ChatterBank7 mins ago
WinMX
20 Answers
I'm a great believer in sharing and have a fairly large library of music which is there for anyone to take. Unfortunately not everyone feels the same. Some have nothing to share, but then we all had to start somewhere. Some don't have any and don't want to share, but the people who really get up my nose are those who have plenty to share but who choose not to. They load their exchange file with their music and register. This way their music is 'availble to share', but then they remove it all. This gives the impression that at first glance they're offering plenty; it's only when you try to download a track do you find out it doesn't exist. This behaviour is sly, underhand and deliberate and is done for selfish reasons or to keep their speed up. If anyone reading this has this intent or does this, you have my undying contempt.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Worker. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
-- answer removed --
I too use WinMx but I only use it for one or two songs by an artists and then if I like what i hear i buy the CD - dont do singles. The only songs i burn to CD is live stuff, mixes and one hit wonders. Maybe you should just buy the Cd's?? Better quality, plus you get the booklet and can show off your music collection alost easier. rather than having blank Cd's with bad printed lables on them. Just a thought.
fair enough worker. Im confused though - Why would you download the track, buy the CD then re-load the tracks on to your PC as you said?? But I see your point about people wanting 1 or 2 tracks. Usually out of 10 tracks not even 1/2 are any good. May be the service should only offer the best songs by a band or rare material - sort of like a taster for the albums.. Not entire albums.
Worker - what an astute answer. There is clearly no difference between my recording a TV programme when I'm not home, in order to watch it later, and you uploading "a fairly large library of music which is there for anyone to take" [i.e. to download without paying for it]. I shall go home and smash the VCR into a million little pieces.
Mike. Who ever said I downloaded my 'fairly large library of music which is there for anyone to take'? Certainly not me. I think you're writing your own question. I bought the vast majority of my library; I've only downloaded the more elusive tracks or those made many many years ago which were my favourites when much younger. No, I've bought them and it's my generosity which compells me to load them for anyone else. Please don't waste your or anyone's time by answering questions which weren't even asked.
Worker, I'm quite happy to respond and apologise if you've had to wait so long. It's just that I *do* have other things to do (though your witty suggestions as to what they might be are sadly wrong.) On to the substantive point of your last posting but one: "Who ever said I downloaded my 'fairly large library of music which is there for anyone to take'? Certainly not me."
No, I never said you had *downloaded* that library of music (though you argue that you have the right to, and it would be easy to assume that someone who is 'a great believer in sharing' might have acted on that belief). I actually pointed out that you have, in your own words, *uploaded* your music library, as it is 'there for anyone to take'.
You suggest that because you have paid for the CD/ record, you now have the right to distribute it to third parties. You do not. When you buy a CD/ record/ DVD/ software/ whatever, you enter a contract that prohibits you from re-distributing. I notice that you go one stage further and take great personal pride in your own generosity, which I find somewhat hard to swallow, because what you are actually doing is facilitating theft and breaking copyright law.
No, I never said you had *downloaded* that library of music (though you argue that you have the right to, and it would be easy to assume that someone who is 'a great believer in sharing' might have acted on that belief). I actually pointed out that you have, in your own words, *uploaded* your music library, as it is 'there for anyone to take'.
You suggest that because you have paid for the CD/ record, you now have the right to distribute it to third parties. You do not. When you buy a CD/ record/ DVD/ software/ whatever, you enter a contract that prohibits you from re-distributing. I notice that you go one stage further and take great personal pride in your own generosity, which I find somewhat hard to swallow, because what you are actually doing is facilitating theft and breaking copyright law.
Mike: You might just as well say that car salesmen are inciting death by dangerous driving, publicans offering death by alcoholic poisoning or chemists selling pills for the express purpose of overdosing. Don't be ridulous. No one is holding a gun to anyone's head. There's a lot in this world to be concerned about, I've no need to list them so I think there's little to be gained by capturing a serious topic and changing it to one of your obvious pet hates. My original comment was about people trying to hoodwink, by deception and you've jumped on board and changed the topic completely. If Paul McCartney retiring every night gripped by terror that he's losing pennies is all you can think about, you have my deepest symphy. I've heard of some 'jobsworths' but you really take the biscuit.
I've been following this string with evaporating interest and must now say that, in my opinion, mikewith has painted himself into a corner and is working to extricate himself with as much credibility as possible. I aslso got the impression that he inferred worker had downloaded his library but still he can't keep his mouth shut. Please concern yourself with things that really matter mikewith and leave the penny-pinching to others. By the way, can you offer any assistance with the original question? No? Thought not.
Without a doubt the weakest non-argument at the greatest length I have come across on this site. Oh well, you asked for more...
Worker, I intially suggested that "[t]heft of copyright material isn't so great." Then I referred to you "uploading [sic] 'a fairly large library of music which is there for anyone to take'". You appear to have read the word 'uploading' as 'downloading' -- quite a basic misjudgement, in my view -- as your next posting claims you have bought the "vast majority" of your music library. Then you admit you have downloaded tracks. Then you reiterate that you believe this gives you the right to distribute the tracks ("my generosity... compells me to load them for anyone else" - I'm going to have that framed and mounted).
In a nutshell, Worker, I'm dizzy: I never mentioned that you might download material, so first you accuse me of saying it, then you admit it and then you defend it!
As for the original question - this is for StuDapples too, it seems - in which Worker bemoaned the "sly, underhand and... selfish" people who "hoodwink, by deception" on *illegal* peer-to-peer file sharing. Can't you spot the tiniest bit of irony there?
Worker, I intially suggested that "[t]heft of copyright material isn't so great." Then I referred to you "uploading [sic] 'a fairly large library of music which is there for anyone to take'". You appear to have read the word 'uploading' as 'downloading' -- quite a basic misjudgement, in my view -- as your next posting claims you have bought the "vast majority" of your music library. Then you admit you have downloaded tracks. Then you reiterate that you believe this gives you the right to distribute the tracks ("my generosity... compells me to load them for anyone else" - I'm going to have that framed and mounted).
In a nutshell, Worker, I'm dizzy: I never mentioned that you might download material, so first you accuse me of saying it, then you admit it and then you defend it!
As for the original question - this is for StuDapples too, it seems - in which Worker bemoaned the "sly, underhand and... selfish" people who "hoodwink, by deception" on *illegal* peer-to-peer file sharing. Can't you spot the tiniest bit of irony there?
Forgive my ignorance but does WinMX not check the folder each time you log on? I'm quite new to broadband and therefore to filesharing, I also have liitle to share at the mo but am working on it!
Can anybody explain why when I'm downloading an avi. file and have waited patiently in the queue, others can then upload from me while i'm downloading, at a faster rate, and end up overtaking me? I have ADSL but even notice 64k users doing this, have I missed something or am I also being too generous in what i allow uploaders to do?
Moan over, I feel better now.