Realistic

[kloid]

Any site with traffic or disk usage consisting more than 33% of file downloads (non html traffic) may be suspended. So the other 67 % must be html traffic. Wow I wonder how much html traffic it would take to reach your monthy GB bandwidth and have 33% file downloads. Lets see 67% of current GB bandwidth, say 30 gigs, with a 20k html file. Basically we pay for the bandwidth, whats the restrictions for. I run a clan website, my clan members want the maps we play, one guy downloads the map, its 33MB, so now I need to serve 67MB of html files to be in compliance? What should I just have a huge html file with map link at the top. Say a 67MB text file with link to 33MB map file for download at top. Then when I have them get the map I am using 100MB per download. Bah I can do this on host who lets me use my bandwidth for todays internet. This is out of date.

[sznapsDOTcom]

ya, that is kinda wack...We shouldn't have a restriction as far as that goes...

[KLH]

I really don't think they enforce it.

It is just there so that incase someone trys to host a download only site, they can shut them off, and say "hey, you didn't follow our TOS."


On my account for example, this month I have transfered a total of 556.985528 MB and out of that, 358.449111 MB was file downloads.

[sxtxixtxcxh]

omg...suspension!
..

:P but i agree with KLH.
it's not a black & white thing. (thank god HR aren't nazi's..... )

[y6y6y6]

One of my sites is over 33% file downloads. I think they're just covering their butts so that they have the option to boot people who abuse the service.

[Unicorn2]

i.e. running a 'warez' site or mp3 download site, this would give them the option to boot you without having to worry about it being because you are running a warez site.

I mean.. wouldn't viper007 be up for suspension.. didn't he get like 30 gigs of traffic off of *1* file?