Unfair behavior of an user
Hello ! I'm a seasoned user of Slsk then SlskQT which I find to be a very cool software, getting better and better.
I have dozens of users from which and to which I've downloaded tons of files and I never had any problems. Moreover, I always found everybody here to be kind and cooperative.
But every rule has an exception: I recently added an user who had an album that I was looking for. His average transfer rate is 67,1, but when my download begun, it was at 1 kbps at its peak and it was constantly displayed as "waiting".
So, after a week, I had downloaded 10 files on 14 on the album, so I begun a chat with him, asking very politely why the transfer rate from him was so low, while he could download from me at more than 200 kbps. He didn't chat with me, but the two remaining files were marked as non shared as soon as he has ended his downloads from me !
I guess that Nir could have a look at our logs to confirm this.
What is it possible to do with this user, to avoid the possibility for him to have this type of behavior against other users ? Thanks for the answers. Happy new year everybody :)
- Log in to post comments
Hi Polonium 210
Hi Polonium 210
your case is somehow typical for leechers (get as most as possible and share/give as less as possible) in any P2P system I've ever read of. The high speed is calculated at start and could be easily bribed with certain methods...
As you deccription shows he's using the limitation, and after you asked U get ignored and/or banned/unshared.
I for myself have DL one album for about 6 month with no advance due to a hacked (no UL slots) SLSK client, so a few weeks is unhappy but better than nothing. After that time I simply bought a DVD drive and ripped the CD which was very secure and the way I'd have done with all my CDs instead of hoping to avoid ripping it again.
Leechers (in some countries sharing files is forbidden but DL files is allowed for home usage, so what to do with "persons living to that rule" living there) are parasites, very hard to fight, like in real life as well.
At current there's no UL/DL ratio done, names are easily changeable (so banning doesn't help), IP change every few hours.
I'm sure Nir will never go so far as consolidate the Login feature in a secure way (certificate, SSL encryption, only one certificate per Email,....) as this is a free system for fun, not security... It would be great to get all leechers in one VLAN and let them cope with their very own nature: nothing shared, nothing received. So there's (from my point of view) nothing Nir/here could be done to correct this.
When you tell me/anyone here how this missing tracks are called I'd start my client up and search for this and DL it, even when it takes weeks.
Cheers
Thanks sammy123 ! I've sent a
Thanks sammy123 ! I've sent a message to most of my users about this user and in 5 minutes I've received the missing files (which were not shared before I asked for them, for various reasons). I've often heard about leechers, but this "freddeaux", this is his user name, is the first I have to deal with. In the future, he'll find closed doors among the most qualified users in the worlds of improvised musics and contemporary jazz and for myself, I'll remember this lesson: always remove immediately a new user from my list when there's not a good balance between the transfer rates from and to him.
Happy new year and thanks again :)
Hi Polonium210
Hi Polonium210
"unfair" is quite arguable, as most have asynchronous transfer modes, like all DSL, UMTS, Satellite Connects.
The problem with blocking that user(name)=> change the username and everythings fine again. As mentioned: it's hard to come by to Leeching in P2P systems. We already discussed it in detail on a thread about 5 month ago. A very helpful addition would be UL/DL ratios, so U have to given a certain minimum amount to get anything back. BUT as there are all clients out there without such a restriction, there's always a way out. I certainly understand why Nir never implemented such policies.
Cheers
Yes, I agree, and I
Yes, I agree, and I understand why such mechanisms aren't implemented in Soulseek. So, as said before, the solution to protect oneself against leechers would probably be to remove quickly new users with poor rates ( I guess 10 k/b would be a correct lower limit). I'll try to find your previous discussion about this subject. Thanks again and, from Paris, France, I wish to everybody here a happy new year :)