members
wouldnt it be better to search out all thos inactive members and remove there accounts?
surely this would relieve some of the presaure on the forums and maybe someone cannot use the name they want as some, inactive memeber is using it
just a suggestion
Liam :csaw:
liam_tmt7 posted this at 20:06 — 15th January 2003.
They have: 33 posts
Joined: Jan 2003
i just read over that and realized how poor my spelling and grammer was
lol
i was munching Pizza @ the time, so thats my excuse
Liam :batman:
Mark Hensler posted this at 20:33 — 15th January 2003.
He has: 4,048 posts
Joined: Aug 2000
I don't like removing records in relational databases. In this case, if we do delete old inactive members...
What do we do with their posts? Delete them?
What do we do with threads they have started? Delete them too?
What do we do to other people's posts that are in threads of an inactive member? Delete them too?
Or do we leave the posts from the inactive member, and just delete their account?
If we do this, how do we indicate who posted when we've deleted the member account? Move everything to Anonymous? Bleh.
Mark Hensler
If there is no answer on Google, then there is no question.
Megan posted this at 20:44 — 15th January 2003.
She has: 11,421 posts
Joined: Jun 1999
I've always thought that we should jsut clean out all the members who have 0 posts (and there are somewhere around 2700 of them!)
liam_tmt7 posted this at 20:54 — 15th January 2003.
They have: 33 posts
Joined: Jan 2003
yeah thats sort of what i mean
just delete the members, but leave the posts
Liam :batman:
The Webmistress posted this at 08:32 — 16th January 2003.
She has: 5,586 posts
Joined: Feb 2001
I agree that it might be a good idea to clear off all members with 0 posts but leave anyone in who has posted.
Renegade posted this at 09:10 — 16th January 2003.
He has: 3,022 posts
Joined: Oct 2002
Yeah clearing zero posters is a good idea and i'm sure many boards do, do that
but what about those with just one post?
Abhishek Reddy posted this at 12:46 — 16th January 2003.
He has: 3,348 posts
Joined: Jul 2001
Why?
Internet names are fair game. If someone took yours first, too bad.
Just because 0-posters haven't posted doesn't mean they don't lurk. If anything, I think accounts whose members haven't posted at all and haven't been active for a few months could be deleted, as well as accounts that members have dropped in favour of a new one for the sake of a different name or because they forgot their password or whatever.
Still, I don't see what ill effect this is having. Sure, the member count stat is misleading, but aren't all statistics lies, anyway?
mjames posted this at 20:06 — 18th January 2003.
They have: 2,064 posts
Joined: Dec 1999
No need to delete inactive users. Why? Having them doesn't cause any strain on the server and there's no telling if they'll come back or not. Plus, as Mark said, it becomes tricky when deciding what to do with old posts.
Panky posted this at 15:21 — 16th March 2003.
She has: 14 posts
Joined: Mar 2003
Just because a registered user doesn't post, doesn't mean they are not here. If you change anything, go by last log in date.
There's really not much of a concern. Inactives aren't using board resources. There's probably no limit on the script to say "too many registered users."
Technically, there is 6000+ members. So, it isn't like false advertising where the number count was intentionally inflated. It's good for marketing. You can advertise 6000+ members. That's 6000+ pairs of eyeballs who can potentially view the ads.
Panky
ICQ:51140074
ROB posted this at 21:23 — 8th April 2003.
They have: 447 posts
Joined: Oct 1999
'rob' registered in sept'99 and has never posted. i don't lose sleep over it, but it is rather annoying that i have to spell my nick R-zero-B when this fellow obviously doesnt want, need, or use the nick.
i say delete anyone who has zero posts and hasnt logged in for over a year.
Abhishek Reddy posted this at 03:07 — 9th April 2003.
He has: 3,348 posts
Joined: Jul 2001
Are you saying he robbed your name? And now you want to nick it back?
ROB posted this at 04:21 — 9th April 2003.
They have: 447 posts
Joined: Oct 1999
shirley you're on the mark.
Want to join the discussion? Create an account or log in if you already have one. Joining is fast, free and painless! We’ll even whisk you back here when you’ve finished.