Some clarity needed to filehost rule

Honored Phun admins/mods,

Firstly, I applaud you all for taking the step to modify and rework the filehost rules.

But um... I think the "average joe" user might be a bit confused by the new rules, so maybe include some examples? I mean, I'm not confused at all, no sir.

Just to clarify, i totally get the mandatory filehost rules... no problem there. But the optional filehost rule:

>Optional Filehost Mirrors
>
>In addition, optional "mirror" links to other filehosts may be posted if desired, but only on a "one for one" basis with corresponding >mandatory filehost links!
>This means that for each mandatory filehost link posted in a thread, one optional mirror link is permitted.

So, if a user wants to post 3 optional filehosts in his uploads, he MUST post links to Rapidshare, Depositfiles, AND Hotfile, correct? So an uploader is limited to posting only 3 optional filehosts no matter what, correct?


Then the supplementary filehost rule:

>Supplementary Hosts
>
>Filehost links added later (Supplementary Hosts) to an existing thread must also follow the above principle - that the cumulative total of >optional "mirror" filehosts in a thread must not exceed that of the corresponding mandatory filehost links.

So, if I'm reading that correctly, supplementary filehosts can be added, so long as a total of 3 optional filehosts have not been posted, other users can add supplementary filehosts?

Let's say for example, this post:

http://forum.phun.org/showthread.php?t=896509&p=6437045&viewfull=1#post6437045

I've used both Rapidshare and Depositfiles and added an optional filehost (Toucansharing). So, if user "Joe" wanted to added "Joefilehosting" mirror links of my upload, he would need to post mandatory Hotfile links first THEN he can add his "Joefilehosting" links, right? And if he did that, no supplementary filehosts could be added, since all mandatory filehosts have been used, correct?

Just wanted to be clear on that point... it may help adding examples in the Filehost rules section, to avoid future confusion as well.

Thanks.

 

yes.
this is an attempt to keep a little integrity.

no.
there are two "mandatory" and one "optional". leaves room for another "optional". when there are two mandatories and two optionals the third optional can only be added after the third mandatory.

 

now I'm confused.. so if you wanna host something on Joefilehosting.com you have to post links on rapidshare and hotfile, not just rapidshare and Joefilehosting.com?

 

Well my guess One is that - if the file you want to upload hasn't been posted before - then if you want to use an optional filehost, you have to use one of the other Mandatory Filehosts (i.e. Rapidshare, Depositfiles, and/or Hotfile) in conjunction with "Joefilehosting". Basically, only 3 other optional filehosts can be used, PERIOD, for any file uploaded.

Wishful thinking, but I applaud the positive attitude, Riv.

Ok, gotcha... so for example if I uploaded a Halle Berry sextape video on all the following filehosts:

A) Rapidshare, Depositfiles, Hotfile (mandatory)
B) Toucansharing, Filepost & Rapidgator (optional)

If I did that, then no further filehosts could be added by me, or by anyone else, correct?

 

guess i`m going to get Joefilehosting for me and make it mandatory here....

actually it`s pretty basic maths.

we have mandatory filehosts (right now 3, this number is unlikely to be changed soon, but you never know) - ALL the rest available worldwide is optional. for each optional filehost (all those evil cash-hosts etc.) there has to be a mandatory already posted.
1 mandatory posted -> one optional allowed.
2 mandatory posted -> two optional allowed
3 mandatory posted -> 3 optional allowed.
that means right now a maximum six different filehost-links for each vid (if there are all three mandatory are already posted)

clear? you can`t post a link hosted on Joefilehosting when there`s already a mandatory (RS, DF, HF) and one optional posted.

sounds more comppicated than it is, actually, no?!

we still want to limit the now optional filehosts, but we also needed to take into account the changes on the filehost-market.

yes.

 

add: keep in mind there`s always a chance that one or more optional filehost(s) will be banned for some reasons - not because of personal taste of any of the staff-members, of course.
IF one of those Joeafilehosting - sites will exceed a reasonable limit of advertizing, will be well-known for hosting against-the-law-content etc.

 

It's not taken yet, Riv! Better hurry, before I grab the domain on a whim.

Righto, I completely understand fully now.

I still think you should add examples in the official Imagehosts and Filehosts thread here:

http://forum.phun.org/showthread.php?t=902949

To avoid any further confusion... you can even use my JoeFilehosting example! I give you permission! :mrgreen:

Be like water.

 

apparently not everyone got (and GOT) the news... feel free and invited to inform people who START with optionals. sooner or later we will find them, but somehow - with your help - sooner is better.

 

lol. or bitter-lol.

took quite a few people a mere 2 days to attempt to exploit the new chances... multiple accounts, neglecting of "search". far from funny.

 

I know I shouldn't reply. But since my second favorite pastime is making a fool of myself, I write: I have no clue what you guys just said.

Thank gawd my favorite pastime is downloading porn and not trying to figure out how to upload it!

 

Eh DuMe... it's really much ado about nothing at the end of it all. Even with better posting rules, cashspammers will find ways to get their virtual measly duckets. :roll:

Eh, but you knew that was going to happen and there wasn't really anything you could do about it outside of some real extreme rule changes. The balance of "quality vs traffic" (that's probably an over-simplification) is a hard thing to keep equal. You can only hope for the best... but expect the worse.