Exclusive Uploaders

[Vitreous]

Posting here because the Rules thread is currently closed.

Rule 16 prevents reposts, but... "Encodings of different sizes are exempt from this rule. Videos by Exclusive Uploaders (the guys with the blue usernames) cannot be re-posted, period". I was about to post a new encode of a video that Akiva (now an "Exclusive Uploader") has previously posted at a lower res/fps. I'm sure the intent is to allow this, but the rule could be read either way. Just checking...

Also, what about posting a torrent of an Exclusive Uploader's video? I'm not going to do that, but others might and rule 16 seems to concern DDLs.

 

[Rollyco]

A different encode is not considered a "re-post", so you can go ahead with your upload.

I'm not sure about a torrent mirror of a Exclusive Uploader's DDL, the staff haven't discussed that scenario yet.

 

[xater]

What about Re-rips of older stuff?

 

[Rollyco]

If by "re-rip" you mean "re-encode", then that's also allowed.

 

[Vitreous]

If by "re-rip" you mean "re-encode", then that's also allowed.

I think Xater means taking a lower quality rip, and using (Q)TGMC processing to improve it. So it is a re-encode, but using the original rip as a source. I know some posters are sensitive about this, but are the rules?

 

[Rollyco]

The only thing that's forbidden is the exact same video file. Any re-encoding or significant processing means it's no longer a "re-post" and is allowed.

 

[guy]

The only thing that's forbidden is the exact same video file.

Or as was mentioned in another thread, the exact same video stream. Simply remuxing an existing video into a different container (eg: MKV->MP4) and reposting it as a "different" file would not be allowed, correct?

 

[illuminatus3]

torrent[/I] of an Exclusive Uploader's video? I'm not going to do that, but others might and rule 16 seems to concern DDLs.

I don't know about other exclusive uploaders, but Akiva is very much against anyone torrenting his posts. I believe he has the statement in bold in all his .rars.

 

[Vitreous]

I don't know about other exclusive uploaders, but Akiva is very much against anyone torrenting his posts.

And most people (myself included) respect his position because he is such a good poster, but the mods make the rules.

 

[Rollyco]

Simply remuxing an existing video into a different container (eg: MKV->MP4) and reposting it as a "different" file would not be allowed, correct?

That's right.

 

[k3nytran]

Hello admin. This is my first time writing to the administrator. I hope you will have some practical advice for me.
I have a few small questions would the network administrator can help me solve:
1. I am a new person, I do not know where to start. If I want to put a document on our web site then I must do what is best, while I may find to your upload directory (I also have read your instructions)?
2. When I'm wrong what do I do? Usually when I usually do not get sent a notice at all!
Thank you for reading and hope to have feedback from you soon!
K3nytran

 

[c|auswitz]

Given that this is a new rule so this situation will not really happen until some time in the future but can something be reposted if the old links are dead, someone's requesting a repost, and the original poster is either no long active on the forum or simply does not wish to repost a large file for one or two people? I'm also not really sure how often links go dead so I'm unsure if this will even be an issue but I was curious so I thought I'd ask.

 

[Ceewan]

For what it is worth I think the whole Exclusive Uploader idea is idiotic, moronic, and hypocrytical.

However, and in all fairness, I do hope that whatever the rule is meant to achieve here bears fruit. Better that than another misguided rule change that completely fails to accomplish any goals whatsoever. The staff here work hard and deserve whatever victories they can achieve. Although I do not support every decision that is made here I do support the staff here on the whole and respect their tireless efforts.

 

[illuminatus3]

For what it is worth I think the whole Exclusive Uploader idea is idiotic, moronic, and hypocrytical.

However, and in all fairness, I do hope that whatever the rule is meant to achieve here bears fruit. Better that than another misguided rule change that completely fails to accomplish any goals whatsoever. The staff here work hard and deserve whatever victories they can achieve. Although I do not support every decision that is made here I do support the staff here on the whole and respect their tireless efforts.

I would typically agree with you, but I think we have to accept this to provide content to the board that are no longer available through other means. lease: :joker:

My question is, what does constitute an 'exclusive poster'? uzzled: I was just reviewing one exclusive poster's posts, and I believe his posts are 80% re-posts of material already on the board and releases that are readily available on shareuzzled:

 

[Vitreous]

My question is, what does constitute an 'exclusive poster'? I was just reviewing one exclusive poster's posts, and I believe his posts are 80% re-posts of material already on the board and releases that are readily available on share

I've also seen a "exclusive uploader" reposting existing material on filehosts that are otherwise banned. Exactly the kind of post the new rules were attempting to get rid of. Should we report such posts? Or can exclusive uploaders do anything they like?

 

[IdolFun]

16. Do not use 'cashlinks', e.g. LinkBucks, URLCash etc. Any posts containing cashlinks will be deleted. [For a list of approved and banned links view this thread: http://www.akiba-online.com/forum/sh...ad.php?t=53361] Exclusive Uploaders (the guys with the blue usernames) are exempt from this rule.

 

[Vitreous]

16. Do not use 'cashlinks', e.g. LinkBucks, URLCash etc. Any posts containing cashlinks will be deleted. [For a list of approved and banned links view this thread: http://www.akiba-online.com/forum/sh...ad.php?t=53361] Exclusive Uploaders (the guys with the blue usernames) are exempt from this rule.

I thought that exemption was for "exclusive material". Seems I was wrong.

So exclusive uploaders do not have to upload exclusive material. They can repost any material on any filehost.

Is there some kind of threshold of exclusive material you need to supply to retain the title and its benefits? Little has been said about how they are chosen.

 

[Rollyco]

Why: Major posters were leaving or threatening to leave A-O if we didn't do something about DDL "dilution". This group was created to stop the bleeding.

Who: The usergroup is for people that have a solid history of uploading videos that aren't pirated anywhere else, including torrent/DDL forums and P2P. Re-encodes don't count. Not all of their uploads have to be 'exclusive', of course. But there does have to be a history. Obviously this is a judgement call the staff has to make on a case-by-case basis. Some cases are easy to determine (akiva), others not so much. It helps if the applicant picks out as many specific cases where they were "first on the scene" from their post history as possible.

What: Having a blue username allows you to report another person's re-post on any DDL host and the staff will delete it for you. You can also use banned filehosts. Those are the only major differences from being a "Full Member."

 

[Kaleb2727]

A different encode is not considered a "re-post", so you can go ahead with your upload.

I'm not sure about a torrent mirror of a Exclusive Uploader's DDL, the staff haven't discussed that scenario yet.

There is an "Exclusive Uploader" whose IV rips I enjoy and have been torrenting with his knowledge and consent. Should I refrain from doing so until the staff discusses this "scenario"?

 

[Rollyco]

Don't worry about it, you can continue to torrent his rips. We only take action when the "Exclusive Uploader" complains through the

report button. And since you have his permission, that's not going to happen.