― teeny (teeny), Tuesday, 9 December 2003 14:58 (twenty-one years ago)
I know this is awfully navelgazey, but seriously, how did we do it before the internet? what other opportunity would I have had to converse very poorly in a language I haven't spoken in years? WE ARE LIVING IN THE FUTURE!!
― teeny (teeny), Tuesday, 9 December 2003 14:59 (twenty-one years ago)
― fiddo centington (dubplatestyle), Tuesday, 9 December 2003 15:00 (twenty-one years ago)
― Julio Desouza (jdesouza), Tuesday, 9 December 2003 15:00 (twenty-one years ago)
― teeny (teeny), Tuesday, 9 December 2003 15:01 (twenty-one years ago)
― Markelby (Mark C), Tuesday, 9 December 2003 15:01 (twenty-one years ago)
― Julio Desouza (jdesouza), Tuesday, 9 December 2003 15:02 (twenty-one years ago)
― cinniblount (James Blount), Tuesday, 9 December 2003 15:03 (twenty-one years ago)
moments later...
[*******] hey bro[*******] why did u ban me?[*******] u prick
― fiddo centington (dubplatestyle), Tuesday, 9 December 2003 15:03 (twenty-one years ago)
― cinniblount (James Blount), Tuesday, 9 December 2003 15:04 (twenty-one years ago)
― El Diablo Robotico (Nicole), Tuesday, 9 December 2003 15:05 (twenty-one years ago)
― fiddo centington (dubplatestyle), Tuesday, 9 December 2003 15:05 (twenty-one years ago)
― charltonlido (gareth), Tuesday, 9 December 2003 15:05 (twenty-one years ago)
― teeny (teeny), Tuesday, 9 December 2003 15:06 (twenty-one years ago)
― cinniblount (James Blount), Tuesday, 9 December 2003 15:06 (twenty-one years ago)
― Tico Tico (Tico Tico), Tuesday, 9 December 2003 15:08 (twenty-one years ago)
― cinniblount (James Blount), Tuesday, 9 December 2003 15:09 (twenty-one years ago)
― stevem (blueski), Tuesday, 9 December 2003 15:10 (twenty-one years ago)
― El Diablo Robotico (Nicole), Tuesday, 9 December 2003 15:11 (twenty-one years ago)
― cinniblount (James Blount), Tuesday, 9 December 2003 15:12 (twenty-one years ago)
― cinniblount (James Blount), Tuesday, 9 December 2003 15:13 (twenty-one years ago)
― stevem (blueski), Tuesday, 9 December 2003 15:15 (twenty-one years ago)
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 9 December 2003 16:15 (twenty-one years ago)
― stevem (blueski), Tuesday, 9 December 2003 16:25 (twenty-one years ago)
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 9 December 2003 16:26 (twenty-one years ago)
― stevem (blueski), Tuesday, 9 December 2003 16:30 (twenty-one years ago)
― cinniblount (James Blount), Tuesday, 9 December 2003 16:32 (twenty-one years ago)
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 9 December 2003 16:36 (twenty-one years ago)
― teeny (teeny), Tuesday, 9 December 2003 16:37 (twenty-one years ago)
― cinniblount (James Blount), Tuesday, 9 December 2003 16:39 (twenty-one years ago)
― s1utsky (slutsky), Tuesday, 9 December 2003 17:56 (twenty-one years ago)
Do the 'privileges' help out much?
― miloauckerman (miloauckerman), Tuesday, 9 December 2003 18:00 (twenty-one years ago)
― cinniblount (James Blount), Tuesday, 9 December 2003 18:05 (twenty-one years ago)
― Bryan (Bryan), Tuesday, 9 December 2003 18:08 (twenty-one years ago)
― Jerry the Nipper (Jerrynipper), Tuesday, 9 December 2003 18:32 (twenty-one years ago)
― Bryan (Bryan), Tuesday, 9 December 2003 18:34 (twenty-one years ago)
― stevie (stevie), Tuesday, 9 December 2003 21:06 (twenty-one years ago)
― jel -- (jel), Tuesday, 9 December 2003 21:11 (twenty-one years ago)
― nickalicious (nickalicious), Tuesday, 9 December 2003 21:12 (twenty-one years ago)
― Sébastien Chikara (Sébastien Chikara), Tuesday, 9 December 2003 21:12 (twenty-one years ago)
the last person to msg me on slsk was spencer chow and he said "gygax!". and then there was that crazy girl with the record label in brooklyn who wanted all my michigan noise.
― gygax! (gygax!), Tuesday, 9 December 2003 21:23 (twenty-one years ago)
― Broheems (diamond), Tuesday, 9 December 2003 22:07 (twenty-one years ago)
this paragraph actually reads like an EBN-OZN lyric...
― bad jode (Jody Beth Rosen), Tuesday, 9 December 2003 22:09 (twenty-one years ago)
― Broheems (diamond), Tuesday, 9 December 2003 22:20 (twenty-one years ago)
― Andrew (enneff), Tuesday, 9 December 2003 22:21 (twenty-one years ago)
i like the way you think!
― bad jode (Jody Beth Rosen), Tuesday, 9 December 2003 22:41 (twenty-one years ago)
Just follow the instruction in the slsk board and use the nicotine client. It works great!
― Elvis Telecom (Chris Barrus), Tuesday, 9 December 2003 23:03 (twenty-one years ago)
i am sharing the Opal album, it's ripped from an original copy. i am "electricsound" if you wanna add me
― the surface noise (electricsound), Tuesday, 9 December 2003 23:39 (twenty-one years ago)
― jaymc (jaymc), Tuesday, 9 December 2003 23:40 (twenty-one years ago)
― johnny z (johnny z), Saturday, 25 September 2004 13:54 (twenty years ago)
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Saturday, 25 September 2004 13:58 (twenty years ago)
― johnny z (johnny z), Saturday, 25 September 2004 14:20 (twenty years ago)
― :| (....), Saturday, 25 September 2004 14:26 (twenty years ago)
― johnny z (johnny z), Saturday, 25 September 2004 14:28 (twenty years ago)
― johnny z (johnny z), Saturday, 25 September 2004 14:40 (twenty years ago)
― Leeeter van den Hoogenband (Leee), Saturday, 25 September 2004 15:00 (twenty years ago)
― johnny z (johnny z), Saturday, 25 September 2004 15:03 (twenty years ago)
looking for ananda shankar stuff, i found a guy on slsk with the username
'pants, meet shit'
― 696, Saturday, 19 May 2007 07:52 (eighteen years ago)
ok. so, does anyone else have a serious problem with these shitfucks with no shares? seriously, every time i'm on, i end up banning like, five of these shits. what is it? ummm, all that i'm sharing is the entire sarah records discography. maybe that's it. i hate most twee fuckers.
― andi, Sunday, 20 May 2007 19:21 (eighteen years ago)
i dont really have a problem myself. i just sort of took it in my stride and then, somehow, it all seemed ok
― 696, Sunday, 20 May 2007 19:22 (eighteen years ago)
Give me tempramental SLSK users who ban bad-sharers any day over the torrent nazis with their cult of ratio.
― libcrypt, Sunday, 20 May 2007 19:35 (eighteen years ago)
haha. i'm both. sometimes on soulseek, i like to ban those shits when they get 90% of a track.
because, i am sad.
― andi, Sunday, 20 May 2007 19:37 (eighteen years ago)
andi, what is username, i want 2 ban u
― Rock Hardy, Sunday, 20 May 2007 19:39 (eighteen years ago)
The cult of ratio pisses me off, but damn O1nk is fast as hell because of it
― stet, Sunday, 20 May 2007 19:46 (eighteen years ago)
it's really not a lot to ask to just keep it over 1.00.
― andi, Sunday, 20 May 2007 19:46 (eighteen years ago)
andi, i have shared files, but you can ban me if you want.
― Lingbert, Sunday, 20 May 2007 19:47 (eighteen years ago)
it's kinda hard for *everyone* to be over 1.0, though.
― toby, Sunday, 20 May 2007 19:48 (eighteen years ago)
daughters song title
― Edward III, Sunday, 20 May 2007 19:50 (eighteen years ago)
-- toby, Sunday, May 20, 2007 7:48 PM (11 seconds ago) Bookmark Link
well, no, i wouldn't say that. i'll agree that #it and o!nk are too strict, though. there's a tracker i like strictly devoted to indie pop that's way more flexible. just make and effort. there really is no reason to be under 0.90, though.
― andi, Sunday, 20 May 2007 19:51 (eighteen years ago)
an*
oh wait, i also share the entire ron johnson records discography, too.
― andi, Sunday, 20 May 2007 19:55 (eighteen years ago)
Yeah, it kinda is, because the torrent sharing algorithm/ratio system is entirely fucked-up. You can upload a new torrent for a recording that's never been on the network and it may -- depending on rules that I can't say I quite grasp -- be downloaded from you exactly once even though you continue to seed, while other folks seed it and have far higher download counts on that particular recording.
The easiest way to get and keep a high ratio is to seed a bunch of popular crap. That's fine for busy worker bees, but with SLSK, you're judged not just by quantity, but the overall quality of yr shares, which encourages folks to share more esoteric than popular stuff. Which is what I'm after, anyways.
― libcrypt, Sunday, 20 May 2007 21:02 (eighteen years ago)
i dont ban people with no shares, i just remove them from the queue. ssx ftw
also, more often than not, its just a network fuckup, and these people are actually sharing stuff. try browsing them!
― ☪, Sunday, 20 May 2007 21:04 (eighteen years ago)
oh, good thread. i once had an excellent chat with a grime fan guy in polish about grzegorz rasiak, who is something of a comedy figure at home it seems, despite him having what i thought was quite a good scoring record. his nickname's drzewo, which means wood. then we talked about other up n coming polish prospects.
i've had a brazilian and a loads of jamaican folk too, who are generally quite curt.
don't really need slsk for anything these days tho.
― r|t|c, Sunday, 20 May 2007 21:48 (eighteen years ago)
oh yea that whole rasiak thing, hes a laughing stock there isnt he?
― 696, Sunday, 20 May 2007 21:54 (eighteen years ago)
v much a peter crouchian relationship i gather.
― r|t|c, Sunday, 20 May 2007 21:58 (eighteen years ago)
'why we call rasiak wood'
(funnily enough it's just his best moments from the last time poland played england)
― r|t|c, Sunday, 20 May 2007 22:06 (eighteen years ago)
I've been invited to those torrent sites and honestly, I don't know how anyone musters the time or patience for them. I'll wait the extra four days for stuff to leak on slsk and bypass the gestapo entirely, thanks.
also, to offer the other perspective to counter Rock Hardy's - I get banned a lot because my hard drive is pretty much at death's door, and I keep getting error messages that I have less that 200mb free space so I have to always go back and delete shit.
I think banning is the adult version of being a tattletale. Petty dorks being vindictive toward other petty dorks.
― Manalishi, Sunday, 20 May 2007 22:15 (eighteen years ago)
On slsk I've found people (who I know are sharing stuff) but it says they have 0 files. And it turns out it's because they're on a mac.
x-post haha ask him for proof.
― Brigadier Lethbridge-Pfunkboy, Sunday, 20 May 2007 22:18 (eighteen years ago)
hm. if someone has no share on slsk, i'll more often than not check their info and their share, just to be sure. but, alas, these people are always little shits. . . i guess i'll make sure to check every time now, if you guys say so. and, why the hell should i waste my bandwidth on someone with nothing to offer me? especially when i'm not even sharing anything they couldn't easily find from someone else. i keep to slots open and a good up-speed. if you're not sharing you can fuck right off.
― andi, Monday, 21 May 2007 00:34 (eighteen years ago)
two*
on bit torrent: download sparingly. don't download something you know you can get off of slsk or some place else later. just try to give back what you take. and, like i said, i can agree that some sites are a little too strict about their trackers. just take the time to figure out what you're doing though, and quit being babies about this. it could be worth it.
― andi, Monday, 21 May 2007 02:29 (eighteen years ago)
I guess I'll consider it, but only as a personal favor to you, andi.
― libcrypt, Tuesday, 22 May 2007 05:26 (eighteen years ago)
jump on torrents that you know are going to be popular. jump on them right away, and keep seeding.
― andi, Tuesday, 22 May 2007 05:50 (eighteen years ago)
the record labels have started flooding soulseek with fake-shares recently. make a search for swizz beats's "it's me bitches" and you'll see what i mean. loads of users with similar sounding names (ciara5, digit56, mrgoogle8) share it but when you try downloading from them it says "awaiting user". fyi this only happens with searches on recent rap singles. i guess their trick is for all of their fake-shares to have real fast access-times/ping-times so that they end up in/clog up the search results before the "legit" shares show up. i kid you not.
― Jeb, Tuesday, 22 May 2007 08:22 (eighteen years ago)
That's been happening for about 3 years now. Not a recent development at all!
― Colonel Poo, Tuesday, 22 May 2007 09:17 (eighteen years ago)
aha. it's pretty effective actually. though it's more of a nuisance than an actual roadblock.
― Jeb, Tuesday, 22 May 2007 09:37 (eighteen years ago)
Yeah it's usually fairly obvious which are the fakes, as you say the usernames always have the same format - a name and a number, and they usually have the same album multiple times with slightly different names to catch variations in spelling.
― Colonel Poo, Tuesday, 22 May 2007 09:47 (eighteen years ago)
I've given up on slsk. o1nk works super fast for me, and my ratio's not a problem at all, I can't see why anyone would moan about it.
― The Wayward Johnny B, Tuesday, 22 May 2007 11:44 (eighteen years ago)
the ratio thing is lame, particularly on 01nk, since I dl mosly obscure or older stuff, which no-one ever wants to download, apparently. My ratios are crap even though I've been seeding dozens of things for a few weeks.
slsk: I've gotten banned recently for having "not interesting enough shares". uh, ok. the other really irritating thing about slsk: if you have your shares on a drive that you turn off at any point while slsk is running, it deletes your share preference w/out telling you. at some point I got banned repeatedly and didn't know why, and it turns out I had nothing shared. annoying. further, the interface for selecting shared folders is clunky (this is a windows OS limitation though). I don't want to recursively share my entire library, just certain things.
― akm, Tuesday, 22 May 2007 13:03 (eighteen years ago)
It's not a windows OS limitation, iirc you used to be select individual folders to share. I suspect (on no grounds whatsoever) that it was rewritten to encourage whole library sharing.
― ledge, Tuesday, 22 May 2007 13:06 (eighteen years ago)
ssX is about a gazillion times better than the awful Windows client.
― libcrypt, Tuesday, 22 May 2007 15:22 (eighteen years ago)
yeah. ssX.
― andi, Tuesday, 22 May 2007 15:37 (eighteen years ago)
does everyone use O1nk nowaways? i lost my account and never went back. is their site still atrocious?
― blueski, Tuesday, 22 May 2007 15:42 (eighteen years ago)
d/l a track by a composer.
Talked about it a bit on a thread.
Turns out I d/l it off him!
― xyzzzz__, Tuesday, 22 May 2007 18:34 (eighteen years ago)
audio galaxy r.i.p.
― PappaWheelie V, Tuesday, 22 May 2007 19:41 (eighteen years ago)
Audiogalaxy was the best, yea.
― libcrypt, Wednesday, 23 May 2007 04:28 (eighteen years ago)
is nicotine still the best mac client for slsk?
― braveclub, Friday, 7 March 2008 11:11 (seventeen years ago)
ssx
― water, Friday, 7 March 2008 11:16 (seventeen years ago)
ta
― braveclub, Friday, 7 March 2008 11:22 (seventeen years ago)