DeathStalker77

Not arguing that possibilty, but those numbers *must* be a reference to something. How do you determine what it is?

Interesting. Ever since the 1st crash, the "memory leak" seems to be back. Would really like to be able to trace down what those Corruption entries in the SystemLog are referring to.

Oops, my bad - sorry, wasn't paying attention. I wasn't doing anything at the time, it was running in the background and just crashed.

<sinff, sniff> it's happened two more times since then as well. And I'm in fewer hubs right now, due to ISP problems. In the SystemLog I did notice some "corruption" entries - Corruption detected at position XXXXXXXX - any way to decode where/what the number refers to?

This is really frustrating - and for *most* users, useless. It should be MY decision as a user whether I want to have slow downloads disconnect. If the only user(s) with a file I want happen to have crappy connections, I'd rather get the file over a long period of time than not get it at all! WHY can you programmers not understand the LOGIC in that? It's plain & simple - it should be a PER FILE, USER option - if I'm getting a file that has 200 sources, sure I might want to have slow connections weeded out, but with rare files (and those are pretty much the ONLY things I download - I don't do all the "popular" movies & crap like that) being able to stay connected at slow speeds is a NECESSITY. Again, just like with the partial file sharing (and let's face it, the VAST majority of DC users do NOT use multisource and may hub out and out ban its use), this should be a decision that *I* make - WHY do you care about what choices a user makes? I can't see it as being anything other than pure ego - "I can control what you get"

BM, I had a file last night that would *not* retain any users - there were 4 users in the queue, but all of them had slow connections and it kept removing ALL of them and showing No Users. There was only 1 segment downloading at a time - never had 2 connections at the same time. Maybe it's not intended to disconnect in this fashion, but it apparently is. I don't intend to show any disrespect, I just don't mince words - if there's a specific, technical, protocol, or programming reason that something cannot be done, I can understand that when those specific reasons/explanations are given - I just don't buy the blanket statement of "it can't be done". With regard to the slot issue, the bottom line is that *someone* is going to connect to the slow users, disconnecting them simply leaves them with open, unused slots. I just do not understand why none of you can see that this does not make a difference except to make downloads take longer - I repeat that users can still have the option set as default, or activate it on a per file basis. How about this - instead of making it a full option (as I would personally like), make the option to not disconnect a per file option ?

Big Muscle, with all due respect, that makes absolutely *zero* sense. Slots will be used regardless of what the speed is. Whether I connect to User A at 1k or User B at 200k it is still a slot used - and if User C, whose connection is only 500B is the ONLY source for the file I'm looking for, then YOU screw me out of that file because of your insistance on this - it is absolutely, unequicably not necessary - and there is no justification for it whatsoever. A slot used is a slot used - period, no ifs, and, or buts.

This has nothing to do with sharing or not sharing things - it has *everything* with being able to download things. Not everyone on DC has a fast connection - this feature totally screws a user if the ONLY sources for a file have slow or bad connections. Disabling it (and no, sorry, I do not believe it "can't be turned off" - that's a programmer cop-out, no ifs, ands, or buts) will do NOTHING to harm downloads. You act as if EVERYONE on DC uses a segmented client - guess what? They don't - the majority probably never will - not until DC++ implements it, and that is something the developers have said they will never do. Making this a USER choice will not change ANYTHING except for the ability of people to GET files easier. You can always enable it if that's what a user chooses. What is it about this that you all don't seem to understand??? And "watching this"? You don't like that I speak my mind - AND speak the truth about things? Virtually ALL of the responses I have gotten since I first posted on here and StrongDC have stated "it can't be done" - I don't beleive that, plain & simple. The second reason given has been it will hurt DC - again, wrong. You put in a virtually useless feature like a limiter - which is banned in pretty much every hub, but you steadfastly refuse to incorporate features which would HELP a user. The bottom line is that you developers, as a group, cannot seem to take any criticism of your work - you simply want everyone to praise you. And yes, I do that - I *do* thank you for good programs - I do not thank you for your "we're always right" attitude. I post because I want the programs to be even better.

I would honestly rather not have the feature entirely, but I think it would at least be a comprimize for it to be an adjustable setting. It's never been said that *every* user hates it or would not use it, I'm sure there are many who would use it. To me, it's like saying you *must* have X number of slots open past 1, just because; or a better example would be saying you can *never* download anymore from a user whose speed is below 1k, That again, wiould be wrong (I don't know if Apex transferred the code directly from StrongDC, as that's something he currently has implemented that you CANNOT turn off. I'm sorry, I would rather get the file I need from the only lucky user still truely on DialUp at 700B, than to NEVER be able to get it at all. Disconnecting or flagging Slow Users is something that should be done by the user. A comprimise in that area might be to FLAG users as SLOW USERS, with an indication to the speed (maybe with color or an icon), that way the user can decide whether to remove them entirely or live with the slow transfer.

Crise, your response says nothing about the issue. Lee and other keep claiming (in the StrongDC forum) about things that "can't be done", "not technically possible" and other such lame responses. The point is, and remains, that I as the user, *no one else* has the right to determine WHAT I share and WHEN I share it. Period. No ifs, ands, or buts. ANY other excuse is just that, an excuse. Only some pathetic ego-trip, power-monger, control-freak would care otherwise.

What's this setting for and what are the setting limitations? Also, is there no option to disable auto-refresh, or at least set the refresh for as long an interval as possible?

Sorry, Lee, but that is plain bull****. You bitch about "leechers" wanting to turn off unfinished files that they may not want to share (for WHATEVER reason!) but you will allow a frigging SPEED LIMITER!!!??? There are FAR more "leechers" out there who ABUSE a limiter function! Bottom line, as I said in Strong's Forum, WHAT I share and WHEN is UP TO ME - period. Don;t give me that lame bull**** excuse of crappy shares (I happen to share over 150GB). Users with crappy LIMITED speeds are far worse than not being able to get a few segments of someone else's unfinished file. What it with your freaking ego trip on wanting to CONTROL what others share???