Prevent uploading to users who aren't sharing

Description: 
I would like to have a way to stop people who have no files shared downloading from me. In Soulseek NS I share with everyone, and if I want to stop leechers I can choose between checking the files of all the people that download from me and banning those that do not share or only sharing with people on my userlist. More and more people are sharing only with the people on their userlist and in the long run that will be the end of soulseek as a great music sharing community. So something like a notification or an autoban for people that do not share.
Status: 
Not likely to be implemented
0
Your rating: None
1
Average: 1 (21 votes)

Comments

This is a topic that's almost as old as Soulseek itself. The usual problem with this approach is that it would be very easy to get around the mechanism by sharing garbage files. People have been saying private sharing would be the end of Soulseek for almost a decade now. I'm not knocking the reasons one might have to care about this sort of thing. Give and take are an important part of fostering relationships on Soulseek, and personal relationships are what sets Soulseek apart from other file-sharing services. There's actually room in the new client to implement a sort of automatic ban-on-no-files-shared feature, but if it became commonplace it would be very easily defeated. You can always just share a few things publicly to reflect your general taste, and keep the majority of your share for users you've verified and are interested in sharing with.

Do you think there could be a way implemented which speeds up the check on a user then, or even a check that is automatically performed? At the moment I have to right click on user, browse their files, and wait for the results to be returned. I then have to move to a different screen.

If, when a user was uploading, a separate yes/no could be shown in a 'sharing?' column this would really help me.

I think I'm willing to go as far as send an automated warning message to a user who appears not to be sharing anything. What do you think?

Sounds perfect to me!

I do this but it really doesn't work.. People just message back saying "F you!!" and stuff like that, and still don't share.. I also would like to see an option to Ban any user. For instance.. I had some downloads waiting for the last 3 days.. I checked this morning and a bunch are listed as "Banned", i sent the guy a message asking why he banned me from downloading and he basically said F you... That comeback apparently never gets old... But since he;s not sharing, i'd like to ban him, since he's currently uploading about 7 albums from me, while banning me from downloading from him... So please, include a ban ability, and to force people to share, can't you make download speeds correlational to the amount of files ppl share?.. So if they are sharing a few junk files, they can't actually download ANYTHING from ANYONE until they add over 100 song files to their shared folder. And then scale it from there.. The more files shared, the faster you can download. foe example, 1000 shared files = 5 kb/s. 5000 shared files = 20 kb/s. 10000 shared files = 100 kb/s.. and so on...

Thank you for the feedback and thanks a million for soulseek. I'm looking forwar to the new client.

Cheers :)

Tristis Oris's picture

Categorically against, besides that I share 2TB music for all and without restriction of speed. At all the reasons not to rummage, and also sometimes it is necessary to come from another's computer where certainly there is no music, not banned for it.
People which are much less useful share only for statistics, but load from them can only selected gods.

I agree with automatically ban user don't share. If they share crap, we ban manually.

dimarray's picture

all i'd really like to see in the way of this is a number displayed in parentheses (0) next to the user so that it's easier to manage. i understand that some folks are sharing garbage files, but if i could see all the 0's right away that would be sweet...

Given that simply preventing people from downloading if they aren't sharing anything is a good way of getting them to share rubbish instead, probably it's better not to ban them immediately. However, I think there should be two messages; the first to the person not sharing anything and the second to the person from whom he's trying to leech.

what if you could set a personal quota for what constituted constructive sharing to you? For instance: despite the relative ease to circumnavigate a restriction on downloading without sharing a single file, by sharing a single file, I am comfortable with such a restriction because I believe many non-sharers dont share because they are uninterested in setting up a directory. The bare requirement to share a single file necessitates setting up a directory. I feel most people, when forced to set up a directory, will set-up a meaningful one.

However- If users had the ability to set limits on how many files they can require another user to share in order to download from them, the system is suddenly less easy to gain. I would probably set my limit at about 1000 files. It is more difficult to share 1000 trash files than it is to make your download folder searchable.

I also totally agree with this idea.

I really think an automatic unsharing system would encourage many more people to set up their shares and for userlist only people to open up their files. The minimum amount of files could be set to avoid the people who share only their garbage Qt files or Samples folder. If you can't share more than 10 files, then you really shouldn't be able to search and download anything. I'm also tired of the drive-by userlist only people who receive the empty share warnings, ignore them, continue to download the files and then run. There's nothing to stop them.

The empty share warnings were a good idea, but in reality they really aren't that effective. Maybe 10% of the people who receive them will ever share anything. I usually give people 2 warnings or a few weeks before they are unshared.

The empty share warnings could still be sent to those who are automatically unshared. Maybe that would give them extra incentive to add some folders.

JulianGiulioJulio's picture

Hello, Community!
Can I just say - I am a kind person, a musician - & sensitive to this precious, vital resource, but why did one user ban me... from downloading a song the other day!?
Our music should be shared with anyone (-why not?) on it, & Soulseek should be as democratic as possible. but I agree, if people could be responsible to clear out any crap, as far as they know, in their sharing file/s... e.g. half-songs; and tracks with those horrible sound bubbles, that are like squeaks, but esp. the first sort!
My problem is -there's no way I can find to share my other music file! (I am only sharing one file at the moment while this other, growing one is going to waste for others!)Can anyone tell me how to add another file to share!?
I've asked S/seek (-twice!), but they haven't got back to me!
Enjoy autumn, music travellers!

I like your post and everything you share with us is current and very informative. Your article is really great. I like the way you wrote this information. Fifa 15 Coins

hysales's picture

First, I know this is a very, very old thread. Second, I've been sharing on Soulseek forever. Here is my take: It's called sharing, not trading. We should not expect any sort of "payment" for sharing, even if that "payment" is simply someone else offering files to share. If you demand payment, let that payment be the good feeling you deserve to get from sharing with everyone.

Next point, we all had to start somewhere. Like it or not, there was a day when you and me had exactly zero digital music files. Even though we had none, someone else let us "share" their files.

Some of us have lots of files, lots of bandwidth, lots of computing power, and so on. Lets volunteer those extra resources to help the entire music community. In particular, since we are never losing anything, we are only letting others take a copy of "our" files, which of course are rarely or never actually "ours" to begin with.

I speak from the point of view of a long time slsk user that freely shares, my full bandwidth (unless the roommates are watching netflix :). I did check the box that sends the "youre not sharing..." message, and I found that many new users are simply unaware of how to go about sharing. But I still let them download from me.

Music should be free for all to hear, and Soulseek is the answer. When we teach our children to share, are they instructed to only offer their toy to another child who can give them a toy in return?

Finally, the RIAA has viciously and evilly attacked people, even children, with brutally oppressive law suits for uploading a few songs. I just can't blame anyone for fearing the attention of their legal departments.

you are amazing. this article really has a lot of information. this is what i have been looking for. keep it up. hoping to see more post from you in the future.
check this out--> Buy Soundcloud Followers

I think most new users will try and download something to test out soulseek before sharing any files. If they were to get instantly banned when ever they try and download something they will probably just uninstall soulseek. New users need to be encouraged so the population can grow. The auto warning message has been quite successful for me with many new users messaging me to say sorry and ask for help setting up a shared folder.

Users should be encouraged to share music rather than simply banned.

A good choice of subject
Very informative and worth reading article
thanks for sharing this

imtheBMAXboss's picture

The subject is very simple yet very informative thank you for the post
buy-soundcloud-comments

Thank you for posting! Will be expecting more from you and keep it up. :)

get soundcloud followers