you if im ever make the "mistake" of burning through my 500 GB buffer on bithq. also i dont see how being "bum-raped" would affect me, since im not and have never been homeless ;)
for anyone still concerned about what bithq is doing, you may be interested to know that thepiratebay.org is a very large bittorrent site/tracker that never checks for cheaters... so all those "mistakes" you routinely make will go unnoticed. DON'T CHEAT.
Quote:
Originally Posted by everyone against the wall of shame
boo hoo even though i can download at 40 Mb/sec i can only upload at 4 kb/sec. woe is me i have the most lopsided bandwidth on the face of the earth
Re: BitHQ's Wall of Shame
Quote:
Originally Posted by
echohead
you may be interested to know that thepiratebay.org is a very large bittorrent site/tracker that never checks for cheaters...
But they don- oh, wait.
