Talk:Ventrilo/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

"VoIP protocol"?

Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

is there something like a "VoIP protocol"? I assume this is not the case and should be clarified. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.114.233.139 (talk • contribs) 14:20, 20 April 2005

since it'd be "Voice over IP" and IP stands for Internet Protocol, that's obviously not the case. MardukZero 18:40, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

true that —Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.226.209.140 (talk • contribs) 02:32, 20 April 2006

not true. Although IP stands for Internet Protocol, that doesn't mean that there can't be a protocol that -uses- the internet protocol. Anyway, VoIP is the accepted name. If you're talking about the protocol for VoIP, which exists, it's perfectly acceptable to refer to it as the VoIP protocol, regardless what the acronym originally means. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.92.64.247 (talk • contribs) 08:38, 28 June 2006

Alternative and cheaper option to renting ventrilo servers

I'm in a clan/guild with approx 250 members. Now .. I'd like to ask if there is any way Ventrilo can compete with teamspeak ( http://www.goteamspeak.com ) and renting a server to run it ?

It was SO much cheaper for me to use teamspeak and their free usage to non profit organisations (ie. clans and guilds etc), rent a server to host it and have no restriction on the server slots... breakdown of the prices for this

teamspeak server (free) + virtual server ( http://www.budgetdedicated.com ) - 17euro a month (this is including network traffic at .5euro a GB)

compare this to the price example for renting a ventrilo server ...

10 Slots - £7 UK (10 euro)
20 Slots - £12 UK (17.2 euro)
30 Slots - £17.1 UK (24.5 euro)
40 Slots - £22 UK (31 euro)

I mean .. ???! get a grip Ventrilo.. I understand non profit organisations are paying for ventrilo servers .. why?

0 good will?

Anyhow, for those using ventrilo, wake up .. Do the numbers .. teamspeak + a server is cheaper and gives you alot more control for upgrading etc. Hell .. you can even run your website off the hosted server, run a CS server off it etc.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.245.56.52 (talk • contribs) 10:01, 28 April 2006

No You cannot. You cannot get cheaper than renting. I don't know where you're getting those numbers from, but they're way more expensive than a lot of providers out there. Buying a server for 17 EURO is like what.. $20 USD? You're only guaranteed a low amount of memory, so consider running a CS server out of the question. Not to mention, you're paying for traffic. A 100 person server can use almost a 1/4 terabyte of traffic if it's constantly filled and people are constantly talking. Ours uses over 50 GB but people aren't on it all the time. That's only for 100 users. That's at least another 25 euro on top of the 17 euro. 100 Ventrilo slots will run you only around 6-7 euro per month for 100 users if you pre-pay yearly at a lot of places. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.189.214.222 (talk • contribs) 22:34, 9 May 2006

Yeah? Does anyone care? Go promote your favorite software on some message board. What does any of this have to do with the article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.92.64.247 (talk • contribs) 08:38, 28 June 2006

Free Ventrilo Servers

Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

87.117.194.57 - Battlefield 2 30 man server, port 3873 <- deleted this because it was a temp test server with no channels. Corpx 04:46, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Ventrilo Hosting Providers

Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Please dont list hosting companies in the main page. Corpx 08:05, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Official Ventrilo site labeled as spam?

Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Why is the official Ventrilo site labeled as spam? It's the official site of the item at hand, it's the place to get the clients, and it's the next logical step for somebody who reads about Ventrilo for the first time.v--209.60.96.90 06:36, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Removed Dallasxtreme Commercial Link

Latest comment: 17 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion

I've removed an external link to the www.dallasextreme.com/setup.php "guide", as it's mostly a reproduction, word for word, of the official Ventrilo setup guide on the offical Ventrilo site, but with half a page of Ventrilo hosting ads on the top and sidebar. This exact link with the same text description has been added numerous times by various IPs and most recently Abbynormal1, who has posted similar links to other pages. On Abbynormal1's first edit, the link was described as "Ventrilo client setup instructions and offers Ventrilo Servers for purchase". I can't see any reason why this link should be on the page, but I've put this here in case others have comments. --Battlehamster 01:19, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

As the poster of the link, I have comment. You're wrong in almost every staement of fact you make, including the ones you made in private to me. First, the content of the link I posted is NOT a reproduction of the Ventrilo setup guide. Albeit, part of it (client guide) is quite similar, the server setup guide -- which is the primary reason I posted the link is unique and not avaialble anywhere else to my finding. It helped me a great dela in setting up my Ventrilo server. So, I would first like to point out that the #1 question here is was my contribution worthy of the Ventrilo wiki? In my opinion, since it offers very helpful, unique information primarily for server admins, yes. The fact that this is only available from a commercial site isn't surprising considering what a small niche Ventrilo holds. Look through Wikipedia, my friend - there are tens of thousands of commercial links here, that BELONG here.

Secondly, I've changed my text description a couple times in hopes to satisfy whoever kept removing my contribution.

Finally, you say you "can't see any reason why this link should be on the page". Show me (post the actual link) a link to a different, better server setup guide that's not on a commercial site and I'll happily agree with you.

P.S. I'm not the site owner, and I consider it libel that you say "Abbynormal1, who has posted similar links to other pages.". Every wiki contribution I've made has been just that - contribution. I don't post links, or edit topics based on my own interest. I don't spam commercial links. I make valid, contribution minded edits. I suggest you either remove your libel, or back it up. --Abbynormal1 15:00, 16 July 2006

I've removed the commercial link that was placed on there. If we're going to post links to setup guides, etc., let it be on a site that's not selling something, especially not something related to the service. That's what ventrilo.com's renting page is for. Thanks. 24.93.208.62 07:47 14:47, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

The link was replaced. Before unilaterally removing the link, since it's been discussed at length here, please find an alternative setup guide. Abbynormal1 10:05, July 18, 2006 (UTC)

How so? Look at the above "Ventrilo Hosting Providers" section:

Please dont list hosting companies in the main page. Corpx 08:05, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Obviously that's a hosting company. I also think the link should be removed. 71.64.100.246 10:38, July 18, 2006 (UTC)

There's no argument that it's a hosting company. Commercial links, in case you didn't know, aren't prohibited in Wikipedia. Like I said before - it's their because it provides a valuable guide that ventrilo.com does not. Why is this so hard to comprehend? Abbynormal1 10:43, July 18, 2006 (UTC)

Quite simple. Even if it's valuable, it's still a hosting company, and it's already been stated that they are not welcome on the page. Maybe, if you want to host commercial links on the page, you should alter the statement listed above. 71.64.100.246 10:45, July 18, 2006 (UTC)

Nobody that matters has ever stated that commercial links are not welcome in Wikipedia if they are important to the encyclopedia. The link to the guide that replaced the dallasxtreme link is not a good replacement. The dallasxtreme guide has instructions for how server admins go about configuring a server. The ventrilo guide explains how a client can install a server and connect to it. It's crazy how much opposition there is to improving Wikipedia.

I'm done trying to contribute -- it's not worth fighting blatant ignorance to the fact that this was a valid link to a useful site, despite it's commercial element. Abbynormal1 12:34, July 18, 2006 (UTC)

I believe the link doesn't belong on the page, according to the Wikipedia: Links normally to be avoided page, specifically item 4. While the Dallasextreme site may have a guide on it, the site primarily exists to sell Ventrilo hosting. Based on the number of times people have removed the link, and the discussion we're curently having, I think it has "objectionable amounts of advertising" (see item #4 again). The content of the page doesn't to me, outweigh the commercial nature of it. I believe that as it is, the link should remain off the page until we have a general consensus on whether or not it should be there. I welcome anyone else's input on the situation. --Battlehamster 22:26, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

All commercial links which don't contain the product's official domain(here ventrilo.com) should be forbidden from the External Links section, it's the only way to prevent spamming on Wikipedia.--SamiKaero 21:38, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Kernel32.dll errors

Latest comment: 17 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Regarding the most recent edit which added:

Many would-be users of Ventrilo use other voice chat programs because of the incompatibility of many users kernel32.dll file with Ventrilo.

Can we get some more information about this? A source/indication of where "many" is coming from? A google search for ventrilo kernel32.dll turned up nothing relevant. A Ventrilo forums search did turn up 5 people with problems over the last year, but without anything more, that seems like a very insignificant number.

In the end I have no problems with statement if it's true, I've just never heard of this being a problem for people before. --Battlehamster 09:24, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

If it can't be corroborated then the line should be removed. Xenocidic 20:48, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree. It's been almost a week without any response from the person who made the edit, so I'm removing it. --Battlehamster 21:16, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

No Linux client

Latest comment: 14 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Ventrilo is a - - program for - - Linux.

I think the above sentence is misleading. There is no Linux version of the Ventrilo client (yet). It's been 'in development' for a long time, maybe a year and a half. I've heard nothing of it since I first saw it on Ventrilo's site. Until the Linux client is released, it should be mentioned in a different way. Nothing suitable comes into my mind though.. Materiality 18:20, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

I (along with others) have written a Ventrilo client for Linux called Mangler. It is available via the GPL license. I don't want to modify this page because I am first party, but a quick google search for "mangler ventrilo" should point you in the right direction. Ekilfoil (talk) 09:46, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

GameComm

Latest comment: 17 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Why is this "software" listed under similar programs? The software does not exist, and neither does the web site. Suposedly, it's supposed to be out in 2007, but should something that does not yet exist and who's web site is currently dead even be listed? The listing should be removed.

Jake b 06:46, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree with you and I have listed the Gamecomm page for AfD, you can chime in at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GameComm. BJ^Talk 06:56, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Interesting...I beta tested for them, but I guess they're done. Corpx 00:51, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

OS Section of right template misleading.

Perhaps there should be two lines under OS, server and client. There is no mention of the server's compatibility with OSs like BSD, but linux is listed when there is no linux client... only longstanding empty promises for one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.139.66.1 (talk • contribs) 22:29, 3 January 2007

Gamedaemons.net

Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

someone added gamedaemons.net to the external links, but for some reason it doesn't show up when you go to edit the section (therefore I can't delete it). Could someone take a look at that? --Abbynormal1 23:49, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

ambiguous information

Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The word "this" is ambiguous in this sentence:

As of this date though, the Mac OS X client is still unable to connect to most servers.

Please specify the date. Dofstead 17:53, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Removed MaximumVoice Spam

Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

MaximumVoice is a commercial hosting provider and thus is not allowed to have a link on the page. I have removed it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.185.144.24 (talk) 04:47, 6 May 2007 (UTC).

Older versions

Latest comment: 17 years ago3 comments1 person in discussion

75.185.144.24 deleted the URL to the older versions of Ventrilo, stating that 'It's against the license agreement to use older versions of Ventrilo, thus I have removed the link.'. Then why shouldn't the URL to the older versions be included? Does the license agreement specifically state that your rights of free speech on the internet are gone once you install it, like an NDA? And what if someone wants to download it and not 'use' it? I don't think censorship should be applied.

I will restore the URL back, since I do think that it is important for people to know where older versions are located if they need it. A lot of servers still run version 2.1.2 on the internet, whether it's against the EULA of a newer version or not. Just use the query "Ventrilo 2.1.4 IP" (without quotes) on Google and skip the first few hits to see several servers still running 2.1.2 (which you can recognize because you 'need' client version 2.1.4 to connect with them).

It's not up to Wikipedia to follow the EULA of software. It's up to the user.

Zepman 21:50, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

If they need it? I cannot find one good reason why they would need it besides to connect to an ILLEGAL ventrilo server. I understand your point regarding it being up to the user -- but I don't see the point in promoting it -- especially when your reason is simply "if they need it," which would only be to connect to an illegal server anyway. There's no reason for it, and I don't see why Wikipedia should be promoting illegal activities (even if it's free speech). 75.185.144.24 03:05, 24 May 2007 (EST)

Informing does not equal promoting. For example, look at the article about the Pirate Bay. It also links to the Pirate Bay, despite that the activities the site employees is illegal (according to the law) in several countries. Or take the entry for Home of the Underdogs. Most of the software on that site is illegal by law because it is abandonware, but Wikipedia still links to the site. As far as I see, the reasons you mention (to connect to an 'illegal' server) does not restrict Wikipedia from mentioning it. And seeing that still a large number of users use the older software (just like a lot of people still visit the Pirate Bay or Home of the Underdogs), the URL should be included. The URL to the official site is also included, so users are not obstructed from gaining the latest version. Zepman 07:50, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

So what's the point then? I think you're missing my points. I'm not saying that Wikipedia is not allowed to link to it -- I'm saying that I don't understand the point in encouraging illegal activities (and that's the only way to use the older version of the software). Last time I checked the photoshop wiki, there's no information on photoshop warez, or encouragement provided to perform illegal activities. If the reason for obtaining the older version of the software was to use it in a legal manner, I have no problem linking to it. But that's not the case -- and as I said, you don't see that kind of link or encouragement on other software wiki pages. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.164.111.30 (talk • contribs) 03:12, 27 May 2007

Next time, sign your message, please.

I will handle each of your points here, so pay attention.

I'm saying that I don't understand the point in encouraging illegal activities (and that's the only way to use the older version of the software).

Downloading is not using. Wikipedia is also not encouraging illegal activity. Wikipedia is informing.

Last time I checked the photoshop wiki, there's no information on photoshop warez, or encouragement provided to perform illegal activities.

True, but that isn't exactly informing about Photoshop. Older versions of Ventrilo are still used by a lot of users so they are informed about it. Again, Wikipedia does not encourage downloading older versions. As far as I see, the latest version and the older version do get treated equally in the article. In fact, the official website is even at the top of the External Links list.

If the reason for obtaining the older version of the software was to use it in a legal manner, I have no problem linking to it. But that's not the case -- and as I said, you don't see that kind of link or encouragement on other software wiki pages.

Again, downloading does not mean using, which technically means that it is legal to download. Also, has this been proven in court? If not, anyone who claims that something is illegal can limit freedom of speech in Wikipedia.

I will add the link back again, since you have still given no valid reasons for not including it. It's an informing link which does not prevent visitors to take the latest version of Ventrilo. It says nowhere in the article that 'users should download version 2.1.2 of the server for the best experience'. If you still think differently, consider putting this issue up for a Wikipedia:Third_opinion. If you do remove the link again, I will put it up personally. I will mention this on this discussion page beforehand, off course. Zepman 08:42, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

I am more than happy to use that feature :) I just don't think it's a good idea to point the user in the direction of obtaining software that is only used in conjunction with illegal versions of the server software. Those older versions cannot connect to legal servers anyway, thus pointing them in that direction is honestly pointless. It serves absolutely no purpose being on the page. I am for one, a firm believer that the developer of the software has a right for his software used in accordance to which he asks. If you want to go against that and promote uses that stray from his recommendations, then fine -- but you're only doing more harm than good. I think you're somehow thinking I'm debating that it's illegal, or against wikipedia policy to post the link. Well, I'm not -- I'm just saying -- what's the point if it's not really doing anything worthwhile for the legitimate user. It's just there for illegitimate ones. Take my comments as you will -- but maybe we can come to some kind of agreement that this needs to be discussed by more people (third parties, or just more users on this page) before a decision to include it is made. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.164.111.30 (talk • contribs) 01:44, 28 May 2007

Removed Steelvent.com Spam

Removed their link (Added by AlphaSwitch -- Please block their user account). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.135.4.150 (talk • contribs) 17:40, 6 June 2007

Guild hacking

Latest comment: 16 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

In part of the article, it states that an unnamed guild had their Ventirlo channel hacked by someone with a Duke Nukem soundboard. Well, that's bad, obviously, but is this incident really of enough note to post here? I'd be willing to bet they're not the only ones who have ever had their Ventrilo hacked.

Excerpt below:

"The Lord of the Rings channel was recently hacked by someone using a Duke Nukem soundboard. The hacker has not yet been identified. The guild leader was extremely angry with the hacker, and claimed he/she was going to "kill your f****** mother you f****** cock sucker"."

BTW I've seen the recording of the hacking, it's extremely funny to hear how badly the admin overreacted.

Atsfrr3000 03:26, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

This ventrilo hacker posts the recordings of his attacks on youtube under the username "VideoCompiler". Just incase anyone wanted to find out more about this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:{{{2}}}|{{{2}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{2}}}|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{2}}}|contribs]]) 20:31, 10 July 2007 208.181.66.1

He doesn't do any hacking, he just uses a few tricks (which he shows on his website) to keep them on there, and to get rid of admins. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.237.177.116 (talk) 04:02, 17 September 2007 (UTC)