thanks

 

No problem, knowledge is power.

 

But to clarify what their policy is, this statement says it all:

For Free Users:

Release will be available for users
when it will be allowed by Team R2R.

Visit this page later...
-o-o-o-
VIP Members

So this is in line with R2R's own statement that they are alive and well and will release to public when they're good and ready. I can guess as well as you who the VIP's are, maybe they're the "ELITES" everyone is so mad about!

 

Last edited: Oct 7, 2015

Sorry for not getting back sooner. I'm more on AudioZ than here, and didn't see this till today.

You may have misunderstood what I was saying on the post from AudioZ that you've quoted, since it was related to several other comments on that thread. Several people were claiming there was some terrible danger in using the Encryptor Tool. They claimed people sending software to R2R would get in trouble, or alternatively R2R would get in trouble. Some people were claiming you would actually be sending software attached to the encrypted message.

I was trying to explain that was untrue -- all this tool did was create an encrypted text message, nothing more. There's no attaching software files to it. All you could do was construct a message consisting of a few hundred characters and then post it somewhere.

My experience with the actual tool was that it worked as it should. It created an encrypted text message that you could post somewhere. However, what happened after that wasn't what was expected. I posted the encrypted message on a different warez site, since my posts had a habit of disappearing over on AudioZ. I included a link in the text message to a file hoster that I had uploaded software to. I later checked the file hoster, but the file was never downloaded. A few other people on AudioZ said they had the same experience -- they gave it a try, but nothing was ever retrieved by R2R or anyone else.

So, the tool worked. It's what was supposed to happen after where things broke down. I mentioned this to SAiNT in a PM about a week ago. He said he was trying to see if he could contact anyone from R2R to find out why people who posted messages were getting no response. I guess at least so far, he hasn't made contact or gotten any answer from them -- at least not anything he can share with us yet.

That's all I know. It would be nice if we could better understand what R2R had in mind with this, but so far no one seems to be coming up with solid information.

Hope that helps.

 

Last edited: Oct 10, 2015

@rico888
Thanks for clarifying. I too got no response after I posted a message using the tool. I hope they respond to SAiNT. All the best!

 

You've nailed it dude.
IMHO, the best (and only) way for R2R to avoid to request legit soft to the public - and also avoid that anyone will make money from their releases - is to get their own couriers/uploaders. Then they will be able to buy EVERYTHING they want with the money earned from hosting sites.
But... wait... if they don't agree that people makes money from their releases, why did they allowed guys like Sunny to gain access to their FTP in the first place and for so long?
Something is fishy in there...

 

Last edited: Oct 10, 2015

Maybe I wasn't clear or precise enough.
What will be a complete "no money involved" solution and will not require to let the masses have access to their FTP is this:

R2R elect their own couriers/uploaders - not guys like Sunny and others who keep the money in their pockets, but trusted people (or why not someone from their own team) which are designate to post their releases at AZ and give them the money back so they will be able to buy new software.

To make it simple: someone from R2R must take the place of our current uploaders. It's a so easy solution that I can't understand why they lost their time into complicated and (maybe) risky methods such as their encryptor.

I'm sure if they adopt this policy, everybody (or at least a large majority of us) will then download only via the links provided by their "official uploaders" and will even ignore mirror links to show them the highest level of respect, gratitude and... devotion (I'm speaking like EW&F, LOL).
What you think about that?

Side note: Of course we have more than enough apps and libs to create until the end of our lives, but that's not the point here. We're talking about R2R, not creativity, right?

PS: Sorry to seem insistent, SAiNT, but it's not "speculations". It's a simple proposal, and sometimes simple proposals are able to change things...

 

Last edited: Oct 10, 2015

I also do not in any way want an inflammatory speculation here. But Revenants clear cut suggestion have been on my mind too and on the face of it seems to be a viable option. Is there a reson anyone can see why it would not work?

 

Maybe the problem is not THEM making money, but just OTHERS. Those are not necessarily connected. In other words, maybe the point isn't even "making money" and "who takes it". How are you even sure these courriers you talk about take releases directly from R2R? And, if they do, it is indeed kind of shady. But it doesn't look like R2R is saying "We want teh moneyz!". It looks like "We worked on this for free and it was not meant to be shared and/or made a profit upon".

Also, a lot of their stuff can be downloaded as demo software for free and be cracked.

I'd like to believe that their public releases are a benevolent public "service". Asking for supplies is maybe an attempt to make the general public appreciate their work and make it a more "community effort". To me, it looks more like an education issue and not a software access one. More of an awareness thing. "Realise what we do for you and what YOU do and what it means". They can't control every single downloader's or uploader's behavior and/or morals (if they are even relevant for most people for something that virtually does no damage) but they can control who gets the releases in the first place.

Then again, asking for them in the open is kinda weird. Maybe they're looking for really high-end, expensive/protected stuff. They could have said that though.

It's a complicated matter. Like saying "Do hosters profit from piracy?". It looks simple at first sight. But then, the money also pays for a service [that people want; for good or bad] (servers, bandwidth, storage, management etc.). So, it's both "yes and no".

All this for something that was worked on for free. It could be argued for uploaders that "well, they spend hours on it/it's a service and I'm willing to pay for it". So, it's mostly a moral issue and not a material one. Note, the difference on "services" (altruistic, for-money and in-between) although it's the same word.

The main flaw I find in your suggestion is that then it makes it even more openly more of a "black market (for-profit) service", than simple releases getting "shared" or "leaked". Would SAiNT want to be an even more active part of that? And even if you do this on AudioZ, there are still the dozens of 'VIP' and general money-making sites. Well, none of this really matters to the average downloader, so maybe I'd be best to let the "big heads" make up their minds.

These are traditional problems. You see where the "internal" mindset is coming from? (It eradicates all these problems or minimises them) And I'd assume that R2R would be smart enough to not download from FTPs or direct linking private sites that could log them.

 

First off R2R does not have a FTP and never did. The FTP belongs to AudioP2P and we decide who gets to race releases or not. And R2R is not the only group! Most of the P2P groups are there. All "Sunny" does is race the releases. All the P2P groups on the FTP BESIDES R2R upload their own stuff on AZ anyways. And they should make a few bucks from their shares, after all it's those few bucks that allows them to purchase new stuff for everybody to enjoy. It's a win\win situation IMHO!!But?? If it would make people feel better and stop asking why "Sunny" is allowed to do this or that. I could purge his account, POOF!! Make him go bye bye, trust me, some people would love it if I if did that, But I see no reason to do that. You should be thanking him NOT asking about him.

Btw.

I ask that everybody reads the "Scene FAQ" over on AZ, especially the last few paragraphs. Everything is explained there.

@SAiNT Allowing threads like this opens the door for speculations, just sayin.

Have a great weekend Everybody!!

 

Hmm... I just saw a post by Mykal but it seems to have disappeared. Odd.

Edit: Now it's back. Witchcraft!

 

Last edited: Oct 10, 2015

For sure, AricStorm, I understand perfectly the security imperatives and also the "heat on the team members" but...

- It's also illegal to simply reverse software, even for your own private use;
- to upload this reversed software, even on a private FTP;
- and to share this illegal material with someone, even your own brother, directly or via a private FTP.

So, to speak frankly, in the case they will have to face a court, I strongly doubt that considering they didn't uploaded their stuff on Rapidgator will make the verdict more lenient...

Well, the situation is fine for me too. And I have absolutely no problem with the "elite" thing. It's 100% normal that anyone is free to share or not his work with the ones he decides.

Have a nice day all

 

Last edited: Oct 10, 2015

this whole discussion is getting older than my grandpa when he died.
as some people have said we should be thankful for what we get, not demand it caus we 'deserve' it, we dont deserve shit

 

makes sense, i still remember the rumour that H2O got hired by steinberg caus they kept cracking their protection (on one occasion within a few days after they claimed it was uncrackable)