Credit System - Share Nothing -> Better Downloads
#1
Posted 26 October 2004 - 12:47 AM
My emule performance was terrible, so I read about the credit system and realised all the stuff I was uploading was not helping because it was files I had already finished.
I moved all my downloads to a different directory and over night my UL:DL ratio went from 1.6:1 to 1:2
Assuming its because of my change, this is pretty dodge. I know its difficult to make a credit system but there must be a better way. Otherwise all the old files will simply disappear on the network.
#2
Posted 26 October 2004 - 01:05 AM
Even if only a considerable amount of users starts doing this you will have more and more problems getting files completed because there are far fewer sources to provide the rare chunks.
Seven for the Dwarf-lords in their halls of stone,
Nine for Mortal Men doomed to die,
One for the Dark Lord on his dark throne
In the Land of Mordor where the Shadows lie.
One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them,
One Ring to bring them all and in the darkness bind them
In the Land of Mordor where the Shadows lie.
Dark Lord of the Forum
Morph your Mule
Need a little help with your MorphXT? Click here
#3
Posted 26 October 2004 - 05:08 AM
There must be a better credit system that could be implemented to actively encourage people to keep sharing a larger library to move them up the queue, rather than the opposite...
Thats the point surely?
#4
Posted 26 October 2004 - 07:04 AM
citysuit, on Oct 26 2004, 07:08 AM, said:
Oh, sure. Yet in almost 2 years, since the credits system has been implemented, nobody came up with the ultimate solution.
Sure, there have been a lot of proposals, but most of them were focused on pure trading (something that's not really welcome here) or other unworkable solutions (like centralized credits systems).
So I'm eager to hear about your idea.
#5
Posted 26 October 2004 - 08:03 AM
This post has been edited by basketor64: 26 October 2004 - 08:03 AM
#6
Posted 26 October 2004 - 08:06 AM
#7
Posted 26 October 2004 - 08:09 AM
#8
Posted 26 October 2004 - 08:32 AM
This post has been edited by Luke: 26 October 2004 - 08:32 AM
#9
Posted 26 October 2004 - 08:35 AM
#10
Posted 26 October 2004 - 08:39 AM
#11
Posted 26 October 2004 - 08:44 AM
The risk of uploading a rare files is bigger in terms of rentability, so it should be rewarded more.
Now, you can't really be sure that someone is uploading a completed file ...
#12
Posted 26 October 2004 - 10:41 AM
Or, . Use a hybrid sharing / trading system. Trading system shares mostly the partfiles (it would be equivalent to unsharing your shared files, without actually unsharing them) and the sharing system shares rare files.
See the 'leecher problem' thread for more info
#13
Posted 26 October 2004 - 10:50 AM
I realy don't see why people are being so impatient. You are getting it for free, the world won't end if you don't get it by the end of the week. If people are that desperate for a file I suggest the alternative that will get it a lot quicker: go out and buy it.
1. Read this: eMule manual and Forum Rules
2. Then read this: Read before posting and do what it says.
3. Then check here Quick help
4. Then ask.
Click on the underlined.
----------------------------
Minister of Semantics, Useless Waffle & Pusskits - In Birks' NWO
---------------------------
Taken from SF's rules, with permission, "If it started in a thread, it should end in the same thread." Therefore don't PM me about a comment I have made in a thread, I am not interested and will put you in my blocked list.
#14
Posted 26 October 2004 - 11:17 AM
basketor64, on Oct 26 2004, 10:44 AM, said:
The risk of uploading a rare files is bigger in terms of rentability, so it should be rewarded more.
Now, you can't really be sure that someone is uploading a completed file ...
Well you can assume that someone who has the file completed won't be requesting a chunk from you within the session. So if someone pretends to be a complete source and then requests something from you in the same session you just outright ban him or remove all his credits.
Seven for the Dwarf-lords in their halls of stone,
Nine for Mortal Men doomed to die,
One for the Dark Lord on his dark throne
In the Land of Mordor where the Shadows lie.
One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them,
One Ring to bring them all and in the darkness bind them
In the Land of Mordor where the Shadows lie.
Dark Lord of the Forum
Morph your Mule
Need a little help with your MorphXT? Click here
#15
Posted 26 October 2004 - 11:19 AM
Stulle @ Dec 7 2005, 06:16 PM
#16
Posted 26 October 2004 - 01:41 PM
Quote
As I said in the other thread, this is not true, the opposite is true. A trading client won't give leechers a chance because it is not economical to allow leechers to download (they don't give anything in return).
The current system doesn't care if somebody returns upload or not. That, my friend, is open to leecher 'abuse'.
Quote
Why did we invent cars? Isn't walking just as good?
The problem is that you are not rewarded if you put your upload higher then 10. Using official emule it does not matter if you upload at 10kb/s or 100kb/s. Especially when you share a lot of files.
And people simply like faster downloads. If I have desire for a file, I don't like to wait for it. Once the wait is over maybe the desire is gone. I will have to predict my future desires and often that's not possible and I have to delay my desires. In the ideal situation you would have instant access to your downloads. Currently not possible but anything closing in on that situation is preferable.
If you are a masochistic person who prefers slow downloads over fast ones then that's your problem (though maybe it's not a problem at all, you are happy with what you have and stuff), but most people like faster downloads. (and don't start pointing to bittorrent, cause they want faster downloads with the same quality emule delivers them).
#17
Posted 26 October 2004 - 01:53 PM
You forget a very important thing: with the current system you can get anything you want, even if you don't have anything to give back.
While this is good for leechers, it's good for the "average Joe" as well.
I may have a gazillion of good files, yet I may want something someone has. Now, when that someone doesn't want any of my files, I'm stuck. This is where the trading systems fail.
I've been into filesharing for long and I remember well the frustrating experience of having to find something I didn't care about only to have something to trade to satisfy the needs of my peer.
I don't want to see the day when with eMule I'll try do download something and I won't be able to get it since the source(s) do not want anything I have. What should I do? Blame my bad luck, search for that file on another network, what?
There are already mucho many systems where the "I give you when you give me" is implemented. Why would you want to turn eMule in just another trading system?
#18
Posted 26 October 2004 - 02:03 PM
Are you saying the current system is the best and can't be bettered?
Also, I was not suggesting I had a better idea myself, just hoping for some debate and discussion on ways of maybe finding an alternative, that balances the problem of people pulling off their shares in the hope of a faster download....
Though in the end, I guess no matter how much we argue the point, time itself will tell... If people DO start pulling off their files en masse over time, then that will show the current model is flawed and some evolutionary system will (hopefully) kick in...
In the meantime, lets hope you are correct in all your assertions...
This post has been edited by citysuit: 26 October 2004 - 02:04 PM
#19
Posted 26 October 2004 - 02:12 PM
He does have a point, and of course, the immediate thought that came to mind was to ban them once it was known that was what they were doing...
Then of course, the other thought springs to mind, what if the current system is maintained, but alongside the rankings we all have on our machines for other clients, we also keep a record of peoples share volume over time....
If a user suddenly drops his current volume of shares, all those clients who have tabs on him could ban him from their own clients (or at least reset hiim to zero in their ratings tables)
That way, you dont have to change much with the current system, and it would discourage people from unsharing for a fast burn...
#20
Posted 26 October 2004 - 02:23 PM