Please extend the size of the blacklist.

Now it's restricted.

You already asked about this subject here:

lichess.org/forum/lichess-feedback/when-you-block-more-than-499-people-some-of-them-get-unblocked?page=1

Why would you open up a new thread?

I asked if there is a restriction or I just can't see some blocked players in my blacklist. Now I want to ask to extend the blacklist. Two different requests.

well, you got an answer there why there are good reasons not to extend it.

You could consider not blocking everyone. That would fix the issue.

No, there was no official answer from Lichess administration that it shouldn't be extended. You just made an assumption. Why should I trust your assumption? People, who I previously blocked, are now unblocked and I keep playing with those, who should be in my blacklist. It means the blacklist isn't working properly. Therefore I request for it's "repairing". You are just another one who likes to criticize any request or initiative. I never criticize any suggestion on the forum. Guess why? Because I'm for changes, not for regression.

@lovlas, I do not block "everyone". I block those who have lag, who don't play rematches, who insult or mock. It is clear with the lag and the last. But I want to better explain the problem with denying rematches. I UNDERSTAND that most of those who deny rematches do not do this for the score reasons. They just play some games and then they go to do something else. They probably don't even think about this thing at all. Also, it's anybody's right to not accept a rematch. However, there are some people, who intentionally play until some score in their favor. 3:2, 1:0, for example. And I blocked one of such players once. They left after 1:0. Then, after "unblocking" we played again. The score was 3:1 in my favor. They still play. The score is 3:3. They still play. The score is 4:3 in their favor. They stop playing. Maybe it's a coincidence. I cannot know. And I don't want to play with those, who do this intentionally. And I have the right to block them. Notice: I do not insult them, I do not insult anybody. But I need my blacklist feature to work as it's supposed to work. That's all. I don't block many players. There are very good people I enjoy playing with. They have a good Internet. We play series of games: 10, 20. They never say anything rude. I would never block such players. I like playing with them a lot. It's my right to choose who I want to play with.

Every list needs a limit at some point. Otherwise people might flood the lists which decreases performance. 500 seems like a decent limit.

Anyway, in this case, I'd reconsider who you block. Even if we'd increase the block list limit, it would be full again soon if you keep blocking people at this rate, and an unlimited list won't happen.

@ProgramFOX, If there would be an option to create challenges with even number of games, it would solve the problem. Playing an even number seems fair. Nobody then can play 7 games with 4:3 and leave. It would be either 5:3, either 4:4. There are situations when two players have a tie. And it seems wrong when one of them waits until the score is 1 point in their favor and leaves.

Why does it matter though? If it would be rated, I'd understand. But you play casual mostly -- how would it matter there if someone plays until the scoretable is in their favor?