Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 19

Thread: How good are "Rarity" and "exclusivity" for a tracker

  1. #1
    whatcdfan's Avatar A.W.A BT Rep: +2
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,452
    hello folks,
    I have noticed that some trackers once reached certain no of users, limit the opportunities for the new members to make their way in, i have always thought the increase in the no of members will result in the increased peer activity, more donations, more content (In some cases) and everything more that ends as good at the end of the day for a tracker.This post of bijoy forced me to talk

    Quote Originally Posted by bijoy View Post
    that's the funny part of bittorrent trackers in recent times. 2 words: exclusive & never is crushing the bt.
    Trackers should come over these 2 words if they wanna do something better, rather than being defined as super secret paraniod tracker.
    Leave out hdbits, no onther tracker don't have any practical need for complete lockdown.
    There are trackers like TL and IPT that are continuously searching for new members and what.cd which is always open for deserving candidates (Probably because it has no "content wise" competition) on the other hand there are trackers like hdbits.org and SCC which are becoming more and more difficult to get in with every new day.
    So the obvious question is, why some trackers limit themselves to become really rare?

  2. BitTorrent   -   #2
    ScottK's Avatar Ƹ̴Ӂ̴Ʒ BT Rep: +6BT Rep +6
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Age
    32
    Posts
    852
    server cant handle too many connection?
    they want to run in SSL?
    idk..want to see some other reason too




  3. BitTorrent   -   #3
    whatcdfan's Avatar A.W.A BT Rep: +2
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,452
    Quote Originally Posted by ScottK View Post
    server cant handle too many connection?
    they want to run in SSL?
    idk..want to see some other reason too
    yup there has to be more reasons, hardware limitations solely cant restrict a tracker from expanding its userbase

  4. BitTorrent   -   #4
    johhny's Avatar Poster BT Rep: +1
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    397
    i like them both
    sometimes small is better

  5. BitTorrent   -   #5
    Intr4ns1t's Avatar Pro-antinegativist BT Rep: +4
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    pressing ur thnx button
    Posts
    689
    Quote Originally Posted by whatcdfan View Post
    hello folks,
    I have noticed that some trackers once reached certain no of users, limit the opportunities for the new members to make their way in, i have always thought the increase in the no of members will result in the increased peer activity, more donations, more content (In some cases) and everything more that ends as good at the end of the day for a tracker.This post of bijoy forced me to talk

    Quote Originally Posted by bijoy View Post
    that's the funny part of bittorrent trackers in recent times. 2 words: exclusive & never is crushing the bt.
    Trackers should come over these 2 words if they wanna do something better, rather than being defined as super secret paraniod tracker.
    Leave out hdbits, no onther tracker don't have any practical need for complete lockdown.
    There are trackers like TL and IPT that are continuously searching for new members and what.cd which is always open for deserving candidates (Probably because it has no "content wise" competition) on the other hand there are trackers like hdbits.org and SCC which are becoming more and more difficult to get in with every new day.
    So the obvious question is, why some trackers limit themselves to become really rare?
    Resources are, almost always, much slimmer for small trackers. To deal with that, they must encourage a greater sense of value and safety, so as to not have to go through the legal battles. Those megatrackers have much more of a support pool to draw from both legally and financially, so they have more practical ability to actually deal with problems, rather than just scrubbing the site server and running for your life, which is the only real option for most small trackers.

    Yes, it's a "sales" tactic, but it's a necessary one. If you really want to see why sites got privatized, try torrenting with DHT exclusively, just make sure you do it with every possible means of hiding your ip. (oh, and don't forget to run a virus scan on every single file you dl, and make you sure you don't dl any fakes, and make sure those 400 other leechers haven't been sitting at 43% for 6 months, and...) It's really just carry over from the scene's approach to security, if I had to put my finger on it.
    Quote Originally Posted by KFlint
    Think 9 is the new 10.

  6. BitTorrent   -   #6
    I'm staff,kiss m ass BT Rep: +1
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Age
    30
    Posts
    470
    The way I see things, staff does the limitation simply because they feel this way. In many cases, when questioned they'd drivel about ,security´; however if you really were into security there are well-known doubts about BT being the right method to begin with.. In fact, also boats clubs etc. keep a limited userbase ("exclusivity") when they do not have to do this to hide from the law.

    I guess basically staff thinks they get the profits from running the site (respect, control over members, getting ass kissed etc.) without taking unneeded risks (and getting problems). Most private site staffers are no Julian Assange, they don't care about free information and stuff whatsoever.

  7. BitTorrent   -   #7
    whatcdfan's Avatar A.W.A BT Rep: +2
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,452
    Quote Originally Posted by Intr4ns1t View Post
    If you really want to see why sites got privatized
    Downloads that max out connections, Encodes that do not make ears and eyes bleed, Warez that do not supply malwares along ETC

    Quote Originally Posted by Sonnentier View Post
    I guess basically staff thinks they get the profits from running the site (respect, control over members, getting ass kissed etc.) without taking unneeded risks (and getting problems). Most private site staffers are no Julian Assange, they don't care about free information and stuff whatsoever.
    You got a point mate
    Last edited by whatcdfan; 01-04-2011 at 05:22 PM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost

  8. BitTorrent   -   #8
    bijoy's Avatar secret lover BT Rep: +1
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    1,834
    I was thinking about starting a thread about this matter too, but now I can see you already started one..

    Quote Originally Posted by ScottK View Post
    server cant handle too many connection?
    they want to run in SSL?
    idk..want to see some other reason too
    SSl is just another method of protection besically from ISP of userbase, and have nothing to do with real security of any site.
    And if you look a bit more carefully, then you can see 2 most popular 0day trackers, TL & IPT don't have any ssl at all.

    Quote Originally Posted by Intr4ns1t View Post
    Resources are, almost always, much slimmer for small trackers. To deal with that, they must encourage a greater sense of value and safety, so as to not have to go through the legal battles. Those megatrackers have much more of a support pool to draw from both legally and financially, so they have more practical ability to actually deal with problems, rather than just scrubbing the site server and running for your life, which is the only real option for most small trackers.
    That's a big point, but no tracker staff never say this point although it is a very much real one, rather they emphasise on another word Community. I already said one thing saveral times: "Want to build a community? Then install a forum software in the server & choose a good topic for conversation & discussion. No need to open a bt site for the purpose of making a community."
    Although it sounds really bad, but it is true, that the word community do not exist in bt. Some people gather in one place to collect some items, and they do it by seeding & leeching. This is not a community.
    If anybody call trolling & sucking,licking others ass (hope I don't cross the line here) in irc, as a sign of community, then I'll say that person nothing but stupid.

    Yes, it's a "sales" tactic, but it's a necessary one.
    Upto some point it is ok. There are many good users who are waiting to get in many trackers and if they do get in have the potential inside them to be a great user. So, there should be some easy way for them to get in..
    'salse' -> this word tend to create some confusion, specially it did that recently. Refer to imagine's own tracker thread to see what this little word can do to any tracker. You will have fun there too.

    If you really want to see why sites got privatized, try torrenting with DHT exclusively, just make sure you do it with every possible means of hiding your ip. (oh, and don't forget to run a virus scan on every single file you dl, and make you sure you don't dl any fakes, and make sure those 400 other leechers haven't been sitting at 43% for 6 months, and...) It's really just carry over from the scene's approach to security, if I had to put my finger on it.
    That's why private trackers gain popularity now-a-days.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sonnentier View Post
    The way I see things, staff does the limitation simply because they feel this way.
    Problem starts when those 'staffs' are kids.

    I guess basically staff thinks they get the profits from running the site (respect, control over members, getting ass kissed etc.) without taking unneeded risks (and getting problems). Most private site staffers are no Julian Assange, they don't care about free information and stuff whatsoever.
    if they can think like you then we don't need to discuss this point now.
    Last edited by bijoy; 01-04-2011 at 05:36 PM. Reason: language problem (?)
    Teh n00b.

  9. BitTorrent   -   #9
    I think trackers should be more open to new users, resource limitations permitting, during their infancy. A lot of trackers set arbitrary caps such as "we'll close at 5,000 new users then just hand out invites." This is silly. Most signups at a new tracker are experienced users. They already have several trackers and hear about a new one, sign up to check it out. Many, if not most, of these users will never actually use the tracker. Instead, a month or two from the opening the user limit will be reached and the account will sit dormant until it is pruned. Maybe 10-20% of the original signups will stick around and use the tracker at least minimally. Now you have a small active userbase with a handful of invites who probably already informed their friends of open signups anyway and whose invitees are just as likely not to be bothered being part of a small new site.

    When you look at trackers at their peak, i.e. when the tracker is not only well established in activity and content, but the demand for accounts exceeds the supply of slots, the number of pruned/banned users it took to get there is tremendous. I've looked at a few sites by comparing the most recent or very recent user's user id # and comparing that to the total number of active users (accounting at times for gaps in the way sites quantified user id #s e.g. FTN). An obvious trend appears. Maybe 10% or slightly more of the total number of users who ever had an account still have an active account. And of course not everyone uses that account with true regularity. Keep in mind, these are the most active trackers at their apex.

    Take a look for yourself on your favorite trackers. I'm sure you'll see that to build a community it takes a lot of fresh blood coming in for months and years, whether at a trickle by chance (slowly built through open signups and liberal invites) or by force (create a buzz and maintain exclusivity). No new site has survived on the exclusivity model. I can name a handful that tried this and failed. You cannot establish exclusivity and a reputation for "greatness" overnight. Those that are still around were opened 3-4 years ago, at least.

    As a quick counterpoint to the generic security argument, there are quite a few very large and open "private" trackers and some tremendous public trackers. How often are people even threatened with lawsuits or sued? How often are people actually busted by the police? Almost never. Millions of users and maybe a handful are subjected to stress over downloading. Security in small numbers is just an argument crafted by those who prefer smaller trackers for whatever personal reason as a justification for keeping it small. I'm fine if you want to keep the club to a few thousand and enjoy some admittedly greater sense of security, but I think there is a real middle ground between 1337x or Demonoid and CN or ITS. Let's be reasonable.

  10. BitTorrent   -   #10
    Intr4ns1t's Avatar Pro-antinegativist BT Rep: +4
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    pressing ur thnx button
    Posts
    689
    Quote Originally Posted by Sonnentier View Post
    I guess basically staff thinks they get the profits from running the site (respect, control over members, getting ass kissed etc.) without taking unneeded risks (and getting problems). Most private site staffers are no Julian Assange, they don't care about free information and stuff whatsoever.
    Purely off topic, but most accounts tend to describe said Julian Assange as exactly what you stated in the bolded part of this quote.
    Quote Originally Posted by KFlint
    Think 9 is the new 10.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •