“Close connection� available only to “Grant

Archived discussion about features (predating the use of Bugzilla as a bug and feature tracker)

Moderator: Moderators

Locked
[PT]Devilishly
Posts: 96
Joined: 2003-04-18 05:57
Location: Oporto, Portugal
Contact:

“Close connection� available only to “Grant

Post by [PT]Devilishly » 2003-04-25 06:58

I think that the command “close connection� should only be used for users that we had given an “extra slot�.
I’m going to use an example to demonstrate what I mean:
Suppose we had defined in the settings, 3 slots to up-load. Until we reach the 3 slots to up-load we couldn’t close any connection, but the others slots opened after those three, could. This would prevent users to close connections to those who had honestly got them.
Supposing that we had chosen in the settings 5 slots and we know want to reduce them to 3. We could only close connections in this order: 1rst- users that we had opened slot; 2nd- the most recent user being added in the up-load slot. If we changed again the settings, 3 slots to 5 in less than 5 minutes, those users would have priority to take those slots again…

Best regards,
[PT]Devilishly

cologic
Programmer
Posts: 337
Joined: 2003-01-06 13:32
Contact:

Post by cologic » 2003-04-25 09:55

Read this thread before commenting further, for the sake of not forcing people to spend time repeating old arguments, please.

[PT]Devilishly
Posts: 96
Joined: 2003-04-18 05:57
Location: Oporto, Portugal
Contact:

Post by [PT]Devilishly » 2003-04-25 10:45

I’m sorry but it’s a too big thread and I just couldn’t read all. Please, try to post only facts, so it can be readable…

Ok, I’m going to use only facts and leave the arguments to you:
- The objective of having slots opened is to users use it, so it isn’t your right to choose who’s going to use them;
- If you open a slot to a user, you have the right to close it.
If those two premises are true, my previous post make all sense…

But ok, if this matter is already being discussed in other thread, I’m asking to a moderator to close this topic.

Best regards,
[PT]Devilishly

Marvin
Posts: 147
Joined: 2003-03-06 06:56
Location: France
Contact:

Post by Marvin » 2003-05-01 05:03

[PT]Devilishly wrote:it isn’t your right to choose who’s going to use them;
Well, I might think it is. If, for whatever reason, I had to lessen my number of slots, I might want to decide on which criterion I would close the connections (boys before girls, small share before big share, big connection before small connection, girls before boys, this guy who is always aggressive with newcomers before that one who is helping them....). After all, isn't this (wonderfull) DC++ thing running on my computer, through some internet connexion I'm paying for ?

cologic
Programmer
Posts: 337
Joined: 2003-01-06 13:32
Contact:

Post by cologic » 2003-05-01 05:29

I'd left this thread for dead, but:
Ok, I’m going to use only facts and leave the arguments to you:
Ha. Ha. Ha.

GargoyleMT
DC++ Contributor
Posts: 3212
Joined: 2003-01-07 21:46
Location: .pa.us

homey don't play that

Post by GargoyleMT » 2003-05-01 08:48

Cologic, I rather liked:
[PT]Devilishly wrote:I’m sorry but it’s a too big thread and I just couldn’t read all. Please, try to post only facts, so it can be readable…
Sorry, Devilishly... the point of posting the thread was to get you to read it and get an understanding for how similar arguments have played out. Cologic posted it for your own benefit.

volkris
Posts: 121
Joined: 2003-02-02 18:07
Contact:

Post by volkris » 2003-05-01 08:59

[PT]Devilishly wrote:- The objective of having slots opened is to users use it, so it isn’t your right to choose who’s going to use them;
- If you open a slot to a user, you have the right to close it.
If those two premises are true, my previous post make all sense…
I was going to go with the "they're my resources to dole out as I will" argument, but I like your second bullet better. If there are ANY slots open on my computer it's because I've opened them. And you're right, I have the right to close it.

[PT]Devilishly
Posts: 96
Joined: 2003-04-18 05:57
Location: Oporto, Portugal
Contact:

Post by [PT]Devilishly » 2003-05-02 14:42

That’s my opinion, but I won’t argue about that…

Best regards,
[PT]Devilishly

Smirnof100
Posts: 19
Joined: 2003-05-06 22:00

Post by Smirnof100 » 2003-05-07 19:04

ok heres my 2 cents.

1. My Slots Belong to me and i should have the right to decide who gets to use them.
2. My i do not suffer from little dick syndrome (LDS: people who think their dick is small so they compensate that by trying to control someone elses situation, or buy the best car or a big gun or something else expensive) and therefore have yet to feel the need to disconnect anyone.
3. People who disconnect others because of LDS or some other reason without a good cause are mean and shouldn't be allowed to use a program of this caliber.
4. I will disconnect users who are mean or who disconnect me from my downloads but thats the only reason i have for disconnecting someone (to date)
5. I will disconnect people getting less than 1k upload from me on large files that are popular (im doing them a favor, they don't wanna wait 3229 hours to get their mp3, and if they have alt search on they will get it faster) but if they reconnect to me i won't redisconnect them... i just figure im doing them a favor, or i will pm them to see if they are there and tell them their odds are better elsewhere.
6. If you don't want that many people downloading from you then DON'T open the extra slots... i open 6... i plan on having 6 ppl download from me and 7 or 8 on request. It would be stupid to open 8 if i only wanted 6 and disconnected everyone who used the extra slots so come on people.
7. Many people confuse a logoff with a disconnect... If i log off everyone logged onto me is going to get a disconnected message (its kind of vague) so you may think someone has disconnect you (they have but...) but they were logging off direct connect and shutting down their computer (or playing counterstrike and needed bandwidth) and either way aren't in the system anymore. Because of the vagueness of the disconnect i always sent a pm to all dl from me to tell them im logging otherwise they may get pissed off at me not knowing i just went to bed or something.

Anyways if everyone is courtous to others and shares fairly then the system works. If there are assholes out there who suffer LDS and feel the need to disconnect you then go elsewhere for your file unless its ultra-rare... in which case you can bitch at them over a pm start a fight get pissed tell an op and they will get banned and you will never see them or your file again....

But point being: I WANT ULTRA CONTROL OVER WHAT GOES ON INSIDE MY COMPUTER. Weather or not i will use or abuse the powers given me i do not like the idea of programmers making assumptions and taking away my power to use the program and tell me what i can and cannot do. What makes this different from lds is that there is controlling what is yours and controlling everyone else around you... I would prefer to control what is mine and in that process let others benefit from what i have.
Build a Man a Fire, and he will be Warm for a day.
Set a Man on Fire, and he will be Warm for the Rest of his Life.

GargoyleMT
DC++ Contributor
Posts: 3212
Joined: 2003-01-07 21:46
Location: .pa.us

trust is a very important currency

Post by GargoyleMT » 2003-05-11 16:13

To (seemingly) summarize at least the end of your point, Smirnof: you'd like to be trusted to do the right thing. Or you don't want to be grouped with the same people who will intentionally do the *wrong* thing.

Smirnof100
Posts: 19
Joined: 2003-05-06 22:00

Post by Smirnof100 » 2003-05-11 19:19

Something like that. It falls under the theory that i would like to be ABLE to do it... not that i would ;)

Btw... I like the Laughing Man Icon :P Guess that means now i cant use it :( Oh well.
Build a Man a Fire, and he will be Warm for a day.
Set a Man on Fire, and he will be Warm for the Rest of his Life.

Locked