Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-26459732-20160118105705/@comment-26459732-20160118183534

Saftzie wrote: BlockList says: 67.158.0.0/16 is quite a range for an infinite block. It includes
 * 67.158.0.0 - 67.158.47.255 : KNOLOGY, Inc.; West Point, GA 31833
 * 67.158.48.0 - 67.158.63.255 : Servmatix Inc.; Phoenix, AZ 85086
 * 67.158.64.0 - 67.158.79.255 : Execulink Telecom Inc.; Burgessville, ON N0J-1C0
 * 67.158.80.0 - 67.158.95.255 : Lubbock Independent School District; Lubbock, TX 79401
 * 67.158.96.0 - 67.158.127.255 : Earthlink, Inc (reallocated to various organizations in NY, CT, RI, etc.)
 * 67.158.128.0 - 67.158.191.255 : Fairpoint Communications, Inc.; Manchester, NH 03101
 * 67.158.192.0 - 67.158.223.255 : Green House Data, Inc.; Cheyenne, WY 82007
 * 67.158.224.0 - 67.158.224.255 : Crystal Connections Corporation; Las Vegas, NV 89032
 * 67.158.225.0 - 67.158.239.255 : Pocketinet Communications, Inc; Walla Walla, WA 99362
 * 67.158.240.0 - 67.158.255.255 : Vaquero Network Services, LLC; Honolulu, HI 96817

Dirtbag Daryl seems to have banned Tremorfan94, then banned Tremorfan94's IP, then the whole range 67.158.0.0/16. Both the OP and Tremorfan94 also seem to be using the same ISP (Fairpoint). Nevertheless, an infinite ban for a large IP block seems extreme. I'd say an infinite ban for any IP is silly, because it almost guarantees the ban affects (or will affect) someone it isn't intended to affect. That's a LOT of companies. That's a bit extreme to block such a large range of IPs...