Page 1 of 1

What network stats do you think should be added

PostPosted: Tue Aug 02, 2005 11:01 pm
by firestorm9377
What networks do you think should be added. I know slyck likes to be accurate, but i think there should be more networks listed.

PostPosted: Tue Aug 02, 2005 11:13 pm
by Allied
I don't care about Direct Connect. But I do miss Ares.

I'm guessing the Admins only post reliable stats. And until a reliable crawler is foud for options in the poll, none will be added.
OpenFT is strange. Sometimes it says 100,000+, other times its 1000.
I believe that the Warez stats were removed because the number was an estimate based on Ares's search horizon.

I don't know why there arn't more crawlers. I look at the mldonkey project and think they'd be the perfect guys to put out 1 program to just crawl all the networks. Seeing as how their daemon's arn't suitable for sharing files(yet).

Until then, heres G2.
This ED2K crawler says 6 mil while this ED2K crawler says just under 3mil. :lol:

PostPosted: Wed Aug 03, 2005 5:00 am
by bmh67wa
I'm guessing that you know what my vote is already! :wink:

PostPosted: Thu Aug 04, 2005 8:37 pm
by ToM
Ares/Warez stats were taken down for being inaccurate.

Opennap stats could work well. :)

Perhaps network crawlers which give semi-accurate (i.e. not straying by millions of users at a time or getting disrupted by MPAA bots etc) could be added and marked with a [*] next to them stating that the displayed results are likely to be somewhat inaccurate.

PostPosted: Thu Aug 04, 2005 8:38 pm
by ToM
bmh67wa wrote:I'm guessing that you know what my vote is already! :wink:


iMesh's portion of the FastTrack network? :)

PostPosted: Fri Aug 05, 2005 6:33 am
by bmh67wa
Image

PostPosted: Sun Aug 07, 2005 12:33 am
by firestorm9377
ToM wrote:Ares/Warez stats were taken down for being inaccurate.

Opennap stats could work well. :)

Perhaps network crawlers which give semi-accurate (i.e. not straying by millions of users at a time or getting disrupted by MPAA bots etc) could be added and marked with a [*] next to them stating that the displayed results are likely to be somewhat inaccurate.

That's what i was thinking :D

PostPosted: Fri Aug 19, 2005 12:55 am
by NoGood
Of coarse OpenNap...

PostPosted: Sat Aug 20, 2005 2:48 am
by nigel123
I with NoGood .... :)

PostPosted: Sat Aug 20, 2005 3:35 am
by tm,
I think that OpenNap stats are unlikely to reappear on Slyck. They were removed from the front page a few years ago - probably for a reason.

Another thing that makes Nap stats unreliable is that many users log into several servers at a time, making the total peer population appear much larger than it actually is.

P2P developers have been known to allow network population stats to remain inflated - this could be because high numbers tend to attract more users. Besides allowing inaccurate crawlers to go uncorrected (as in Ares) - there was one P2P developer, EarthStation 5, that claimed that they had 15 million simultaneous users, even though extremely few files could ever be found.

PostPosted: Sat Aug 20, 2005 3:49 am
by Psycho Ced
Whats the point in having stats if you really can't trust those numbers?

PostPosted: Mon Aug 22, 2005 8:15 pm
by Allied
Why Filetopia? 3 thousand people isn't a big community on the internet.