Re: Sites ranked level 10
i am surprisd KG doesnt have a perfect 10 for its contents ......
Re: Sites ranked level 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by
SaviouR
i am surprised KG doesn't have a perfect 10 for its contents ......
Yea, in it's category it's the best :|
Re: Sites ranked level 10
Yes i do think all of the above mentioned site deserve [10] based on content, speed and pre times
As for KG, it has awesome conent but speed isn't. And, there isn't any pre time for old movies lol
...and i think TT should get [10], it fuflils all requirement to it's best!
edit: TT is [10] :)
edit2: i think SCC should step one more to [10]
Re: Sites ranked level 10
You can always do better... mostly on speed and pretimes
but i'm sure those numbers are relative... not absolute...
like HDbits is really #1 ... so if you have to line up all the trackers from 0 to 10, HDbits would be placed on 10... nothing can beat them...
of course if all the files had at least one gbit seedbox sharing them would be the "perfection"... lol
Re: Sites ranked level 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by
SaviouR
i am surprisd KG doesnt have a perfect 10 for its contents ......
My kinda guy, I totally agree :P
Re: Sites ranked level 10
The first intelligent ratings thread I have seen in awhile, actually I think though that the content etc. is up to the individual, I enjoy trackers that have a mix of the 0day scenestuff and packs that are made up by members.
Everyone values content differently based on their personal interests, so what I find is a good tracker others may not like at all, but the content indicators are a good reference guide to what a tracker offers.
Re: Sites ranked level 10
I think the quality rating is subjective, based on the taste of the reviewer. The quality rating tends to be quite fixed as opposed to the rarity ranking where there are parties with interest that are trying to push the trackers up/down the list and make it more dynamic.
As for KG, if it was only contents then it's definitely a 10. Pretimes make no difference on a tracker like KG as it's not a 0-day tracker, but tbh the speed could be somewhat better. So overall a 9 is a very good score for KG.
Re: Sites ranked level 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by
fusionz
NO! I am not talking about the rarity level, what i want to discuss is the
[Content,Speed,Pre-Times] sites. which are :
HDBits[10]
TL[10]
BitMeTV[10]
ScT[10]
TT[10]
FTN[10]
Do you think these sites deserve the Perfect 10 ( based on content, speed and pre times not anything else ) ?
Do you think there are other sites who deserve to get a perfect 10 ?
// edit : What do you think What and Waffles should be rated ?
looking at content, speed and pretimes:
hdbits: is there a better hd site? :noes:
tl, sct, ftn: are there better 0-day sites? :noes:
bitmetv: is there a better tv site? :noes:
tt: is there a better site for trance? :noes:
that's why they all deserve the best [10].
waffles and what should be compared to oink[10], because it was the best.
but they are too young to be rated yet. (ok, maybe a [7-8])
Re: Sites ranked level 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Polarbear
Quote:
Originally Posted by
fusionz
NO! I am not talking about the rarity level, what i want to discuss is the
[Content,Speed,Pre-Times] sites. which are :
HDBits[10]
TL[10]
BitMeTV[10]
ScT[10]
TT[10]
FTN[10]
Do you think these sites deserve the Perfect 10 ( based on content, speed and pre times not anything else ) ?
Do you think there are other sites who deserve to get a perfect 10 ?
// edit : What do you think What and Waffles should be rated ?
looking at content, speed and pretimes:
hdbits: is there a better hd site? :noes:
tl, sct, ftn: are there better 0-day sites? :noes:
bitmetv: is there a better tv site? :noes:
tt: is there a better site for trance? :noes:
that's why they all deserve the best [10].
waffles and what should be compared to oink[10], because it was the best.
but they are too young to be rated yet. (ok, maybe a [7-8])
I agree with you, those are the sites that really set the bar on content, no matter how rare they are :)