possible to add more than 512 to ignore list?

[majax]

I'm using winmxmonitor and I did notice that after 512 names are added to ignore list, the 513th name kicks out the 1st name put in the ignore list. Is there anyway to change it so I can have as many as I want?

Lots of people seem to get a new number in their name w/e they reconnect so 512 names is kinda easy to reach fast.

[Mytheroo]

that's interesting as 512 is the biggest queue I've had for my files.

Do you believe in 2nd chances....that people might learn to not get ignored?

Plus some MxM ignore settings are unfairly ignoring people (for instance those without anyone uploading from them at that time or those who queue multiple files locally and winmx remotely queues them against it's settings)

Most ppl clear out the ignored users list once in a while anyway, they'll go straight back in if they haven't changed their ways

[majax]

Nope don't believe in 2nd chances and your opinion on mxmmonitor are not shared by me.

I simply would like an answer as to wether I can add more names than 512.

[]-[êll.Ôñ.ËÀR'][']-[.]

No ....... answer given

[Mytheroo]

fair enough the 2nd chances....but that MxM adds ppl to ignore lists unfairly and can act against the intentions of the user (getting them ignored by the other user's mx) is Fact, not opinion    and is well documented by MxM users like myself.

[Snuffy]

There should be an option to put as many people as you want. Shouldn't be a limit placed on it.

[wonderer]

It would be pointless to put more on that list. As the requester noticed, w/e the WinMx ignored connection is refreshed, that connection is very unlikely to exist ever again, so why should you want to keep it listed? What is the point in building useless lists other than telling how many U refuse to share in the files you gathered from other users that are gratefully sharing their files?
Are you maybe one of those telling all their shared files are their own contribution to the Peer?

WinMx is a file sharing community and not a denie to share community. how about that?

Happy sharing

[GhostShip]

Your welcome to your opinion Majax aka Snuffy but the massive majority of the folks I come across dont seem to agree with your requirement and will not help you with something we feel is self defeating and in general a waste of your time.

When a user can change their name rapidly or use other simple methods to change their identity its prety pointless as Wonderer mentioned to waste your time and effort in trying to stop them, if you dont want to share something with a specific user then unshare the content they require until they go away, this is the simplest solution in my opinion.

[majax]

@ wonderer. I live in a thing called a democracy where even people with unpopular opinion can voice it.

winmx is an out-of-date program. Who cares what people do on it.

[wonderer]

Majax, that is just the nice thing of a democracy, nobody is forcing you to use an out-of-date program, Best you can do to prevent users to download from you with a program like WinMx, if you insist on using it by lack of up to date programs, is to install a firewall and block the IP-range 0.0.0.0-255.255.255.255.

 

[Joshua203]

or just the ones he wants to block 

[wonderer]

That is also an option in a democratic virtuality

[majax]

My point wasn't about using winmx. It's about adding more than 512 people.
If it's possible to do then why not be given the option.

God forbid anyone with technical skills update this program. I mean, it does run so smoothly, lol.

[wonderer]

No ....... answer given

Or in simple words, no, it is not possible, hence there is no opion given.

[GhostShip]

It amazes me why people seem to persist in wanting things that are not available "just because.." 
I have informed you previously Majax its not possible to add more nodes to the feature you have requested using the available releases.

Btw... I care what goes on on this network Majax and so do the others on the site here, we come here to help each other support a program that we feel was not allowed to flower into what it could have been, instead of looking backwards we have made the best of what is out there to keep our favourite program operative and many have helped achieve that goal, please dont ever get the idea no one here cares.

[Josh]

Having an ignore list with this many people wouldn't do any good anyways, since every time the user refreshes their connection to the network, their 5 digit ID is changed, and so is their hash code, which makes ignoring them useless.

I don't know if it would be possible to ignore someone by their ip address, but maybe?

[Forested665]

most residentail connections are on DHCP
those ips will change too, just maybe not as fast

[GhostShip]

Nice of you to bump up an old thread Bacon, I dont know if you know this but its considered "not done" to revive old threads unless there is a very good reason to do so, please try to refrain from doing it, I will turn a blind eye in this instance as you are newish to posting here.

[Bluey_412]

if majax is still around...

Perhaps he/she/it might like to try running a whois on every name in the overstuffed ignore list. A surprising number will return a failed whois, in fact not likely to be more than 10 that pass, therefore, all the failed ones can be removed...

You are also not doing yourself any favours connection wise, cos checking every possible uploader against that list is a time consuming process, and that may cause people to time out, then they get ignored for retrying too soon...

oooooohhhhhhhhhhhhhh, skip it, wasting time preaching to a non-sharing greedy grot...