Too many old dormant member accounts on here?

quoth09 · 02/27/2008, 03:32 AM

I was looking for a certain member earlier, and while going through the members list, I noticed something:

1215 total members

But yet, look at all the accounts that have 0 posts, 1 post, or less than 10 for that matter, and all the accounts that haven't been used in a year or more.

It honestly makes me wonder what the actual active percentage # is, of members that have used their accounts in the last year or sooner?

Just a random question here, even though it's not much of a nuisance, but just wondering why accounts don't get purged on here? There really isn't need to have a person's account on here if they haven't posted or been active in over a couple of years.

Anyone else notice this? I couldn't find a previous thread about the issue.

Kitsunexus · 02/27/2008, 03:40 AM

Yeah dude, but what if you were once a great active poster here, beloved by the community, made great contributions to the forums, etc etc... What if you were just starting out here?

But then hard times hit, you couldn't pay for your internet anymore because you had a kid with a medical issue, and slowly yet surely life's issues piled up upon you until you forgot all about PCEFX and just focused on breaking even in life.

But then one day, things get better, and you get Internet access again. A couple of months later, you remember PCEFX, and you log back on to return to your welcoming friends...

...except you can't, because your account was deleted by an overzealous vote for organization.

I'm not saying every inactive member is going through something like that, but I'd wager some are, and to delete their account without getting their say in things, that's just flat out wrong.

quoth09 · 02/27/2008, 03:49 AM

I'm not saying delete accounts that have lots of posts on them.
I'm not saying delete accounts on here without trying to contact people.

I'm talking about people that haven't been on here in like 3-4 years or more, that never posted, haven't been active since they signed up, or posted maybe 1, 2 or 4 posts ages ago.

Besides, if someone comes back on here after all the cleaning is done (which I really dobut will happen if they haven't posted in 2 years or more), they can easily sign back up again.

Kitsunexus · 02/27/2008, 03:52 AM

Quote from: quoth09 on 02/27/2008, 03:49 AMI'm not saying delete accounts that have lots of posts on them.
I'm not saying delete accounts on here without trying to contact people.

I'm talking about people that haven't been on here in like 3-4 years or more, that never posted, haven't been active since they signed up, or posted maybe 1, 2 or 4 posts ages ago.

Besides, if someone comes back on here after all the cleaning is done (which I really dobut will happen if they haven't posted in 2 years or more), they can easily sign back up again.

OK, that makes sense then, but where do we draw the line at "formerly active"? 100?

Also, for curiosity's sake, how much server space does the average user's account occupy?

NecroPhile · 02/27/2008, 09:38 AM

If any accounts are going to be purged, then Mr. Nanto should start with that Luta Gemma tool.

Is it common for inactive accounts to be dropped at other forums? It doesn't really matter to me if there's a bunch of dead accounts, but they don't serve much purpose either.

Quote from: quoth09 on 02/27/2008, 03:49 AMI'm not saying delete accounts that have lots of posts on them.

Why not? If they've been gone for years, post counts shouldn't matter. It ain't any more difficult for them to recreate a account than someone who only made a few posts.

PCEngineFX · 02/27/2008, 12:54 PM

Hi quoth09,

Thank you for bringing up your concerns about dormant accounts. While it would make the forum numbers more accurate, leaving the dead accounts in the system doesn't harm anything. If I feel really bored with nothing to do, I'll purge the dead users...but this is a super low priority item.

MissaFX · 02/27/2008, 02:50 PM

It would be nice if say 500 or more of the most inactive accounts could be removed. But I understand it is not a high priority. I do think it is more important to do however than making any changes to the board right now. I'd put making changes to the forum area the lowest priority and I would make updating the other areas the priority if I was doing it all.

nat · 02/27/2008, 02:55 PM

Honestly, if the unused accounts aren't taking up space, why remove them? They don't hurt anything.

MissaFX · 02/27/2008, 02:57 PM

Quote from: nat on 02/27/2008, 02:55 PMHonestly, if the unused accounts aren't taking up space, why remove them? They don't hurt anything.

So that we have a more realistic idea of how many people are members here. Like I said though, it would be a low priority for even me.

Turbo D · 02/27/2008, 04:24 PM

Every now and then I'll see someone with like 1-12 posts login and do nothing. Not sure why, haha. Sometimes they comeback to sell a few titles or post a wanted add.

Joe Redifer · 02/27/2008, 04:30 PM

Who cares if there are dormant accounts? They're not bothering anything. You can look at the board statistics which any member can click on to get an accurate idea of the activity here. I wouldn't exactly consider getting the wrong idea about how many members are here because you counted dormant accounts an issue of ANY kind. Really.

However some forums do automatically purge non-active members for whatever reason. I don't like forcing people to post just to retain their membership. Feels wrong. They should want to post. Sometimes people sign up just to ask a few questions or make a few comments and then just lurk. No biggie.

MissaFX · 02/27/2008, 04:36 PM

Quote from: Joe Redifer on 02/27/2008, 04:30 PMWho cares if there are dormant accounts? They're not bothering anything. You can look at the board statistics which any member can click on to get an accurate idea of the activity here. I wouldn't exactly consider getting the wrong idea about how many members are here because you counted dormant accounts an issue of ANY kind. Really.

However some forums do automatically purge non-active members for whatever reason. I don't like forcing people to post just to retain their membership. Feels wrong. They should want to post. Sometimes people sign up just to ask a few questions or make a few comments and then just lurk. No biggie.

If we had a system which automatically removed people, I think it should wait at least 90 days. You can loose internet for a month to two just moving or by having a major issue with your provider. Or even a major computer failure.

Joe Redifer · 02/27/2008, 04:41 PM

I'm certainly not suggesting that. It should wait 150 years before auto-purging. The only members who need to be purged are those who sign up and spam for viagra and whatnot, which this forum doesn't seem to have a problem with, thankfully.

guyjin · 02/27/2008, 04:51 PM

I was actually one of those accounts you're suggesting we delete.

I signed up here many years ago (2001?) made a few posts, and left since there wasn't much activity.

Then I rediscovered it, and haven't been able to leave since

esteban · 02/27/2008, 09:15 PM

hey quoth, you weren't looking for me, were you?

I say we start deleting everyone's account that begins with the letter "K". Active or not.