"delayed" queue on downloading side

sometimes a user has too many albums i want to download from him. but he has the restriction on how many albums i may queue at the time. so i need to queue some now, and after some time to queue others. but what if i am afk, but he is online at that time, and when i reach at the keyboard he would go offline? so may be it could be implemented that way: i queue all albums at once but mark this as "delayed queue" - after downloading each album, my client takes a sleep for, say, 5 seconds. if anyone is in queue besides me, that man starts downloading. if there is no one - i start the second album, on the fair ground. not to disturb the person i am downloading from, all queued albums are displayed on queue only on my side. but on the side of the person i am downloading from only the album i am currently downloading is queued, or if someone else was in queue, only the next album to download in the delayed queue is displayed
Your rating: None
Average: 1 (3 votes)


This is an interesting suggestion, but needs to to be evaluated in combination with all other request threads concerning round-robin/alternative schedulers for file transfers.

If Nir ever wants to change the current behavior, it would be better for him to provide a couple reasonable suggestions and do a poll then to let every single user come up with their individual request.

This just seems like me to give leechers a way to try and cheat people's personal rules they put in place. I've had numerous users who have tried to download my entire collection and I don't like that at all. In my opinion, people should be downloading what they like, if anyone tries to download my entire collection by queuing thousands of tunes at once or in a "piece-meal" fashion as described above, I'd ban them without question, whether it complies with my "don't queue more than 1 LP or 10 tunes at once rule" as this seems like a way for people to avoid any form of effort when trying to find stuff. It's not in the spirit of file-sharing (as you can download off one person and never share with anyone else if you don't want to) - if you are forced to visit numerous sources to download from then you will probably be sharing with (at least) those who you downloaded from.

As you can tell, don't like this idea.

I tend to agree. While you could argue the benefits of downloading sporadically instead of continuously holding up the queue, I suspect most uploaders would not see it that way. Rather they are more likely to feel deceived, and this mechanism to be perceived as a tool for the user to hide their intentions. The uploader's wishes aren't a technical problem to fix or try to get around. If you feel at odds queuing screenfuls of files at a time, there might be a good reason for that. Building a massive library of tens of gigabytes of files might seem fun on the surface, but I'd like to think of the ideal Soulseek experience as one of sampling and enjoying things piecemeal.

I'm all for this. The greatest frustration with soulseek is this nutty download limit. I live in the 21st century and what computers do for me is queue jobs, and automate them. This manual approach is like driving a model T ford about, quaint at best. The reality is it has nothing to do with leaching. You can and should be able to ban people who aren't sharing reciprocally to your satisfaction. I share more than most by a long way for example and have the client up most always serving files and have no restrictions on queue length.

Sampling and enjoying s in fact what I do, it's awesom, I just do it on eclecitc mixes built from larger collections, no song at a time or album at a time say. Rather using mixers like MusicIP.

Automation is not deception, in fact timing requests and being able to schedule them is simply saving time.

Each to their own though, and I'm grateful for what is on offer. SS is a brilliantly eclectic mix of users. Awesome.