300MB "Movie" that is actually a 75MB clip with 275MB of "image.rar" - Page 2

**behemoth** · May 25th, 2015, 12:19 PM

I think that they should at least warn us. "The clip is 163MB." At least then we could do the math and decide if the clip is worth downloading a file that is possibly more than 2x the actual size of the clip.

**captpike** · May 25th, 2015, 05:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by retroanalyst

Should they be reported so that other members are warned of them, or does nobody really care? I have just discovered one of those people, joined only two weeks ago.

One was called out in a thread but that post was removed and the user still posts clips that are under 80 megs but are a 300 meg download

**Pepper II** · May 25th, 2015, 08:05 PM

If you think a member is being deceptive with his posts I recommend using the reported post icon and stating your concerns on the form. This way the appropriate section Mods will see it and can decide what action to take (if any).

**palo5** · May 26th, 2015, 06:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by captpike

That user isn't the only one there is one more out there also doing the same

We think there have been 6 in Classic Pornstars, and 4 are now banned

If any Member downloads a "padded" file, please follow Pepper II's perfect advice, and report the post

If the post is in Classic Pornstars, you can contact any of the section moderators

**rotobott** · May 26th, 2015, 06:47 PM

Think I'm downloading one right now, looks way to big for what it is, still I'd better check.

If people had to post proper screens giving details of the video, instead of just random screenshots it would stop this practice, which reflects badly on most uploaders who would never do such a thing.

Actual file

Jenny48549 · May 27th, 2015, 01:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by retroanalyst

Should they be reported so that other members are warned of them, or does nobody really care? I have just discovered one of those people, joined only two weeks ago.

If they are padding the compressed file with a bunch of useless junk, then by all means let a section mod know so they can check it out. Adding covers and a preview in a full movie archive is allowed but if the extra padding is larger than the actual scene etc and has no bearing on the stated content, then we should be told.

**SexObjex** · May 27th, 2015, 04:18 AM

This has been reported to section mods, at least by me. I'm not sure what they're waiting on, the biggest offender is in the Christy Canyon and Peter North threads.

**SexObjex** · May 27th, 2015, 01:19 PM

He's back at it again this morning in both of those threads. Both have been reported. I'm not sure what more is expected of us here, or why VEF moderators reading this thread are unable to take action themselves on such transparently abusive behavior.

**behemoth** · May 27th, 2015, 08:17 PM

I reported this as suggested. Here is a perfect example: http://vintage-erotica-forum.com/sho...&postcount=236 A 252MB download for a 43MB clip. The balance consists of 2 .jpg files of 106MB each (unviewable).

**rotobott** · May 27th, 2015, 08:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by behemoth

I reported this as suggested. Here is a perfect example: http://vintage-erotica-forum.com/sho...&postcount=236 A 252MB download for a 43MB clip. The balance consists of 2 .jpg files of 106MB each (unviewable).

That's a new one one, I spoke to a mod who said this would be sorted out soon as, I really can't understand why it's happening, it should have been nipped in the bud, anybody new here downloading this rubbish will think we're a joke.

May 25th, 2015, 12:19 PM	#11
behemoth Vintage Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 406 Thanks: 32,649 Thanked 13,627 Times in 384 Posts	I think that they should at least warn us. "The clip is 163MB." At least then we could do the math and decide if the clip is worth downloading a file that is possibly more than 2x the actual size of the clip. __________________ To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

May 26th, 2015, 06:47 PM	#15
rotobott Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Posts: 32,106 Thanks: 174,780 Thanked 634,600 Times in 31,427 Posts	Think I'm downloading one right now, looks way to big for what it is, still I'd better check. If people had to post proper screens giving details of the video, instead of just random screenshots it would stop this practice, which reflects badly on most uploaders who would never do such a thing. Actual file Last edited by rotobott; May 26th, 2015 at 07:24 PM.. Reason: added screenshot

May 27th, 2015, 08:17 PM	#19
behemoth Vintage Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 406 Thanks: 32,649 Thanked 13,627 Times in 384 Posts	I reported this as suggested. Here is a perfect example: http://vintage-erotica-forum.com/sho...&postcount=236 A 252MB download for a 43MB clip. The balance consists of 2 .jpg files of 106MB each (unviewable). __________________ To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

May 25th, 2015, 08:05 PM	#13
Pepper II Super Moderator Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Sunny South Florida Posts: 7,852 Thanks: 163,934 Thanked 119,242 Times in 7,641 Posts	If you think a member is being deceptive with his posts I recommend using the reported post icon and stating your concerns on the form. This way the appropriate section Mods will see it and can decide what action to take (if any).

May 27th, 2015, 04:18 AM	#17
SexObjex Vintage Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Baton Rouge, LA Posts: 1,508 Thanks: 4,730 Thanked 21,458 Times in 1,529 Posts	This has been reported to section mods, at least by me. I'm not sure what they're waiting on, the biggest offender is in the Christy Canyon and Peter North threads.

May 27th, 2015, 01:19 PM	#18
SexObjex Vintage Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Baton Rouge, LA Posts: 1,508 Thanks: 4,730 Thanked 21,458 Times in 1,529 Posts	He's back at it again this morning in both of those threads. Both have been reported. I'm not sure what more is expected of us here, or why VEF moderators reading this thread are unable to take action themselves on such transparently abusive behavior.