Even Better Option To Not Use 56kers

[ghost944]

im on 56k and i share

[asmithz]

I have 56k and i share.


The more we share the more easyer people can get files.

[RealitY]

This is an idea that belongs to places like IRC or DC++ which do not swarm files.
KaZaa = The more the better.
Enough Said.

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

[hugoharding]

Whats wrong with 56kers, i'm one and i share.

if you want to cut them off because you are getting a slow download speed, that means that you are not connected to anyone with anything except 56k, therefore if you werent downloading from them, you wouldn't be downloading anything at all, you would have a 0% complete download.

so be happy, if the only person with the file you want is a 56k user, then download a bit slower, you'll get the file in the end.

so stop complaining about them, and be happy with what you've got.

Hugo.

[TheGamingSummers76]

I was a 56Ker who shared up until a week ago when I got cable, and I know how they feel. All 56Kers are not selfish. I had almost 1000 files and was glad to share. I also hated when idiotic bandwidth-happy monsters cut me off. Now I have BB. It wouldn't be right for me to cut other people off even though they are taking up only like 3% of my bandwidth. Now what would happen if you were desperately looking for 1 file, that noone else had except for a "lowly" 56Ker? What would you do?

[kylman5000]

Originally posted by Wolfmight@11 July 2003 - 21:19
that'd suk.. then there'd be less resources.. hey an extra 2kb/s or two isnt that bad when added to 100kb/s.

Ok, sure k++ allows almost unlimited connections, it take up bandwidth to connect to these 2kb/s sources. So now, instead of a 100kb/s its like 99kb/s. soon, add 20 or 30 56ks'er you lose a lot of bandwidth from the fast people.

If you think about it, a 100kb/s alone is better than 102kb/s together.

[randm01]

Originally posted by kylman5000+15 July 2003 - 23:47--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (kylman5000 &#064; 15 July 2003 - 23:47)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Wolfmight@11 July 2003 - 21:19
that&#39;d suk.. then there&#39;d be less resources.. hey an extra 2kb/s or two isnt that bad when added to 100kb/s.

Ok, sure k++ allows almost unlimited connections, it take up bandwidth to connect to these 2kb/s sources. So now, instead of a 100kb/s its like 99kb/s. soon, add 20 or 30 56ks&#39;er you lose a lot of bandwidth from the fast people.

If you think about it, a 100kb/s alone is better than 102kb/s together. [/b][/quote]
maybe you should go think about it a LITTLE bit more...like 2kb more....if your in such a hurry to get a file 2kb will make it complete in that much less time...fafuksake...some ppl just need to get a life.....but thats just my opinion.

[Cl1mh4224rd]

Download from 10 56k users at 2kB/s = 20kB/s total. Not too shabby.

Block those 56k&#39;ers and what do you think your download speed is now? That&#39;s right... nothing, zero, zilch..

[stownplayer]

i&#39;m a 56k connection and i share almost 12,000 files. That is over 55 gigs of data. Please don&#39;t apply a label to all 56k people because some of us can only use what is available in our area.


Stownplayer

[RPerry]

I am also on 56k, and I think the majority of us thinks this idea stinks