yetanotherid

What, so is it a rule or is it 'recommended'? Or is it just your way of getting your own back because the other kids made fun of you too much when you were at school? I'd like to think you aren't a dim-witted idiot as well, but if you think that every person who joins a forum has time to be 'bothered' to read the forum rules, then go through every sticky thread looking for some detail a moderator who lacked attention as a child might have decided to throw in as an extra bonus, then you've spent far too much time here and far too little in the real world. If the forum has a rule, put it where the forum rules go. Is that so hard to understand? You originally said, and I quote: "such behavior is exactly what creates quote pyramids". Obviously this is still incorrect, and no amount of waffle along the lines of quoting pyramids not being able to exist without quoting will ever make it anything but faulty logic. Had you at least admitted this before qualifying what you were trying to say rather than denying it, you'd now look like less of a goose. Lastly, while it's terrific that you've found such an admirable calling such as removing unnecessary quotes from posts, and that this provides you with so much satisfaction in life, the word 'threat' is not appropriate here. This forum is nothing but an insignificant spec in the vast universe of the internet to me, so being banned from here isn't something I'd describe as even a tiny inconvenience. In fact, I think the chances are I wouldn't even notice. But if banning me for quoting and keeping the forum safe from quotes helps fulfill some need to be noticed you don't normally have fulfilled in the real world, and if you need that attention as much as your avatar indicates, then I'm glad to have helped you out. LOL. Maybe you should get t-shirts printed. And to think Arni wasted a whole career with "I'll be back" when a line like yours was avaiable.

Well here's my view on this..... What I SHOULD be able to do is quote the post I'm replying to without someone getting themselves into a knot over it, and having to waste time checking the thread and editing posts for no apparent reason. Secondly, if there's some sort of quoting rule that seems uniquely applicable to this forum, then it should be put where new members would expect to find it. http://forum.utorrent.com/misc.php?action=rules Thirdly, quoting pyramids are caused by posters not quoting properly, not by the act of quoting itself. http://tinyurl.com/cnhsk http://tinyurl.com/ymz5r7 Fourthly, I'm sure I'll be able to find another torrent program I like, with a forum where I don't have to worry about something I consider to be nonsense, so any further thinly veiled threats of banning won't be necessary. Thanks to the people who actually contributed to the topic.

I guess it's because many of us participate if forums where there's not actually hours or days between posts in most threads, and where in fact many people can be posting at the same time. If you ever participate in one of those forums where lots of crossposting happens, it becomes pretty obvious that the only way to ensure continuity in the thread, and to ensure that it's understood who you are replying to, is by including the relevant quote when you reply. I guess after posing in those sorts of forums, where quoting is actually considered a courtesy or is even the norm, it's pretty easy to assume that it's done everywhere, and almost impossible to imagine that there's a forum somewhere with so few problems, that quoting a post is actually seen as something to worry over. Just for the record, I did join in a thread in another forum where quoting the post I was replying to didn't seem to be an issue, or at least where nobody seemed to feel a need to remove a quote and then take up a similar amount of page space complaining about it, and learnt a bit more about Firewalls and port forwarding. Or at least the Comodo firewall anyway.... I had assumed that when you forward a port it stays open to traffic no matter what. I was encouraged to do some port forwarding tests and discovered my assumption regarding port forwarding was actually wrong. The Comodo firewall at least, still seems to stealth a forwarded port. I'm not sure how it works, because the port was certainly open while I was running uTorrent, but as soon as I shut uTorrent down the firewall stealthed the port again. From this I can only assume the firewall is clever enough to check whether there's a program willing to respond to traffic on the port, and open it appropriately. If it doesn't find a program willing to respond, it ignores the incoming traffic and the port appears stealthed. My router also seems to work in a similar way, although the port test reported the port as closed rather than stealthed when uTorrent wasn't running. When I get a chance I'll try Zone Alarm again and see if it's the same, but until then it appears my idea that a firewall should be able to forward a port according to whether a certain program is running is unnecessary, because that's what it seems to do when forwarded ports anyway. And it would seem that as far as firewalls go, Comodo must be better at it than the version of Zone Alarm I was using.

PS. The connection icon in uTorrent's status bar came back yesterday, but today when I started the program it was gone again. Not that it matters too much, but would anyone have any idea why it keeps disappearing? I have uTorrent on another computer here running the same version of XP and the icon is always there, although it's still running uTorrent 1.5 Is there any known icon bug in 1.6?

Thanks again for the replies guys. Lord Alderaan is correct, my router isn't really part of the equation here as it's forwarding properly. I guess after having a bit more of a play with the software Firewalls and having more time to think about it, it really comes down to this..... Comodo is theoretically, I guess, a better Firewall than Zone Alarm, as even though it pops up with a message asking if uTorrent can connect and act as a server, it still blocks unsolicited connection attempts on the port uTorrent is using. Zone Alarm, from what I can deduce, will allow unsolicited connection attempts on the uTorrent port, as long as uTorrent is actively using the port (effectively forwarding the port as long as uTorrent is using it, letting any incoming data through). Once uTorrent itself stops using the port (for example when stopping all torrents) it starts blocking the port again and the port forwarding test fails (which is something I guess you don't always want it to do). As I said, I guess in theory this makes Comodo a better firewall, but I wish it had a way of setting program rules that would let it mimic Zone Alarm's behaviour. In fact I wish all Firewalls would let you conditionally forward a port, one of the conditions being when a particular program is running. That way it could block the port the rest of the time, and you wouldn't be leaving holes in your Firewall when you don't need them. It sort of amazes me it can't be done this way, unless someone knows of a Firewall that'll let you do it? For the moment I've just created a rule to forward the port in Comodo, and using avatarl's suggestion, I move the rule up when using uTorrent, and down again when I'm not using uTorrent to disable it. Of course this relies on me remembering to do so after I finished using uTorrent. It would be much better if there was a way to get the firewall to remember to do this for you. I might see if Comodo have a forum where I can at least make this a feature suggestion. Thanks again, Darren

Thanks for the reply Switeck. The router isn't a problem, it's forwarding fine. I understand that Zone Alarm is allowing uTorrent traffic because that's what I told it to do, but I'm just curious to know why the other firewall doesn't work the same way. I've told it allow uTorrent traffic as well, but it seems to block (according to it's logs) incoming traffic unless I forward the port. I assume this is because the incoming traffic in question is unsolicited, and it's probably the correct thing for it to do. Just wondering why Zone Alarm appears not to work the same way, and if that actually makes it more clever. I use a software firewall as well as the router because I figure it's the only way to get a warning when something nasty finds it's way onto the computer and tries to get out. Which is why I don't use the XP firewall. I've often thought about setting a rule which turns it into the opposite of XP's firewall, so it only monitors outgoing traffic, and leaves incoming traffic to the router, but I can't decide if that's a good idea or not.....

Firstly this is not a "uTorrent is slow" post. In fact I don't have any problems with it. I'm just asking this in the hope someone can explain to me why something is happening in relation to firewalls. I'm running XP, connected to the internet via a router, and have a Firewall on my PC. Zone Alarm originally, but it was giving me problems (not uTorrent or port forwarding related) so I switched to Comodo firewall a few days ago which so far I really like. And it was this switch which brought me to my question..... I have the relevant ports forwarded on my router, and all that works fine. However contrary to all the instructions I've read, I've never had to forward ports in Zone Alarm (always used version 5.5 pro). I just run uTorrent, Zone Alarm pops up and asks me if it's okay for uTorrent to connect and act as a server, I say yes, and all is fine. I get a green light in the status bar (well I did but more on that later) and it just works. When I run the port forwarding test, my browser opens the relevant page and the test passes. This has pretty much been the case for every file sharing program I've tried. I have noticed one thing with uTorrent though. If I run the program without actually downloading or uploading a torrent, the status bar icon tends to stay mainly yellow, flashing green occasionally, and the port forwarding test fails or passes accordingly. As soon as I start a torrent, it goes green and stays that way. Then I uninstalled Zone Alarm and installed Comodo. I expected a similar result, but the port forwarding test would always fail, and the status icon would stay yellow until I manually forwarded the port in the firewall. So this finally leads me to my question....... Is Zone Alarm a particularly clever firewall, realizing that uTorrent is using a particular port, and holding it open while the program is running, or is that a bad thing, and it shouldn't actually be allowing unsolicited incoming connections to a program, even though that's pretty much exactly what I want it to do? After such a long post, my question actually feels too short, so I have another quick one.... Recently I upgraded to uTorrent 1.6, and I noticed I've lost the connection status icon in the status bar? Is it missing in this version or do I have something strange going on? Thanks for any opinions...... Darren