Dimeadozen help

[Kirk McElhearn]

I'm downloading the torrents for the two Melkweg videos, and after the
last time I restarted my computer, I'm getting an error message saying
"share ratio violation; please raise your share ratio up to 0.25
first". The problem is that while I can't download, I also can't seed.
Also, it's not really my fault that there arent' many leeches; I've
shared over 900 MB for the two torrents so far...

Is this just a tracker problem, or am I condemned to not be able to
download the rest of these torrents?

Thanks,

Kirk

[p***@yahoo.com]

http://wiki.dimeadozen.org/index.php/DimeFAQ:Frequently_Asked_Questions#What_is_SRE_.28share_ratio_enforcement.29.3F_How_does_it_work.3F

Pat Buzby
Chicago, IL

[Kirk McElhearn]

Post by p***@yahoo.com
http://wiki.dimeadozen.org/index.php/DimeFAQ:Frequently_Asked_Questions#What_is_SRE_.28share_ratio_enforcement.29.3F_How_does_it_work.3F

So
that means I can neither get these torrents completely, nor improve my
ratio, since the system won't even let me upload... That's pretty dumb,
IMHO...

Since I had to create a new account to get these torrents (my old one
must have been nuked since I don't use dimeadozen much), I'm basically
screwed.

Is anyone going to seed these torrents (the two Melkweg videos) to
other servers that have less ridiculous rules?

Kirk

[band beyond description]

Post by Kirk McElhearn

Post by p***@yahoo.com
http://wiki.dimeadozen.org/index.php/DimeFAQ:Frequently_Asked_Questions#What_is_SRE_.28share_ratio_enforcement.29.3F_How_does_it_work.3F

So

that

Post by Kirk McElhearn
means I can neither get these torrents completely, nor improve my
ratio, since the system won't even let me upload... That's pretty dumb,
IMHO...
Since I had to create a new account to get these torrents (my old one
must have been nuked since I don't use dimeadozen much), I'm basically
screwed.
Is anyone going to seed these torrents (the two Melkweg videos) to
other servers that have less ridiculous rules?
Kirk

grab something else that will help you get your share ratio up, like
within the early swarm of downloaders of another popular DVD, which in
the long run will allow you to give back much more than you've taken,
easily; otherwise, create another ID. not to brag, but i don't have a
2.72 share ratio for nuttin'.
--
Peace,
Steve

"Think wrongly,
if you please,
but in all cases,
think for yourself."
~Doris Lessing

Lest the amnesiacs forget:
http://www.workingforchange.com/comic.cfm?itemid=20086
http://www.workingforchange.com/comic.cfm?itemid=20111

[bradish]

not to brag, but i don't have a 2.72 share ratio for nuttin'.

Eliteist torrenter....lol

[Von Face]

Post by Kirk McElhearn
"share ratio violation; please raise your share ratio up to 0.25

Go to Trader's Den...> http://www.thetradersden.org/?

They don't screw with you.

And there's always etree.....

[Kirk McElhearn]

Post by Von Face

Post by Kirk McElhearn
"share ratio violation; please raise your share ratio up to 0.25

Go to Trader's Den...> http://www.thetradersden.org/?
They don't screw with you.

Thanks.

Post by Von Face
And there's always etree.....

Yeah, but I haven't seen these torrents there yet.

Best,

Kirk

[dwolf]

I had a friend with ratio problems.... first thing... Don't ask the
moderators for mercy... they will show you NONE !!!! If you have a
completed download on your hard drive and you did not alter it at all... you
can go back to the download link and fire it up, if there are any leechers
you will be one of the seeds and begin uploading, getting your ratio up..
The only other solutions are to learn how to seed a show... that was too
complicated for my friend and he does not live near me, What he finally did
was make a small donation and he was given a better ratio. At first I really
despised that option... but maybe it's an okay donation for all the goodies
you get for notta...

Post by Kirk McElhearn

Post by Von Face

Post by Kirk McElhearn
"share ratio violation; please raise your share ratio up to 0.25

Go to Trader's Den...> http://www.thetradersden.org/?
They don't screw with you.

Thanks.

Post by Von Face
And there's always etree.....

Yeah, but I haven't seen these torrents there yet.
Best,
Kirk
--
Read my blog, Kirkville
http://www.mcelhearn.com

[DG]

Post by Kirk McElhearn
I'm downloading the torrents for the two Melkweg videos, and after the
last time I restarted my computer, I'm getting an error message saying
"share ratio violation; please raise your share ratio up to 0.25
first". The problem is that while I can't download, I also can't seed.
Also, it's not really my fault that there arent' many leeches; I've
shared over 900 MB for the two torrents so far...
Is this just a tracker problem, or am I condemned to not be able to
download the rest of these torrents?

I've run into this same bullshit. Torrents thrive the more people
involved. Limiting their access is a power grab by some twit. The
best thing to do is just let it sit and you will eventually get it.
Might take a week or a month but you will get it.

bt.etree.org is a great spot to get music. Usenet binaries are my
favorite. Fast as your net connection and no power grab possible.

[Jperdue4]

Post by DG
I've run into this same bullshit. Torrents thrive the more people
involved. Limiting their access is a power grab by some twit. The
best thing to do is just let it sit and you will eventually get it.
Might take a week or a month but you will get it.
bt.etree.org is a great spot to get music. Usenet binaries are my
favorite. Fast as your net connection and no power grab possible.

I think sharing is a good policy, i dont have a problem at all with
dime, its VERY easy to get your ratio up, just share..
go to the front page that shows what has been posted in the last 24
hours, grab something that has alot of folks wanting it, download it
and then leave the window open after you finish. Thats all there is to
it, leave it oipen maybe overnight and the next day while your at work
and presto, your ratio goes up.OR, go into your computer and see what
you still have on your hard drive. Go to dime, find that torrent,
click on it like you want to download it, and it will automatically
see that you already have the whole show and it will seed it. Ive
been seding a Bruuuce show for about 3 days now and my ratio is up
over 1.50 now. Dime does a great job of weeding out inferior seeds
etc. I like the other sites too but dime has more of what i personally
am looking for. Ive only been doing this for about 3 weeks and so far
ive been able to figure out enough to download and then share shows.
Im in heaven with my new computer and connection!!
jonp

[bradish]

Post by Jperdue4

Post by DG
I've run into this same bullshit. Torrents thrive the more people
involved. Limiting their access is a power grab by some twit. The
best thing to do is just let it sit and you will eventually get it.
Might take a week or a month but you will get it.
bt.etree.org is a great spot to get music. Usenet binaries are my
favorite. Fast as your net connection and no power grab possible.

I think sharing is a good policy, i dont have a problem at all with
dime, its VERY easy to get your ratio up, just share..
go to the front page that shows what has been posted in the last 24
hours, grab something that has alot of folks wanting it, download it
and then leave the window open after you finish. Thats all there is to
it, leave it oipen maybe overnight and the next day while your at work
and presto, your ratio goes up.OR, go into your computer and see what
you still have on your hard drive. Go to dime, find that torrent,
click on it like you want to download it, and it will automatically
see that you already have the whole show and it will seed it. Ive
been seding a Bruuuce show for about 3 days now and my ratio is up
over 1.50 now. Dime does a great job of weeding out inferior seeds
etc. I like the other sites too but dime has more of what i personally
am looking for. Ive only been doing this for about 3 weeks and so far
ive been able to figure out enough to download and then share shows.
Im in heaven with my new computer and connection!!

Lossless legs is another favorite of mine. http://www.shnflac.net/

I forget which site it was, but I joined them to get that GD Tivoli
Gardens show. I tried to get my ratio up, but then they sent out an email
that said you could ***buy*** upload credits for like $1 per GB or
somesuch nonsense. They called it a donation, I called it fuckin extortion.

I got ***right*** on **that**

Donations are one thing, quid pro torrent is another....

[Kirk McElhearn]

Post by Jperdue4
I think sharing is a good policy, i dont have a problem at all with
dime, its VERY easy to get your ratio up, just share..
go to the front page that shows what has been posted in the last 24
hours, grab something that has alot of folks wanting it, download it
and then leave the window open after you finish.

Well, no. As I explained, I had to create a new account, and was
downloading the two Melkweg torrents. So since there weren't many
people leeching (I have enough upstream bandwidth), I couldn't get to
the end of them to share; hence, I can't download another torrent to
allow it to upload. Basically, the site said, "Here, download this for
a while, but we won't let you finish it - now go away."

Kirk

[p***@yahoo.com]

Post by Kirk McElhearn
Well, no. As I explained, I had to create a new account, and was
downloading the two Melkweg torrents. So since there weren't many
people leeching (I have enough upstream bandwidth), I couldn't get to
the end of them to share; hence, I can't download another torrent to
allow it to upload. Basically, the site said, "Here, download this for
a while, but we won't let you finish it - now go away."

Try creating a new torrent and seeding it there (perhaps a Dead show
downloaded from another site since there isn't usually much Dead on
DIME lately). That might get your ratio above .25.

Pat Buzby
Chicago, IL

[Brad Greer]

Post by Kirk McElhearn

Post by Jperdue4
I think sharing is a good policy, i dont have a problem at all with
dime, its VERY easy to get your ratio up, just share..
go to the front page that shows what has been posted in the last 24
hours, grab something that has alot of folks wanting it, download it
and then leave the window open after you finish.

Well, no. As I explained, I had to create a new account, and was
downloading the two Melkweg torrents. So since there weren't many
people leeching (I have enough upstream bandwidth), I couldn't get to
the end of them to share; hence, I can't download another torrent to
allow it to upload. Basically, the site said, "Here, download this for
a while, but we won't let you finish it - now go away."

No, that's not what they said to you. When you signed up you could
have read the FAQ, share ratio is explained there as well as some tips
for how not to get yourself in trouble (hint - downloading two DVDs
that don't have a lot of leechers at once is a good way to get your
ratio out of whack). If you hadn't disconnected from the torrents to
begin with you would have been okay as well - they allow you to finish
any torrents you're on if your ratio goes bad, they don't let you
connect to new torrents (or reconnect to partially downloaded
torrents) if you have a ratio of under .25 and have downloaded more
than 5 MB.

[DGDevin]

Post by Jperdue4
I think sharing is a good policy, i dont have a problem at all with
dime, its VERY easy to get your ratio up, just share..

Exactly, it works by people helping each other out because they help
themselves in the process. Allowing the parasites to download endlessly
without requiring them to seed and it could collapse. There is no "grab for
power" involved, it's simply a matter of requiring people to pitch in and
help if they want to belong to that community. If the rules seem a bit
strict at times, the admins can probably relate many negative experiences
that led them to take such an approach.

[Kirk McElhearn]

Post by DGDevin
Exactly, it works by people helping each other out because they help
themselves in the process. Allowing the parasites to download
endlessly without requiring them to seed and it could collapse. There
is no "grab for power" involved, it's simply a matter of requiring
people to pitch in and help if they want to belong to that community.
If the rules seem a bit strict at times, the admins can probably relate
many negative experiences that led them to take such an approach.

I'll repeat what I said - in my case, I had to create a new account,
and couldn't even finish the torrents I started. How does that help
anyone? I can't get the torrents, and I can't keep uploading. Even if I
could keep uploading without downloading until my ratio reached their
limit I'd be happy, but by cutting me off they prevent even that. So
it's a waste of bandwidth from those seeding (because I didn't even get
the torrents) and it effectively cuts me out of any future sharing
until I create another account...

Kirk

[Dustydevils]

Hard to imagine anyone even questioning how much Dime rules. I could go
on and on, but frankly the worst thing about it is that it's beyond
addicting. Just when I want to stop and catch up, something like these
Melkweg videos pop up.

Post by Kirk McElhearn

Post by DGDevin
Exactly, it works by people helping each other out because they help
themselves in the process. Allowing the parasites to download
endlessly without requiring them to seed and it could collapse. There
is no "grab for power" involved, it's simply a matter of requiring
people to pitch in and help if they want to belong to that community.
If the rules seem a bit strict at times, the admins can probably relate
many negative experiences that led them to take such an approach.

I'll repeat what I said - in my case, I had to create a new account,
and couldn't even finish the torrents I started. How does that help
anyone? I can't get the torrents, and I can't keep uploading. Even if I
could keep uploading without downloading until my ratio reached their
limit I'd be happy, but by cutting me off they prevent even that. So
it's a waste of bandwidth from those seeding (because I didn't even get
the torrents) and it effectively cuts me out of any future sharing
until I create another account...
Kirk
--
Read my blog, Kirkville
http://www.mcelhearn.com

[DGDevin]

I'll repeat what I said - in my case, I had to create a new account, and
couldn't even finish the torrents I started. How does that help anyone?

I'm not suggesting Dime is perfect or your case isn't an unfortunate one,
but the outpouring of praise of Dime in this thread should indicate that
your case is the exception to the rule. I don't know how you got your ratio
so out of whack, but it does seem as if you'll need to start over and pay
more attention to making sure you upload enough to keep your ratio in the
green, good luck.

[Kirk McElhearn]

Post by DGDevin

Post by Kirk McElhearn
I'll repeat what I said - in my case, I had to create a new account,
and couldn't even finish the torrents I started. How does that help
anyone?

I'm not suggesting Dime is perfect or your case isn't an unfortunate
one, but the outpouring of praise of Dime in this thread should
indicate that your case is the exception to the rule. I don't know how
you got your ratio so out of whack, but it does seem as if you'll need
to start over and pay more attention to making sure you upload enough
to keep your ratio in the green, good luck.

It got "out of whack" by simply trying to download two torrents. They
wouldn't complete, since there weren't enough leechers for my ratio to
be high enough. If that's how the system works, it's clearly flawed. If
you can't even download a torrent without getting knocked out, there's
something wrong.

But, hey, the "outpouring of praise" suggests I should just move along
and look somewhere else...

Kirk

[Gladys]

Post by Kirk McElhearn
It got "out of whack" by simply trying to download two torrents. They
wouldn't complete, since there weren't enough leechers for my ratio to
be high enough. If that's how the system works, it's clearly flawed. If
you can't even download a torrent without getting knocked out, there's
something wrong.

One thing you might try is limiting the amount you download to 1 kbs and
letting it run for a while with the outbound opened wide. Eventually
someone will take data from you. If it won't let you start up the
torrent though I think you're pretty much screwed. I'd mail the admins
and tell them the story in a nice way - maybe they'll fix things for you.

Post by Kirk McElhearn
But, hey, the "outpouring of praise" suggests I should just move along
and look somewhere else...

You might want to do that, but there seems to be reasonable ways to try
to fix it. If you put your energy into that you might be successful.
Good Luck! :-)

Gladys.

[p***@yahoo.com]

Post by Gladys
One thing you might try is limiting the amount you download to 1 kbs and
letting it run for a while with the outbound opened wide. Eventually
someone will take data from you. If it won't let you start up the
torrent though I think you're pretty much screwed. I'd mail the admins
and tell them the story in a nice way - maybe they'll fix things for you.

Maybe that would work, but I suspect the admins would direct him to the
two options mentioned in the FAQ:

1) Seed a completed download from DIME (it sounds like he doesn't have
one) or

2) Create a new torrent and seed it. As I mentioned earlier, there are
not a lot of Dead shows on DIME, so he could probably grab one from
etree or shnflac, reseed it to DIME, get above .25 and jump back on the
Melkweg torrents.

Pat Buzby
Chicago, IL

[Brad Greer]

Post by Kirk McElhearn

Post by DGDevin

Post by Kirk McElhearn
I'll repeat what I said - in my case, I had to create a new account,
and couldn't even finish the torrents I started. How does that help
anyone?

I'm not suggesting Dime is perfect or your case isn't an unfortunate
one, but the outpouring of praise of Dime in this thread should
indicate that your case is the exception to the rule. I don't know how
you got your ratio so out of whack, but it does seem as if you'll need
to start over and pay more attention to making sure you upload enough
to keep your ratio in the green, good luck.

It got "out of whack" by simply trying to download two torrents. They
wouldn't complete, since there weren't enough leechers for my ratio to
be high enough. If that's how the system works, it's clearly flawed. If
you can't even download a torrent without getting knocked out, there's
something wrong.

You can download a torrent without getting knocked off, the vast
majority of people manage to do it. You chose to download two DVDs at
once (over 7 GB of data) that were pretty late in the cycle and had
few leechers, your opportunity to give back was low and you didn't
read (or understand fully) the rules regarding share ratio violation.

Had you started by downloading one DVD and allowing that to seed over
a .25 ratio you would not have had a problem. Had you started by
downloading a few CDs and seeding them to well over a .25 ratio you
woudn't have a problem. It's not the system, it's how you attempted
to use it (and I can understand not understanding how your decision to
download two DVDs at once could get you in trouble, btw).

Post by Kirk McElhearn
But, hey, the "outpouring of praise" suggests I should just move along
and look somewhere else...

Your choice. Personally, I think the share ratio minimum at Dime
makes a lot of sense - it prevents people from grabbing and running
and not contributing back to the community (I'm not suggesting that
was your intent - you picked a bad choice of torrents to start out
with). The variety and quality on Dime is excellent, IMO. They have
some rules that can be a pain at time (especially in regard to
torrents that contain any trace of commercially released material) but
that's their call - they've been shut down in the past and are free to
make whatever rules they think they need to keep the operation up and
running.

[bradish]

Post by DGDevin

I'll repeat what I said - in my case, I had to create a new account, and
couldn't even finish the torrents I started. How does that help anyone?

I'm not suggesting Dime is perfect or your case isn't an unfortunate one,
but the outpouring of praise of Dime in this thread should indicate that
your case is the exception to the rule. I don't know how you got your
ratio so out of whack, but it does seem as if you'll need to start over
and pay more attention to making sure you upload enough to keep your ratio
in the green, good luck.

I was just over 1.0 ratio when I decided to torrent GD Tivoli Gardens DVD
and GD Duke 1978 DVD. Poof! Ratio Kaput!

I just now got back over 1.0.

Its not a good idea have your first torrent be a 9GB DVD thats a month old.

[Jperdue4]

On Fri, 24 Nov 2006 13:14:28 -0600, "bradish"

Post by bradish
Its not a good idea have your first torrent be a 9GB DVD thats a month old.

BINGO!.
JonP

[Bobby McGee]

Post by Jperdue4
I think sharing is a good policy, i dont have a problem at all with
dime, its VERY easy to get your ratio up, just share..
go to the front page that shows what has been posted in the last 24
hours, grab something that has alot of folks wanting it, download it
and then leave the window open after you finish. Thats all there is to
it, leave it oipen maybe overnight and the next day while your at work
and presto, your ratio goes up.

Exactly, it is that simple.
And those people who say to go to the tradingden or etree are nuts.
Yep, they both have some killer shows once in awhile but we all know
that dime is THE place to be.
Everytime I open it I fell like a lottery winner.

[Brad Greer]

Post by DG

Post by Kirk McElhearn
I'm downloading the torrents for the two Melkweg videos, and after the
last time I restarted my computer, I'm getting an error message saying
"share ratio violation; please raise your share ratio up to 0.25
first". The problem is that while I can't download, I also can't seed.
Also, it's not really my fault that there arent' many leeches; I've
shared over 900 MB for the two torrents so far...
Is this just a tracker problem, or am I condemned to not be able to
download the rest of these torrents?

I've run into this same bullshit. Torrents thrive the more people
involved. Limiting their access is a power grab by some twit. The
best thing to do is just let it sit and you will eventually get it.
Might take a week or a month but you will get it.

Actually, torrenting works by having people give back what they take.
Ideally, every person on a torrent should have a ratio of 1.0 (the
uploaded exactly what they downloaded), in practice this is of course
impossible (for example, the original seeder can't "take" anything for
a given torrent).

The policies at Dime are pretty lenient, IMO, and designed to keep out
people who just download without giving back to the torrent community
(selfish bastards is another way to describe these people). In order
to be considered a member in good standing of the tracker they only
ask you to give back 1/4 of what you download (a 0.25 share ratio).
Even with typical home internet access that has higher download rates
than upload rates this shouldn't be that hard to do.

For Kirk, the easiest way out of your current problem is to donate to
Dime - they will give you a larger "enforcement period" before
checking your ratio again. That way you'll be able to finish
downloading the Melkweg shows, I'd strongly recommend keeping your
bittorrent client open long enough to get your share ratio well above
the minimum .25 ratio. Another choice would be to sign up for The
Traders Den where these shows were originally torrented.

[Dave Kelly]

DimeDozen is THE best download site on the web
Bar none.
Etree is OK if your looking for phish and disco bisquits
audience recordings...
Traders Den is cool...
But NO other site has the sheer volume and diversity
of genres that Dime offers.
Dont hate on Dime.
Whew!

[DG]

Post by Dave Kelly
DimeDozen is THE best download site on the web
Bar none.

I disagree. The best sites want more peope to join a
torrent so that it speeds up. Restricting it with a login/
password slows it down. They also probably log IPs.

Post by Dave Kelly
Etree is OK if your looking for phish and disco bisquits
audience recordings...

As if that is all they have... I really enjoy the Mofro that has
been on there recently.

Post by Dave Kelly
Traders Den is cool...
But NO other site has the sheer volume and diversity
of genres that Dime offers.
Dont hate on Dime.
Whew!

They have good torrents but I'm suprised that they are still up
given all the non taper friendly stuff they have.

[Dave Kelly]

Post by DG
As if that is all they have... I really enjoy the Mofro that has
been on there recently.

Mofro?...you're making my point...Mofro?....
ANYways....you best get on over there...
theys a new Keller Williams Incidents aud up!
Mofro! <You kids KILL me!...shakes head>

[DG]

Post by Dave Kelly

Post by DG
As if that is all they have... I really enjoy the Mofro that has
been on there recently.

Mofro?...you're making my point...Mofro?....

Listen to that Hammond and get back to me...

Post by Dave Kelly
ANYways....you best get on over there...
theys a new Keller Williams Incidents aud up!

Monotonous loops for all!!!!

Post by Dave Kelly
Mofro! <You kids KILL me!...shakes head>

Take three Lochloosa's and post again in the morning.

[Brad Greer]

Post by DG

Post by Dave Kelly
DimeDozen is THE best download site on the web
Bar none.

I disagree. The best sites want more peope to join a
torrent so that it speeds up. Restricting it with a login/
password slows it down. They also probably log IPs.

No, they don't log IPs (other than to the degree required of all
trackers - they have to let other peers know your IP so they can
connect, of course, but they don't keep a record of your IP or what
you've downloaded). As to a login/password slowing things down, how
does that work? You log into the web site and download a torrent
file. You open the torrent with your BT client and start downloading.
How do you think the login/password impacts speed?

Post by DG

Post by Dave Kelly
Traders Den is cool...
But NO other site has the sheer volume and diversity
of genres that Dime offers.
Dont hate on Dime.
Whew!

They have good torrents but I'm suprised that they are still up
given all the non taper friendly stuff they have.

They have rules regarding what's allowed - if there's been an sniff of
a commercial release (including pay-per-view broadcasts turned into
DVDs, for example) they don't allow them. Compared to sites that
torrent commercially released albums and movies they're not as big an
issue in the labels eyes (although they've had their share of warnings
over the years).

[bradish]

Post by DG

Post by Dave Kelly
DimeDozen is THE best download site on the web
Bar none.

I disagree. The best sites want more peope to join a
torrent so that it speeds up. Restricting it with a login/
password slows it down. They also probably log IPs.

And so what if they logged IPs? lol

Im pretty sure IPs are not real hard to obtain.

[The Lord of Eltingville]

Post by Dave Kelly
DimeDozen is THE best download site on the web
Bar none.
Etree is OK if your looking for phish and disco bisquits
audience recordings...
Traders Den is cool...
But NO other site has the sheer volume and diversity
of genres that Dime offers.
Dont hate on Dime.
Whew!

HRYK... There may be other sites out there, but none of them...not a
single, solitary one of them have the variety (and volume) of live music
and videos that dime offers up 24x7.

People complain about not being able to get accounts. All that's needed
is a bit of patience and a willingness to re-apply once a day. Inactive
accounts are deleted daily and openings are always popping up.

I like the idea of share ratios. It helps weed out the mooches who just
snatch and run without even trying to upload the number of bytes they
downloaded.

As for the membership limiting the number of people on a
torrent...horsepoop. Popular torrents often have hundreds of seeders
and you can download a full DVD or a 4 CD set in a few hours if you've
got he bandwidth. Even with my pokey DSL, I was able to simultaneously
d/load a 1992 Pere Ubu acoustic set (300Mb) and 2 Prince shows (~2.2Gb
total) in under 10 hours. Immediately after that was completed, I
downloaded a 4.5Gb video of the last filmed rehearsal of Bob Marley &
The Wailers in ~9 hours.

One of the other gripes is that they accept financial contributions from
their members. Well, somebody's got to pay for all that bandwidth and
disc space. Telcos, webhosts, and data centers don't give that stuff
away. I've got no problem kicking up a couple extra bucks every now and
then to help keep the packets flowing.

Dime fucking rules.

[DG]

Post by The Lord of Eltingville
As for the membership limiting the number of people on a
torrent...horsepoop.

Do you understand how torrents work? If you limit the number of
seeders on a torrent then you are slowing it down.

Post by The Lord of Eltingville
One of the other gripes is that they accept financial contributions from
their members.

I don't buy but have no problem with people selling bootlegs. This is
what they are doing when they charge money for access.

Post by The Lord of Eltingville
Well, somebody's got to pay for all that bandwidth and
disc space. <SNIP>

Geeze... You don't understand how bit torrent works.

[The Lord of Eltingville]

Post by DG

Post by The Lord of Eltingville
As for the membership limiting the number of people on a
torrent...horsepoop.

Do you understand how torrents work? If you limit the number of
seeders on a torrent then you are slowing it down.

If you're trying to say that the number of seeders on any torrent on
dime is being limited (in reality, not in theory) by their membership
cap of 100,000 accounts, you're either delusional or simply spouting
bullshit.

I have yet to see a torrent from one of the sites you recommend move at
anywhere near the speed that dime torrent regularly do.

Post by DG

Post by The Lord of Eltingville
One of the other gripes is that they accept financial contributions from
their members.

I don't buy but have no problem with people selling bootlegs. This is
what they are doing when they charge money for access.

There's a difference between accepting donations and charging for
access. I would have expected you to be bright enough to understand
that. My mistake...

Post by DG

Post by The Lord of Eltingville
Well, somebody's got to pay for all that bandwidth and
disc space. <SNIP>

Geeze... You don't understand how bit torrent works.

If that's what you need to think, have at it.

[DGDevin]

If you're trying to say that the number of seeders on any torrent on dime
is being limited (in reality, not in theory) by their membership cap of
100,000 accounts, you're either delusional or simply spouting bullshit.

And we should be surprised by this exactly why?

There's a difference between accepting donations and charging for access.
I would have expected you to be bright enough to understand that. My
mistake...

Yup.

[The Lord of Eltingville]

Post by DGDevin

If you're trying to say that the number of seeders on any torrent on dime
is being limited (in reality, not in theory) by their membership cap of
100,000 accounts, you're either delusional or simply spouting bullshit.

And we should be surprised by this exactly why?

I don't think anyone would be.

Post by DGDevin

There's a difference between accepting donations and charging for access.
I would have expected you to be bright enough to understand that. My
mistake...

Yup.

I was woozy from too much pumpkin pie. Silly mistakes like that won't
happen again.

[DG]

Post by DGDevin
And we should be surprised by this exactly why?

Sniping again...

[DGDevin]

Post by DG
Sniping again...

Just marvelling at your ability to get both feet in your mouth at the same
time, "Power grab," good grief. Dime is an amazing resource, and it works
just fine for people who aren't greedy, your bleating notwithstanding.

[DG]

Post by DGDevin

Post by DG
Sniping again...

Just marvelling at your ability to get both feet in your mouth at the same
time, "Power grab," good grief.

What is the reason to make torrents require a login/pass?

What is the reason to restrict access to a system that is designed to
work better with more nodes?

Post by DGDevin
Dime is an amazing resource,

No doubt...

Post by DGDevin
and it works
just fine for people who aren't greedy, your bleating notwithstanding.

Greedy for wanting a system to work at peak efficiency?

[DGDevin]

Post by DG
What is the reason to make torrents require a login/pass?
What is the reason to restrict access to a system that is designed to
work better with more nodes?

Has it occured to you that limiting the size might be a deliberate tactic to
avoid attracting unfriendly attention from the labels and their goon-squad
the RIAA?

[bradish]

Post by DGDevin

Post by DG
What is the reason to make torrents require a login/pass?
What is the reason to restrict access to a system that is designed to
work better with more nodes?

Has it occured to you that limiting the size might be a deliberate tactic
to avoid attracting unfriendly attention from the labels and their
goon-squad the RIAA?

Maybe, but if I was an artist/RIAA person, it wouldn't matter-unauthorized
distribution is wrong, reguardless of size, etc. YMMV

[DG]

Post by bradish
Maybe, but if I was an artist/RIAA person, it wouldn't matter-unauthorized
distribution is wrong, reguardless of size, etc. YMMV

Of course...

[DGDevin]

Post by bradish
Maybe, but if I was an artist/RIAA person, it wouldn't matter-unauthorized
distribution is wrong, reguardless of size, etc. YMMV

I'm torn on this. On the one hand unathorized copying is illegal (not
always the same thing as wrong). On the other hand a lot of good music
would never be heard by anyone if it was left up to the greedy and
incompetent swine at the labels. I draw the line at commercially available
releases, but boots of live shows that the label never released (and never
will) are another matter to me, and I fully realize that decades of lobbying
have put the law on the side of the labels in this regard, big companies get
their way, big surprise.

Of course there is an almost totally effective way to stop unauthorized
distribution--authorize it. Pearl Jam sold two and a half million copies of
"official bootlegs" from their 2000 tour, The Who sell CDs and DVDs of their
concerts with the money going to charity, and of course the Dead took the
steam out of the sails of bootleggers pretty well, didn't they.

But it remains that the RIAA (which has always tended to overplay the volume
of bootlegging for its own financial benefit) is more likely to go after a
larger "unauthorized distribution" operation than a small one, so it is
quite possible that Dime choses to stay small for that reason in addition to
their policy of shutting down trading of commercial releases.

[Kirk McElhearn]

Post by DGDevin
But it remains that the RIAA (which has always tended to overplay the
volume of bootlegging for its own financial benefit) is more likely to
go after a larger "unauthorized distribution" operation than a small
one, so it is quite possible that Dime choses to stay small for that
reason in addition to their policy of shutting down trading of
commercial releases.

AFAIK, there have been no cases where sites that simply list available
torrents have been found guilty of anything. They're not providing the
music.

Kirk

[Brad Greer]

Post by Kirk McElhearn

Post by DGDevin
But it remains that the RIAA (which has always tended to overplay the
volume of bootlegging for its own financial benefit) is more likely to
go after a larger "unauthorized distribution" operation than a small
one, so it is quite possible that Dime choses to stay small for that
reason in addition to their policy of shutting down trading of
commercial releases.

AFAIK, there have been no cases where sites that simply list available
torrents have been found guilty of anything. They're not providing the
music.

However, the lawyers for record labels have gone after the ISP that
Dime uses to host their web server and tracker - the ISP originally
caved because they didn't want the legal hassle, Dime changed their
name (they used to be Easytree) and implemented tougher rules
regarding copyrighted material.

[DG]

Post by DGDevin

Post by DG
What is the reason to make torrents require a login/pass?
What is the reason to restrict access to a system that is designed to
work better with more nodes?

Has it occured to you that limiting the size might be a deliberate tactic to
avoid attracting unfriendly attention from the labels and their goon-squad
the RIAA?

It's not like they are stealth. They are wide open and if they are
charging as some have suggested then they will get popped.

[The Lord of Eltingville]

Post by DG

Post by DGDevin

Post by DG
What is the reason to make torrents require a login/pass?
What is the reason to restrict access to a system that is designed to
work better with more nodes?

Has it occured to you that limiting the size might be a deliberate tactic to
avoid attracting unfriendly attention from the labels and their goon-squad
the RIAA?

It's not like they are stealth. They are wide open and if they are
charging as some have suggested then they will get popped.

That's like saying The Salvation Army charges people to walk past their
bell ringers during the holiday season. Nobody's forced to put a cent
in the kettle if they don't want to.

[DG]

Post by The Lord of Eltingville

Post by DG

Post by DGDevin

Post by DG
What is the reason to make torrents require a login/pass?
What is the reason to restrict access to a system that is designed to
work better with more nodes?

Has it occured to you that limiting the size might be a deliberate tactic to
avoid attracting unfriendly attention from the labels and their goon-squad
the RIAA?

It's not like they are stealth. They are wide open and if they are
charging as some have suggested then they will get popped.

That's like saying The Salvation Army charges people to walk past their
bell ringers during the holiday season. Nobody's forced to put a cent
in the kettle if they don't want to.

Except for the fact that the Salvation Army doesn't control your
access to torrents without a donation.

[The Lord of Eltingville]

Post by DG

Post by The Lord of Eltingville

Post by DG

Post by DGDevin

Post by DG
What is the reason to make torrents require a login/pass?
What is the reason to restrict access to a system that is designed to
work better with more nodes?

Has it occured to you that limiting the size might be a deliberate tactic to
avoid attracting unfriendly attention from the labels and their goon-squad
the RIAA?

It's not like they are stealth. They are wide open and if they are
charging as some have suggested then they will get popped.

That's like saying The Salvation Army charges people to walk past their
bell ringers during the holiday season. Nobody's forced to put a cent
in the kettle if they don't want to.

Except for the fact that the Salvation Army doesn't control your
access to torrents without a donation.

Nor does dime. I'd be surprised if more than 1/2-1% of the people who
have accounts have ever donated a cent.

You can keep trying to spin it any way you want, but the fact is that
dime doesn't charge anyone a cent to do a thing. The kettle's there,
but you're free to ignore it.

Have you ever had a dime account and used it?

[DGDevin]

Post by The Lord of Eltingville

Post by DG
Except for the fact that the Salvation Army doesn't control your
access to torrents without a donation.

Nor does dime. I'd be surprised if more than 1/2-1% of the people who
have accounts have ever donated a cent.

Ding ding ding, we have a winner.

[DGDevin]

Post by DG
It's not like they are stealth. They are wide open and if they are
charging as some have suggested then they will get popped.

They shut down trades of commercial releases, and they have chosen to remain
much smaller than they could be. Do you have a better explanation of those
policies than what I have proposed? And one more time, they are not
"charging," they accept donations, I've never met anyone who uses Dime who
has ever sent them any money.

[DG]

Post by DGDevin

Post by DG
It's not like they are stealth. They are wide open and if they are
charging as some have suggested then they will get popped.

They shut down trades of commercial releases, and they have chosen to remain
much smaller than they could be. Do you have a better explanation of those
policies than what I have proposed? And one more time, they are not
"charging," they accept donations, I've never met anyone who uses Dime who
has ever sent them any money.

If you pay to have your ratio upped then that is a "charge".

[Brad Greer]

Post by DG

Post by DGDevin

Post by DG
It's not like they are stealth. They are wide open and if they are
charging as some have suggested then they will get popped.

They shut down trades of commercial releases, and they have chosen to remain
much smaller than they could be. Do you have a better explanation of those
policies than what I have proposed? And one more time, they are not
"charging," they accept donations, I've never met anyone who uses Dime who
has ever sent them any money.

If you pay to have your ratio upped then that is a "charge".

Actually, no, they do not "up your ratio" if you donate. They have
this concept called "enforcement cycle" which is how often the
actively check your ratio and (if it's below .25) don't allow you to
download. The default is every 5 GB downloaded (slightly more than a
DVD, in other words). If you donate they'll increase your enforcement
cycle and make it retroactive - in other words, if you've already been
hit with an enforcement cycle download ban they'll lift it until your
next enforcement cycle comes up.

The moderators at Dime never suggest donating as a way to get out of
your enforcement cycle and never ask for donations. Users of Dime
(particularly on the mailing list) will often suggest people donate
both as a means to extend your enforcement cycle and as a means of
keeping a very, very good torrent site going. Also, only some very,
very small number of users have ever donated (I have, and it had
nothing to do with share ratio issues).

[DGDevin]

Post by Brad Greer
The moderators at Dime never suggest donating as a way to get out of
your enforcement cycle and never ask for donations. Users of Dime
(particularly on the mailing list) will often suggest people donate
both as a means to extend your enforcement cycle and as a means of
keeping a very, very good torrent site going. Also, only some very,
very small number of users have ever donated (I have, and it had
nothing to do with share ratio issues).

Thanks for the string of *informed* posts on Dime, very refreshing in
contrast to some other posts in this thread.

[Brad Greer]

Post by DGDevin

Post by Brad Greer
The moderators at Dime never suggest donating as a way to get out of
your enforcement cycle and never ask for donations. Users of Dime
(particularly on the mailing list) will often suggest people donate
both as a means to extend your enforcement cycle and as a means of
keeping a very, very good torrent site going. Also, only some very,
very small number of users have ever donated (I have, and it had
nothing to do with share ratio issues).

Thanks for the string of *informed* posts on Dime, very refreshing in
contrast to some other posts in this thread.

Nah, it's one other poster, maybe two.

[DGDevin]

Post by Brad Greer

Post by DGDevin
Thanks for the string of *informed* posts on Dime, very refreshing in
contrast to some other posts in this thread.

Nah, it's one other poster, maybe two.

It's been interesting (and amusing) watching someone with all the facts on
his side casually squash a series of frenzied but utterly ineffectual swipes
at Dime. Why someone would form such an antipathy to Dime is beyond me,
much less why they would cook up so many bogus reasons to justify their
dislike. Oh well, one more space available for somebody who will appreciate
what Dime has to offer. ;^)

[bradish]

I've never met anyone who uses Dime who has ever sent them any money.

Ive never _met_ anyone who uses Dime period. At least in the real world.

[Joe]

Post by bradish

I've never met anyone who uses Dime who has ever sent them any money.

Ive never _met_ anyone who uses Dime period. At least in the real world.

This IS the real world.

It doesn't get any realer than rmgd. All else is but illusion.

Joe

[bradish]

Post by Joe

Post by bradish

I've never met anyone who uses Dime who has ever sent them any money.

Ive never _met_ anyone who uses Dime period. At least in the real world.

This IS the real world.
It doesn't get any realer than rmgd. All else is but illusion.
Joe

Thanks for the early morning chuckle. :)

[The Lord of Eltingville]

Post by bradish

I've never met anyone who uses Dime who has ever sent them any money.

Ive never _met_ anyone who uses Dime period. At least in the real world.

I reconnected with an old friend from the 80s through dime. I'd made a
comment in one of the torrent discussion threads and she happened to
recognize a few of the names and places I mentioned. She put two and
two together and emailed me to see if I was the person she was thinking of.

A couple of my friends have accounts as well. BTW, Don...none of them
have paid a cent to access torrents at dime.

[Brad Greer]

Post by DG

Post by DGDevin

Post by DG
Sniping again...

Just marvelling at your ability to get both feet in your mouth at the same
time, "Power grab," good grief.

What is the reason to make torrents require a login/pass?

Among other reasons to keep membership to a manageable level and to
enforce share ratio limits - you know, the idea that you *have* to
give back at least some of what you download.

Post by DG
What is the reason to restrict access to a system that is designed to
work better with more nodes?

From a practical standpoint the membership cap (100,000 members) has
no real impact on the speed of any given torrent - I've seen more
activity and faster downloads on Dime than I do on any torrents I've
downloaded from etree.

Post by DG

Post by DGDevin
Dime is an amazing resource,

No doubt...

Post by DGDevin
and it works
just fine for people who aren't greedy, your bleating notwithstanding.

Greedy for wanting a system to work at peak efficiency?

Provide some evidence that it doesn't work at "peak efficiency." I've
downloaded 4 GB DVDs in a matter of hours off of Dime, I see more
consistent higher download speeds on Dime than any other tracker I
generally use. I'd say that indicates things are running efficiently.

[DG]

Post by The Lord of Eltingville
<SNIP>
From a practical standpoint the membership cap (100,000 members) has
no real impact on the speed of any given torrent
<SNIP>
Provide some evidence that it doesn't work at "peak efficiency." I've
downloaded 4 GB DVDs in a matter of hours off of Dime, I see more
consistent higher download speeds on Dime than any other tracker I
generally use. I'd say that indicates things are running efficiently.

No matter how fast you get it, capping a system that controls the flow
to/from a torrent at 100,000 is restricting the flow.

[bradish]

Post by DG

Post by The Lord of Eltingville
<SNIP>
From a practical standpoint the membership cap (100,000 members) has
no real impact on the speed of any given torrent
<SNIP>
Provide some evidence that it doesn't work at "peak efficiency." I've
downloaded 4 GB DVDs in a matter of hours off of Dime, I see more
consistent higher download speeds on Dime than any other tracker I
generally use. I'd say that indicates things are running efficiently.

No matter how fast you get it, capping a system that controls the flow
to/from a torrent at 100,000 is restricting the flow.

Oh please, give me a break.

Complaining about Dime is like me and Brew bitching about seeing all those
Sailor > Saints...at the end of the day, you should be thankful you got
anything!

Still, why the hell did they have to play that fuckin combo every night?
####

[DG]

Post by bradish

Post by DG

Post by The Lord of Eltingville
<SNIP>
From a practical standpoint the membership cap (100,000 members) has
no real impact on the speed of any given torrent
<SNIP>
Provide some evidence that it doesn't work at "peak efficiency." I've
downloaded 4 GB DVDs in a matter of hours off of Dime, I see more
consistent higher download speeds on Dime than any other tracker I
generally use. I'd say that indicates things are running efficiently.

No matter how fast you get it, capping a system that controls the flow
to/from a torrent at 100,000 is restricting the flow.

Oh please, give me a break.

You might not like the fact but it is a fact.

[The Lord of Eltingville]

Post by DG

Post by bradish

Post by DG

Post by The Lord of Eltingville
<SNIP>
From a practical standpoint the membership cap (100,000 members) has
no real impact on the speed of any given torrent
<SNIP>
Provide some evidence that it doesn't work at "peak efficiency." I've
downloaded 4 GB DVDs in a matter of hours off of Dime, I see more
consistent higher download speeds on Dime than any other tracker I
generally use. I'd say that indicates things are running efficiently.

No matter how fast you get it, capping a system that controls the flow
to/from a torrent at 100,000 is restricting the flow.

Oh please, give me a break.

You might not like the fact but it is a fact.

Ya got something to back up that claim? Simply repeating something over
and over doesn't make it true.

[DG]

Post by The Lord of Eltingville

Post by DG

Post by bradish

Post by DG

Post by The Lord of Eltingville
<SNIP>
From a practical standpoint the membership cap (100,000 members) has
no real impact on the speed of any given torrent
<SNIP>
Provide some evidence that it doesn't work at "peak efficiency." I've
downloaded 4 GB DVDs in a matter of hours off of Dime, I see more
consistent higher download speeds on Dime than any other tracker I
generally use. I'd say that indicates things are running efficiently.

No matter how fast you get it, capping a system that controls the flow
to/from a torrent at 100,000 is restricting the flow.

Oh please, give me a break.

You might not like the fact but it is a fact.

Ya got something to back up that claim? Simply repeating something over
and over doesn't make it true.

http://www.afterdawn.com/software/source_codes/download_source.cfm?source_id=46

[Brad Greer]

Post by DG

Post by The Lord of Eltingville

Post by DG

Post by bradish

Post by DG

Post by The Lord of Eltingville
<SNIP>
From a practical standpoint the membership cap (100,000 members) has
no real impact on the speed of any given torrent
<SNIP>
Provide some evidence that it doesn't work at "peak efficiency." I've
downloaded 4 GB DVDs in a matter of hours off of Dime, I see more
consistent higher download speeds on Dime than any other tracker I
generally use. I'd say that indicates things are running efficiently.

No matter how fast you get it, capping a system that controls the flow
to/from a torrent at 100,000 is restricting the flow.

Oh please, give me a break.

You might not like the fact but it is a fact.

Ya got something to back up that claim? Simply repeating something over
and over doesn't make it true.

http://www.afterdawn.com/software/source_codes/download_source.cfm?source_id=46

I'm sure you think that downloading something from a web site is like
downloading from a tracker that implements personalized torrent files
but you're wrong. There is nothing like this implemented on Dime, I
suspect you know that but are trying to prove your point in a
completely irrelevant way. Nice try, nice trolling.

In theory, a torrent could have more than 100,000 users on it. I've
never seen a torrent come even close to that size, but I suppose it
could conceivably happen. However, since virtually nobody can support
100,000 concurrent connections nobody on the torrent will have any
ability to connect to all 99,999 other users. Instead, they'll
naturally find themselves in mini-swarms which are somewhat
self-contained. So, even if there was a theoretical torrent with
100,000 users on it (give me a break on that, btw) nobody would see a
download speed on it any faster than if there were, say, 1,000 users
on the torrent. Physical limitations of how much memory a given
machine has to suppport multiple connections, a practical limitation
as well - if you somehow were able to connect to all 100,000 users you
would be giving so little bandwidth to each of those that you'd net
lose bandwidth because of protocol overhead.

Whatever your objections to personalized trackers (maybe you don't
like having to give back even 25% of what you take, I can't think of
another reason but I'm willing to listen) this bullshit about speed of
downloads isn't one of them.

[DGDevin]

Post by Brad Greer
Whatever your objections to personalized trackers (maybe you don't
like having to give back even 25% of what you take, I can't think of
another reason but I'm willing to listen) this bullshit about speed of
downloads isn't one of them.

If you're expecting an answer that makes sense above the level of playground
contradiction then you are the soul of generosity.

[DG]

Post by DGDevin

Post by Brad Greer
Whatever your objections to personalized trackers (maybe you don't
like having to give back even 25% of what you take, I can't think of
another reason but I'm willing to listen) this bullshit about speed of
downloads isn't one of them.

If you're expecting an answer that makes sense above the level of playground
contradiction then you are the soul of generosity.

Please explain how you slow a torrent down by adding one more node.
You are welcome to pointing it out in the source code.


I'm still waiting for you to explain how and when heat and pressure on
sedimentary rock quit creating oil.

[Brad Greer]

Post by DG

Post by DGDevin

Post by Brad Greer
Whatever your objections to personalized trackers (maybe you don't
like having to give back even 25% of what you take, I can't think of
another reason but I'm willing to listen) this bullshit about speed of
downloads isn't one of them.

If you're expecting an answer that makes sense above the level of playground
contradiction then you are the soul of generosity.

Please explain how you slow a torrent down by adding one more node.
You are welcome to pointing it out in the source code.

Spreading your bandwidth too thin does nothing to actually contribute
to the speed of a torrent. So, if you somehow were able to connect to
99,999 other peers how much bandwidth would you give? You'd have to
actually handshake with each of those peers, the handshaking would eat
up all of your bandwidth. You'd effectively slow the other members of
the swarm who would waste time handshaking with you while not actually
getting any data from you.

It happens all the time on trackers - someone finds a tracker, sees
two dozen torrents they want to download and immediately tries to
connect to all of them. They wind up being spread so thin they barely
manage a trickle down from each torrent and would have been able to
get all of the music faster by FTPing.

So, again, explain how many torrents you've participated in that had
more than 500 active peers at any point in time and then explain how
the 100,000 user limit at Dime has any real-world effect.

[Neil X.]

Post by Brad Greer
So, again, explain how many torrents you've participated in that had
more than 500 active peers at any point in time and then explain how
the 100,000 user limit at Dime has any real-world effect.

Well, there is a simple logic to this, Brad, and I'm sure you see it,
even if you don't like it. Unless you're going to claim that every
single torrent on dime always has a maximal number of peers logged on,
24 hours a day (I'm not a member, maybe that is indeed the case, though
I doubt it), then limiting the number of of people on dime limits the
number of people that might conceivably be interested in hopping onto a
given torrent. So limiting membership does negatively effect the speed
of a t least *some* of dimes torrents.

Sure, I completely understand there are compelling reasons for the
policy, but claiming that limiting the number of members never has any
effect on torrent speed is disingenuous.

Peace,
Neil X.

[Brad Greer]

Post by Neil X.

Post by Brad Greer
So, again, explain how many torrents you've participated in that had
more than 500 active peers at any point in time and then explain how
the 100,000 user limit at Dime has any real-world effect.

Well, there is a simple logic to this, Brad, and I'm sure you see it,
even if you don't like it. Unless you're going to claim that every
single torrent on dime always has a maximal number of peers logged on,
24 hours a day (I'm not a member, maybe that is indeed the case, though
I doubt it), then limiting the number of of people on dime limits the
number of people that might conceivably be interested in hopping onto a
given torrent. So limiting membership does negatively effect the speed
of a t least *some* of dimes torrents.

No, I understand that but I don't think it has any *practical*
real-world implications. Now, it's entirely possible that my
experiences on Dime (torrents generally run faster than any other
tracker, private or open, that I use) is atypical but there is enough
evidence that is not the case to suggest that the cap of 100,000 users
doesn't really impact torrent performance. An obscure torrent for an
obscure band that has a limited audience will have slower speeds, but
that would be true of a public tracker as well.

Now, some other limited membership trackers with much lower membership
caps do have an impact on torrent performance. Jerome's Place, for
esxample, tends to have slower torrent speeds than many other trackers
I regularly use, I think it's a function of their low number of
registered users and their tendency to put out too many torrents at
once (therefore not allowing enough participants to get real speed
going).

I'm not arguing the theoretical - DG is absolutely correct that a
theoretically unlimited tracker could have higher speeds than a
restricted membership tracker. I'm arguing the real-world
implications - I've rarely, if ever, seen a torrent with more than 500
active peers and I've never seen a case of a torrent on Dime suffering
because there weren't enough members interested in joining that
torrent. Torrent speeds on Dime are consistently higher than torrent
speeds on etree, for example, even though etree is completely open and
Dime is not.

Post by Neil X.
Sure, I completely understand there are compelling reasons for the
policy, but claiming that limiting the number of members never has any
effect on torrent speed is disingenuous.

Again, practical, real-world versus theoretical. I'll agree 100% that
limiting the number of users *could* impact torrent speed but I'll
also assert that the 100,000 user limit at Dime makes that immaterial
in the real world. I won't even go into the limits of how many
connections a given client can support (which effectively divides
really large swarms into many smaller swarms).

[DG]

Post by Brad Greer

Post by Neil X.

Post by Brad Greer
So, again, explain how many torrents you've participated in that had
more than 500 active peers at any point in time and then explain how
the 100,000 user limit at Dime has any real-world effect.

Well, there is a simple logic to this, Brad, and I'm sure you see it,
even if you don't like it. Unless you're going to claim that every
single torrent on dime always has a maximal number of peers logged on,
24 hours a day (I'm not a member, maybe that is indeed the case, though
I doubt it), then limiting the number of of people on dime limits the
number of people that might conceivably be interested in hopping onto a
given torrent. So limiting membership does negatively effect the speed
of a t least *some* of dimes torrents.

No, I understand that but I don't think it has any *practical*
real-world implications. Now, it's entirely possible that my
experiences on Dime (torrents generally run faster than any other
tracker, private or open, that I use) is atypical but there is enough
evidence that is not the case to suggest that the cap of 100,000 users
doesn't really impact torrent performance. An obscure torrent for an
obscure band that has a limited audience will have slower speeds, but
that would be true of a public tracker as well.

The fact that it has a limited audience is not the issue. That
torrent will run at peak speed. Locking one person out via any means
will slow the overall torrent.

Post by Brad Greer
Now, some other limited membership trackers with much lower membership
caps do have an impact on torrent performance. Jerome's Place, for
esxample, tends to have slower torrent speeds than many other trackers
I regularly use, I think it's a function of their low number of
registered users and their tendency to put out too many torrents at
once (therefore not allowing enough participants to get real speed
going).

Read this and get back to me... Might help clear some of your issues.
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/13.01/bittorrent_pr.html

Post by Brad Greer
I'm not arguing the theoretical - DG is absolutely correct that a
theoretically unlimited tracker could have higher speeds than a
restricted membership tracker.

Holy shit, someone admitted I'm correct! I'm shocked.

Post by Brad Greer
I'm arguing the real-world
implications - I've rarely, if ever, seen a torrent with more than 500
active peers and I've never seen a case of a torrent on Dime suffering
because there weren't enough members interested in joining that
torrent. Torrent speeds on Dime are consistently higher than torrent
speeds on etree, for example, even though etree is completely open and
Dime is not.

Your perception of speed is not the speed of the overall torrent.

Post by Brad Greer

Post by Neil X.
Sure, I completely understand there are compelling reasons for the
policy, but claiming that limiting the number of members never has any
effect on torrent speed is disingenuous.

Again, practical, real-world versus theoretical. I'll agree 100% that
limiting the number of users *could* impact torrent speed but I'll
also assert that the 100,000 user limit at Dime makes that immaterial
in the real world. I won't even go into the limits of how many
connections a given client can support (which effectively divides
really large swarms into many smaller swarms).

Now that we've gotten past step one.

Restrictions on torrents (locking out one node) has a slowing effect
on most torrents served by *all* nodes.

[DG]

Post by Brad Greer

Post by DG

Post by DGDevin

Post by Brad Greer
Whatever your objections to personalized trackers (maybe you don't
like having to give back even 25% of what you take, I can't think of
another reason but I'm willing to listen) this bullshit about speed of
downloads isn't one of them.

If you're expecting an answer that makes sense above the level of playground
contradiction then you are the soul of generosity.

Please explain how you slow a torrent down by adding one more node.
You are welcome to pointing it out in the source code.

Spreading your bandwidth too thin does nothing to actually contribute
to the speed of a torrent. So, if you somehow were able to connect to
99,999 other peers how much bandwidth would you give? You'd have to
actually handshake with each of those peers, the handshaking would eat
up all of your bandwidth. You'd effectively slow the other members of
the swarm who would waste time handshaking with you while not actually
getting any data from you.
It happens all the time on trackers - someone finds a tracker, sees
two dozen torrents they want to download and immediately tries to
connect to all of them. They wind up being spread so thin they barely
manage a trickle down from each torrent and would have been able to
get all of the music faster by FTPing.
So, again, explain how many torrents you've participated in that had
more than 500 active peers at any point in time and then explain how
the 100,000 user limit at Dime has any real-world effect.

You obviously don't understand how the protocol works.

[The Lord of Eltingville]

Post by DG

Post by The Lord of Eltingville

Post by DG

Post by bradish

Post by DG

Post by The Lord of Eltingville
<SNIP>
From a practical standpoint the membership cap (100,000 members) has
no real impact on the speed of any given torrent
<SNIP>
Provide some evidence that it doesn't work at "peak efficiency." I've
downloaded 4 GB DVDs in a matter of hours off of Dime, I see more
consistent higher download speeds on Dime than any other tracker I
generally use. I'd say that indicates things are running efficiently.

No matter how fast you get it, capping a system that controls the flow
to/from a torrent at 100,000 is restricting the flow.

Oh please, give me a break.

You might not like the fact but it is a fact.

Ya got something to back up that claim? Simply repeating something over
and over doesn't make it true.

http://www.afterdawn.com/software/source_codes/download_source.cfm?source_id=46

Aside from getting a page that states the site's policy against
hotlinking and their requirement for user accounts, the link you
provided was useless. No, wait; that's not entirely true. It included
a paragraph that backed up my earlier comment about bandwidth costing
money (which prompted you to tell me that I didn't know anything about
how bittorrent works). Funny, that...

--
We're very sorry for the inconvenience. We have been forced to take
measures against hot-linking, and you, our users, are the ones who have
to suffer. Bandwidth is very expensive, and we cannot afford to waste it.
--


If you can find *any* source that proves dime's cap of 100,000 users
actually causes their torrents to run slower than those offered on other
sites, please post them. If you can't...you ought to stop talking out
your ass.

[Kirk McElhearn]

On 2006-11-28 04:36:04 +0100, The Lord of Eltingville

Post by The Lord of Eltingville
Aside from getting a page that states the site's policy against
hotlinking and their requirement for user accounts, the link you
provided was useless. No, wait; that's not entirely true. It included
a paragraph that backed up my earlier comment about bandwidth costing
money (which prompted you to tell me that I didn't know anything about
how bittorrent works). Funny, that...

The tracker site doesn't pay for the upload/download bandwidth - users
do. That's the whole point of the bittorrent protocol.

Kirk

[The Lord of Eltingville]

Post by Kirk McElhearn
On 2006-11-28 04:36:04 +0100, The Lord of Eltingville

Post by The Lord of Eltingville
Aside from getting a page that states the site's policy against
hotlinking and their requirement for user accounts, the link you
provided was useless. No, wait; that's not entirely true. It
included a paragraph that backed up my earlier comment about bandwidth
costing money (which prompted you to tell me that I didn't know
anything about how bittorrent works). Funny, that...

The tracker site doesn't pay for the upload/download bandwidth - users
do. That's the whole point of the bittorrent protocol.

Users pay for the bandwidth in and out of their own computers. Somebody
else pays for the bandwidth in and out of the data center(s) where the
server(s) running the tracker/website are housed. There are also
monthly hosting fees and hardware expenses -- that stuff doesn't just
magically happen.

Admins donate their time, but that's about it. The rest is paid for
with real money, hence some of the larger sites have banner ads or have
a link available for members to use to donations to help out.

Even sites with open trackers, such as archive.org, accept donations
(http://www.archive.org/donate) to help offest their costs. I've seen
posts in the various etree encouraging people to make donations to
Imbiblio, the non-profit organization that hosts their servers
(http://www.ibiblio.org/faq/?sid=2#19>.

I guess that makes them bootlegers in Don's eyes...




BTW, here's the contents from a page at thetradersden.org
(http://www.thetradersden.org/forums/donations.php?) regarding their
monthly operating expenses:

--
About The Traders' Den
The Traders' Den forums and tracker is a free site that we provide to
the music trading community. This site operates fully through volunteer
efforts. No one here is paid. We do everything we do for the site
because we love spreading the love of live music. This site does,
however, cost us money to run. If you love this site as much as we do
and you would like to help us pay the bills, then if you are able,
please donate. We want to keep you fully aware of what our costs are and
how much we have received in donations. More than one person has access
to the paypal account we are using to accept donations, so we promise
you that the funds received will be fully accounted for.

Running costs per month: $319.00
(hosting, server upgrades)
Donations this month: $185.48
($192.50 - $9.22 PayPal fees + $2.20 PayPal interest)

Total running costs to date: $5,981.50
Total donations to date: $6,525.93


What the donations are used for: monthly server fees (we currently have
a dedicated Dual Xeon that the site runs on and we have access to a
backup server); vBulletin software and support; yearly domain name
registations; occassional host support.

last updated November 24, 2006
--

[DG]

Post by The Lord of Eltingville
Even sites with open trackers, such as archive.org, accept donations
(http://www.archive.org/donate) to help offest their costs. I've seen
posts in the various etree encouraging people to make donations to
Imbiblio, the non-profit organization that hosts their servers
(http://www.ibiblio.org/faq/?sid=2#19>.
I guess that makes them bootlegers in Don's eyes...

Twisting what I've said is a fun game but that does not make it true.
As someone wrote here, they limit your access to a torrent and say the
ratio will be overlooked for a fee. That is bootlegging to me.

[Brad Greer]

Post by Kirk McElhearn
On 2006-11-28 04:36:04 +0100, The Lord of Eltingville

Post by The Lord of Eltingville
Aside from getting a page that states the site's policy against
hotlinking and their requirement for user accounts, the link you
provided was useless. No, wait; that's not entirely true. It included
a paragraph that backed up my earlier comment about bandwidth costing
money (which prompted you to tell me that I didn't know anything about
how bittorrent works). Funny, that...

The tracker site doesn't pay for the upload/download bandwidth - users
do. That's the whole point of the bittorrent protocol.

The tracker site does pay for web hosting, they pay for the tracker
itself (after all, every torrent has to register with the tracker,
every peer on the torrent has to handshake with the tracker
periodically, etc.), they pay for any sort of database used, etc. The
actual upload/download bandwidth is provided by the users but if you
think that's all that's involved in running a tracker than by all
means set up your own tracker.

[DG]

Post by The Lord of Eltingville

Post by DG

Post by The Lord of Eltingville

Post by DG

Post by bradish

Post by DG

Post by The Lord of Eltingville
<SNIP>
From a practical standpoint the membership cap (100,000 members) has
no real impact on the speed of any given torrent
<SNIP>
Provide some evidence that it doesn't work at "peak efficiency." I've
downloaded 4 GB DVDs in a matter of hours off of Dime, I see more
consistent higher download speeds on Dime than any other tracker I
generally use. I'd say that indicates things are running efficiently.

No matter how fast you get it, capping a system that controls the flow
to/from a torrent at 100,000 is restricting the flow.

Oh please, give me a break.

You might not like the fact but it is a fact.

Ya got something to back up that claim? Simply repeating something over
and over doesn't make it true.

http://www.afterdawn.com/software/source_codes/download_source.cfm?source_id=46

Aside from getting a page that states the site's policy against
hotlinking and their requirement for user accounts, the link you
provided was useless.

There is a link at the bottom of the page for the source code.
http://www.afterdawn.com/software/source_codes/bittorrent.cfm

Point out the flaws and I'll believe you.

[Brad Greer]

Post by DG

Post by bradish

Post by DG

Post by The Lord of Eltingville
<SNIP>
From a practical standpoint the membership cap (100,000 members) has
no real impact on the speed of any given torrent
<SNIP>
Provide some evidence that it doesn't work at "peak efficiency." I've
downloaded 4 GB DVDs in a matter of hours off of Dime, I see more
consistent higher download speeds on Dime than any other tracker I
generally use. I'd say that indicates things are running efficiently.

No matter how fast you get it, capping a system that controls the flow
to/from a torrent at 100,000 is restricting the flow.

Oh please, give me a break.

You might not like the fact but it is a fact.

In theory you are correct. However, unless you've actually seen
torrents on public trackers with 100,000 users peers (I'd be shocked
if you've seen many torrents with more than 500 active peers) so what?

The question is not "how many users access a given tracker" but rather
"how many active peers are on a given torrent and do they all give
back what they take?"

[DG]

Post by Brad Greer

Post by DG

Post by bradish

Post by DG

Post by The Lord of Eltingville
<SNIP>
From a practical standpoint the membership cap (100,000 members) has
no real impact on the speed of any given torrent
<SNIP>
Provide some evidence that it doesn't work at "peak efficiency." I've
downloaded 4 GB DVDs in a matter of hours off of Dime, I see more
consistent higher download speeds on Dime than any other tracker I
generally use. I'd say that indicates things are running efficiently.

No matter how fast you get it, capping a system that controls the flow
to/from a torrent at 100,000 is restricting the flow.

Oh please, give me a break.

You might not like the fact but it is a fact.

In theory you are correct. However, unless you've actually seen
torrents on public trackers with 100,000 users peers (I'd be shocked
if you've seen many torrents with more than 500 active peers) so what?

No. You are missing the fact that the potential traders are limited
to 100,000. You don't need 100,000 to increase the speed, you just
need one more node.

Post by Brad Greer
The question is not "how many users access a given tracker" but rather
"how many active peers are on a given torrent and do they all give
back what they take?"

I've never tried to take without giving back.

[Brad Greer]

Post by DG

Post by Brad Greer

Post by DG

Post by bradish

Post by DG

Post by The Lord of Eltingville
<SNIP>
From a practical standpoint the membership cap (100,000 members) has
no real impact on the speed of any given torrent
<SNIP>
Provide some evidence that it doesn't work at "peak efficiency." I've
downloaded 4 GB DVDs in a matter of hours off of Dime, I see more
consistent higher download speeds on Dime than any other tracker I
generally use. I'd say that indicates things are running efficiently.

No matter how fast you get it, capping a system that controls the flow
to/from a torrent at 100,000 is restricting the flow.

Oh please, give me a break.

You might not like the fact but it is a fact.

In theory you are correct. However, unless you've actually seen
torrents on public trackers with 100,000 users peers (I'd be shocked
if you've seen many torrents with more than 500 active peers) so what?

No. You are missing the fact that the potential traders are limited
to 100,000. You don't need 100,000 to increase the speed, you just
need one more node.

Okay, so let's take bt.etree.org. Unlimited "membership", in fact no
membership. Why do I so often find the torrents at "restricted",
"non-efficient" sites like Dime are much, much faster?

The 100,000 user limit has no practical impact on torrent speed.
Plenty of us have offered evidence that download speeds on Dime are
generally faster than any other tracker, you continually claim the
100,000 user limit is "inefficient." Provide real-world evidence.

Post by DG

Post by Brad Greer
The question is not "how many users access a given tracker" but rather
"how many active peers are on a given torrent and do they all give
back what they take?"

I've never tried to take without giving back.

Good, that's what makes torrenting work.

[Gladys]

Post by DG
No matter how fast you get it, capping a system that controls the flow
to/from a torrent at 100,000 is restricting the flow.

It's all about the tracker. If they cap at a number that won't overwhelm
the tracker they are doing the right thing IMO.

If your answer is that they should get a faster tracker, well then why
don't you send them one or STFU? :-)

Gladys.

[DG]

Post by The Lord of Eltingville

Post by DG

Post by The Lord of Eltingville
As for the membership limiting the number of people on a
torrent...horsepoop.

Do you understand how torrents work? If you limit the number of
seeders on a torrent then you are slowing it down.

If you're trying to say that the number of seeders on any torrent on
dime is being limited (in reality, not in theory) by their membership
cap of 100,000 accounts, you're either delusional or simply spouting
bullshit.

If you are saying that limiting the amount of a participants of a
torrent increases speed, you're either delusional or simply spouting
bullshit.

Post by The Lord of Eltingville
I have yet to see a torrent from one of the sites you recommend move at
anywhere near the speed that dime torrent regularly do.

Speed is one issue. The other is the gathering of personal
information when it is unnecessary. Another is having people pay
money to "get their ratios" up. They must not have paid attention to
what happened to Napster.

Post by The Lord of Eltingville

Post by DG

Post by The Lord of Eltingville
One of the other gripes is that they accept financial contributions from
their members.

I don't buy but have no problem with people selling bootlegs. This is
what they are doing when they charge money for access.

There's a difference between accepting donations and charging for
access. I would have expected you to be bright enough to understand
that. My mistake...

Try that one in court. I have no problem with them charging but let's
not cloud the fact that it is bootlegging.

[Brad Greer]

Post by DG

Post by The Lord of Eltingville

Post by DG

Post by The Lord of Eltingville
As for the membership limiting the number of people on a
torrent...horsepoop.

Do you understand how torrents work? If you limit the number of
seeders on a torrent then you are slowing it down.

If you're trying to say that the number of seeders on any torrent on
dime is being limited (in reality, not in theory) by their membership
cap of 100,000 accounts, you're either delusional or simply spouting
bullshit.

If you are saying that limiting the amount of a participants of a
torrent increases speed, you're either delusional or simply spouting
bullshit.

Nobody has said anything like that. However, there's a difference
between theory (limiting the overall membership of a torrent tracker
will make torrents go slower) and reality (very few, if any, torrents
on Dime suffer speed problems because of a lack of users). The
membership at Dime is more than high enough to make it immaterial wrt
torrent speed in any real way. I've found, for instance, that
torrents on Dime generally go *much* faster than torrents on etree.

Post by DG

Post by The Lord of Eltingville
I have yet to see a torrent from one of the sites you recommend move at
anywhere near the speed that dime torrent regularly do.

Speed is one issue. The other is the gathering of personal
information when it is unnecessary. Another is having people pay
money to "get their ratios" up. They must not have paid attention to
what happened to Napster.

What personal information do they gather other than an e-mail address?
And, since fewer than 1% of Dime users donate (and most who donate
don't do it because of share ratio issues) I think your claim they
"charge to get their ratio up" is far off base.

Post by DG

Post by The Lord of Eltingville

Post by DG

Post by The Lord of Eltingville
One of the other gripes is that they accept financial contributions from
their members.

I don't buy but have no problem with people selling bootlegs. This is
what they are doing when they charge money for access.

There's a difference between accepting donations and charging for
access. I would have expected you to be bright enough to understand
that. My mistake...

Try that one in court. I have no problem with them charging but let's
not cloud the fact that it is bootlegging.

No, they don't charge. The only way anyone "officially" connected
with Dime even asks for donations is the "Donate" link at the top of
every page.

[bradish]

Post by Brad Greer
The
membership at Dime is more than high enough to make it immaterial wrt
torrent speed in any real way.

Hey, just because folks are Dime members doesnt mean they sit around and get
stoned all day#####

[Brad Greer]

On Mon, 27 Nov 2006 16:32:37 -0600, "bradish"

Post by bradish

Post by Brad Greer
The
membership at Dime is more than high enough to make it immaterial wrt
torrent speed in any real way.

Hey, just because folks are Dime members doesnt mean they sit around and get
stoned all day#####

If believing that works for you...

[JC Martin]

Post by The Lord of Eltingville
People complain about not being able to get accounts. All that's needed
is a bit of patience and a willingness to re-apply once a day. Inactive
accounts are deleted daily and openings are always popping up.

I've been trying for a month now and no luck. Any time windows I should
look at?

-JC

[bradish]

Post by JC Martin

Post by The Lord of Eltingville
People complain about not being able to get accounts. All that's needed
is a bit of patience and a willingness to re-apply once a day. Inactive
accounts are deleted daily and openings are always popping up.

I've been trying for a month now and no luck. Any time windows I should
look at?

A month? Yikes, that is a while. Back in July, it took me about 3days.

[JC Martin]

Post by bradish

Post by JC Martin

Post by The Lord of Eltingville
People complain about not being able to get accounts. All that's needed
is a bit of patience and a willingness to re-apply once a day. Inactive
accounts are deleted daily and openings are always popping up.

I've been trying for a month now and no luck. Any time windows I should
look at?

A month? Yikes, that is a while. Back in July, it took me about 3days.

Shit...I just got in after three tries. Shhweeeeeet!

-JC

[Brad Greer]

Post by JC Martin

Post by bradish

Post by JC Martin

Post by The Lord of Eltingville
People complain about not being able to get accounts. All that's needed
is a bit of patience and a willingness to re-apply once a day. Inactive
accounts are deleted daily and openings are always popping up.

I've been trying for a month now and no luck. Any time windows I should
look at?

A month? Yikes, that is a while. Back in July, it took me about 3days.

Shit...I just got in after three tries. Shhweeeeeet!

JC - now that you've got a membership check out this torrent:

http://www.dimeadozen.org/torrents-details.php?id=121855

David Murray Big Band from the Knitting Factory doing a few Dead songs
(as well as "normal" David Murray material). Apparently someone got
around to transferring the DATs to CD and is circulating it. IMO,
better than the Octet version of the Dead songs. Read through the
comments if you care about properly documenting the equipment used for
the original recording as whoever did the transfer had lost that
information.

[JC Martin]

Post by Brad Greer

Post by JC Martin

Post by bradish

Post by JC Martin

Post by The Lord of Eltingville
People complain about not being able to get accounts. All that's needed
is a bit of patience and a willingness to re-apply once a day. Inactive
accounts are deleted daily and openings are always popping up.

I've been trying for a month now and no luck. Any time windows I should
look at?

A month? Yikes, that is a while. Back in July, it took me about 3days.

Shit...I just got in after three tries. Shhweeeeeet!

http://www.dimeadozen.org/torrents-details.php?id=121855
David Murray Big Band from the Knitting Factory doing a few Dead songs
(as well as "normal" David Murray material). Apparently someone got
around to transferring the DATs to CD and is circulating it. IMO,
better than the Octet version of the Dead songs. Read through the
comments if you care about properly documenting the equipment used for
the original recording as whoever did the transfer had lost that
information.

Hey, thanks for the heads up Brad. I remember talking about David's big
band with in the last year or so.

-JC

[The Lord of Eltingville]

Post by JC Martin

Post by Brad Greer

Post by JC Martin

Post by bradish

Post by JC Martin

Post by The Lord of Eltingville
People complain about not being able to get accounts. All that's
needed is a bit of patience and a willingness to re-apply once a
day. Inactive accounts are deleted daily and openings are always
popping up.

I've been trying for a month now and no luck. Any time windows I
should look at?

A month? Yikes, that is a while. Back in July, it took me about 3days.

Shit...I just got in after three tries. Shhweeeeeet!

http://www.dimeadozen.org/torrents-details.php?id=121855
David Murray Big Band from the Knitting Factory doing a few Dead songs
(as well as "normal" David Murray material). Apparently someone got
around to transferring the DATs to CD and is circulating it. IMO,
better than the Octet version of the Dead songs. Read through the
comments if you care about properly documenting the equipment used for
the original recording as whoever did the transfer had lost that
information.

Hey, thanks for the heads up Brad. I remember talking about David's big
band with in the last year or so.

Do a search for open jazz torrents. There's always lots of them up for
grabs...

[Brad Greer]

Post by JC Martin

Post by Brad Greer

Post by JC Martin
Shit...I just got in after three tries. Shhweeeeeet!

http://www.dimeadozen.org/torrents-details.php?id=121855
David Murray Big Band from the Knitting Factory doing a few Dead songs
(as well as "normal" David Murray material). Apparently someone got
around to transferring the DATs to CD and is circulating it. IMO,
better than the Octet version of the Dead songs. Read through the
comments if you care about properly documenting the equipment used for
the original recording as whoever did the transfer had lost that
information.

Hey, thanks for the heads up Brad. I remember talking about David's big
band with in the last year or so.

Yeah, and at the time I said I had to get around to digging up the
SHNs I had of the shows and distributing them. Luckily, someone else
did a transfer of DAT clones and distributed that, now I don't have to
find my original discs buried somewhere in a pile of other discs :)

Check it out and let me know what you think of it - the Shakedown
Street from the early set is incredible, the Dark Star is really nice
as well (even if there's a small glitch on the master DAT). We got
there well before the early set and watched the band working on Dark
Star (we were asked not to tape and honored the request in return for
being allowed to tape the actual performances with no hassles).

[Gladys]

The best thing I've gotten from Dime lately is this:

http://www.dimeadozen.org/torrents-details.php?id=112233

followed by this, this, and this:

http://www.dimeadozen.org/torrents-details.php?id=112700
http://www.dimeadozen.org/torrents-details.php?id=118417
http://www.dimeadozen.org/torrents-details.php?id=118567

I went looking for the audio and found video. This thing is priceless.
You may not particularly like Springsteen, but if you like Rock and Roll
you really ought to give it a shot. :-)

Gladys.

[The Lord of Eltingville]

Post by JC Martin

Post by The Lord of Eltingville
People complain about not being able to get accounts. All that's
needed is a bit of patience and a willingness to re-apply once a day.
Inactive accounts are deleted daily and openings are always popping up.

I've been trying for a month now and no luck. Any time windows I should
look at?

Between noon and 1pm, your local time...

[Dave Kelly]

http://server2.deadacated.com:9000/

[Rupert]

The limitations over at DIME are for all of the assholes that bail
right after they finish downloading. Some people just don't get it.

And DK's right, the shear volume of stuff over there is staggering.