That clearly shows why using PeerGuardian is a bad idea. Banning dubious ranges from Gnutella will not cause much trouble. PeerGuardian blocks everyone and everything for stuff that is completely unrelated. The servers of this forum have always been in a "bad" range. That's no wonder. Banned ranges almost always affect legit server farms and co-location providers. PeerGuardian is not very effective for Gnutella anyways. It's clearly the wrong solution for the wrong problem. Blocking lists are always problematic using them out-of-context is just insane. If anyone is that scared to use Gnutella, then just don't use it or watch out what you share. Or maybe don't believe the FUD. It's more likely to win the lottery than getting caught for bagatelle. PeerGuardian is not going to protect you anyway. ISPs like Roadrunner, Verizon and many other cooperate with the RIAA/MPAA and others letting them run sniffers and anti-P2P nodes on their dynamic ranges. You can't ban these unless you're willing to ban yourself and the rest of the internet along with it.

Blocklists are and always will be a valuable tool for the gnutella network and
it's users. "That" does not clearly show anything other than that you have to
pay attention to what you are doing when using such powerful tools. From
the perspective of the gnutella network virtually all commercial space is
undesirable because it is the domain of spam and anti-P2P server farms.

That these defenses make it much less likely the MAFIAA will see you at all is
a psychological benefit, nothing more. Anyone with huge collections of
copyrighted content shared online will still be seen by everyone because
gnutella was never designed for stealth in the first place.

The primary use of these block lists is not to support piracy by providing
blanket coverage against MAFIAA operations, as you apparently assume. The
main reason they exist is to reduce the noise level and pollution of the
network by large commercial operations and the many types of worms out
there. Individuals who are trying to defend their clients copyrights are
welcome to do so as long as they don't burden the network with massive
amounts of traffic, but as soon as any of them have a detrimental effect on
the network they are immediately blocked for the common good.

As for your assertion that ISPs willingly host massive anti-P2P operations in
dynamic ranges, can you honestly tell us how you know that these are not
individuals hired by anti-P2P companies and working from home?

If you can't understand how to use this basic defense, don't bother criticizing
it's existence. PG doesn't even come close to blocking "everything". Most
people who use PG and the like have no complaints and new users like Sgt
quickly learn how to make it work for them. The massive reduction of
unnecessary traffic on their nodes makes them more productive, and
searches, uploads and downloads benefit as a result.

In case you haven't noticed, PG has a simple button right up front to allow
web surfing right through the blocks while still protecting all other protocols.
Does that keep it in context for you? Try it for a few weeks and learn to use
it properly before you start pontificating in public on the benefits and
drawbacks of such software.

Sorry Sir, but I'm right and you are wrong, Sir. Everybody is the master of their own faults. End of discussion.