Feature request: Prompt to seed or not seed site upon view

[AFlowOfCode]

I think it would be useful to be prompted whether or not you want to seed the site when you visit it, rather than automatically seeding everything you come across.

After spending some time browsing there are a lot of dead / default sites etc that I don't want to seed at the moment. Then I must go through a rather lengthy process of selecting delete then moving to top right of screen to confirm delete for each one.

This would be solved by simply asking if a user wants to seed the site they are currently visiting.

[unsystemizer]

who can stand being asked the same question all day long? we could have this in preferences but i am against that as well, because the default should be to seed everything one visits.

IMO parasitic behavior (which is what this request is about) should not be the default setting. this is like asking how to disable seeding by default on a bittorrent client.

i would support this request if there was a way to pay for content in return for not having to seed it. the network relies on autoseeding for its anti censorship, privacy, resilience and being cost-free.

those who do not want to contribute can use a web gateway, those who want to contribute a little can disable certain sites.

[AFlowOfCode]

I understand where you're coming from, but the analysis and response to my request is a little misguided, and attitude more than a little preachy. If I wasn't interested in the concept of a distributed web, why would I even be using Zeronet? There's certainly nothing there that couldn't be leached from the regular web!

The comparison to torrents is null. Does anybody seed all the torrents that they come across? I'm assuming you constantly seed 1000s of torrents you aren't interested in simply because they're out there, including ones that actually have no legitimate content... of course you do, right? Give me a break.

The fact is that people are going to choose what they want to seed and what they don't. Making it easier for users to make that decision is not going against the philosophy of the distributed web. If distributed web is going to scale beyond the minuscule state it currently is in, not every user is going to want to seed the whole thing, nor every single page they visit. Perhaps it's doable now, but if there ever is enough content to in any way compare to the regular web, it's not going to be practical or realistic.

I think your suggestion about preferences is good. Maybe it is better to have seeding on by default, but also have the ability to set an option enabling you to be prompted about seeding each new site you visit. Note I didn't say simply "turn off seeding by default". I want the option to be presented. Maybe the prompt should be done when you navigate away from a site, or close a tab. Or maybe it just won't work--I'm open to hear thoughts, arguments, ideas.. in discussion form, preferably from people in a calm state of mind who aren't trying to shoot ideas down from their ivory tower.

[AFlowOfCode]

I'd also like to point out there currently exists a global "Size Limit" option, so it is already assumed people will be selectively seeding which sites they want. If it could be implemented well, there is merit in making it easier to make this selection rather than retroactively deleting in order to choose.

If somebody wants to browse content without seeding, as far as I can tell there's nothing stopping them from setting the limit to 1mb. This renders blustery displays of philosophical force against enhanced options irrelevant.

I could see something like switching on the preference to be prompted, and then a little button appears near the zero button that simply says "seed?" (or suitable icon) & upon clicking it shows a green check mark and then vanishes.

[unsystemizer]

The comparison to torrents is null. Does anybody seed all the torrents that they come across? I'm assuming you constantly seed 1000s of torrents you aren't interested in simply because they're out there, including ones that actually have no legitimate content... of course you do, right?

I consider this comparison invalid.

• ZN sites are tiny and consume insignificant resources.
• There aren't 1,000's of ZN sites, in fact I doubt you've visited more than 50 and if you judiciously clicked on links you couldn't have found more than 50 bad sites. From my own experience I have 5 favorite sites and I seed about 20 other out of which some 5 are bad or (in my opinion) undeserving but I disabled only two. I'd love to know your situation.

I'd also like to point out there currently exists a global "Size Limit" option, so it is already assumed people will be selectively seeding which sites they want.

Yes, so that already gives users a reasonable approach of limiting their seeding activities.

What you are asking is to make "Don't seed any sites I visit" the default. The network doesn't have other method of propagating. Until there's a way to pay or get paid on the network, if "Don't seed" becomes the default then most new sites won't be available when the publisher is offline which at this stage would be bad for everyone.

My proposal is to make payments easier and introduce basic reputation and rating indicators such as WOT or other (so that one doesn't visit poor quality sites by accident). That would make it possible to find cheap & paid seeders and make it harder for bad (bloated, crappy, etc.) sites to use visitors' resources.

Unless the network starts to grow very quickly, I would rather see developer time invested in features that would help the network and even (indirectly) mitigate this issue than solving minor issues that have their root in real issues such as the lack of reputation and monetization.

[AFlowOfCode]

"Don't seed any sites I visit" already exists, via the Size Limit option. I am merely suggesting an additional way of choosing--the concept relates to user experience. It's definitely minor and low priority but would be more relevant in a scaled network. And lets hope that the network does scale!

I'm just putting the idea here for the record--I trust the project contributors to make their own decisions about what's worth doing and what's not and I'm not personally attached to whether they implement it or not. It's just an idea. Yours are interesting and deserve their own dedicated threads, if you haven't made them already.

[unsystemizer]

The Size Limit punishes all sites including those you like, so it's probably less likely to be used by regular users because it inconveniences them on sites they do like. But I've nothing against judiciously designed options to improve the experience, I'd just like this to be implemented in a way that allows the network to remain well seeded and resilient.

[Nutomic]

Something like this is definitely needed in my opinion. I often open a site from a link, and when I see it realize that it's not what I want. So if I don't want my list of sites full of spam, I have to delete all those sites manually.

As an alternative, maybe Zeronet could seed a site only if it was visited at least 3 times (example number). Or sites could be removed automatically if they weren't opened for say 30 days.

[ghost]

Same as https://github.com/HelloZeroNet/ZeroNet/issues/512