How long to keep inactive member

[The kid]

I was going thru the membership list. Muhammad signed in 1998. Membership really didn't start picking up till year 2000. In the year 2000 probably 10% or less, those member are still active. All the rest have 0 post and hold a place in line. They also hold user names in check from someone else using that name. I've noticed the big online mail system began purging unused accounts. My question is why doesn't TBN purge all this dead weight. The old saying "use it or loose it" should apply. Ok 12 years is long enough to be AWOL. You should lose your place in line for inactivity reasons alone. I bet if a an email was sent to notify the user if they don't use it they will lose it. A small % would actually act. Your thoughts. -kid

 

[murphy1244]

I was going thru the membership list. Muhammad signed in 1998. Membership really didn't start picking up till year 2000. In the year 2000 probably 10% or less, those member are still active. All the rest have 0 post and hold a place in line. They also hold user names in check from someone else using that name. I've noticed the big online mail system began purging unused accounts. My question is why doesn't TBN purge all this dead weight. The old saying "use it or loose it" should apply. Ok 12 years is long enough to be AWOL. You should lose your place in line for inactivity reasons alone. I bet if a an email was sent to notify the user if they don't use it they will lose it. A small % would actually act. Your thoughts. -kid

I said the same thing months ago, that's why I got the username I have cause all the other murph names were taken.

 

[smstonypoint]

If I was Muhammad, I would put this at the bottom of my "to do" list and keep it there. At last count there were 176,836 members. Culling the inactive members and any of their previous messages just to free up their user names would require a lot of work on the administrators' part and would reduce the membership count. Be creative if you want a "neat" user name.

Steve

 

[murphy1244]

If I was Muhammad, I would put this at the bottom of my "to do" list and keep it there. At last count there were 176,836 members. Culling the inactive members and any of their previous messages just to free up their user names would require a lot of work on the administrators' part and would reduce the membership count. Be creative if you want a "neat" user name.

Steve

No, there are 176,836 user accounts. You have no idea how many of these are double or more. If having multiple numbers of accounts is your goal, your right

 

[The kid]

If I was Muhammad, I would put this at the bottom of my "to do" list and keep it there. At last count there were 176,836 members. Culling the inactive members and any of their previous messages just to free up their user names would require a lot of work on the administrators' part and would reduce the membership count. Be creative if you want a "neat" user name.

Steve

Steve the members I mentioned have a post count of (0) and membership date of 2000. Is that truely a member? Or bragging rights? The ones I feel could be cut would not impact the message database. It's not a request, only an observation. -robert

 

[JHTFarmer]

A member since 2000 and not a single comment to be heard? Who'd of thought the Supreme Court justice Clarence Thomas was a member of this forum?

 

[murphy1244]

A member since 2000 and not a single comment to be heard? Who'd of thought the Supreme Court justice Clarence Thomas was a member of this forum?

:laughing:

 

[Bird]

That "Join Date" of 2000 may not mean the person actually joined that year. Many of us were members before that date and the changes made that year. So that post count of zero may also not be exactly right. If purging were done and usernames freed up and re-used, wouldn't there be cases in which you find posts by the same username, but actually different people? Anyway, I'm like smstonypoint; can't see that being a priority or even a need.

 

[murphy1244]

wouldn't there be cases in which you find posts by the same username, but actually different people. I think that's the point Glen

 

[chin]

Someone must be bored