About ridicioulous number of members

[Ycep]

Why there isn't any algorithm for deleting members not logged in for very long time (or, let say about 4 years)?
There is 10000 members registered there, and sadly, barely 1000 members actually did logged since last 4 years.
Would any of moderators delete any of such members?
No really, it may take Chase's hard drive too much.

[glauxosdever]

Hi,


Who cares? Besides, I'm not sure whether moderators are able to delete user accounts, I think an administrator has to do that.


Regards,
glauxosdever

[SpyderTL]

It seems that it's not altogether unheard of for people to take an extended "break" from OSDEV for several years, or more.

I don't think that they should have their account deleted for that.

Any particular reason that having fewer accounts in the system would be better than it is now?

[Schol-R-LEA]

Ah, you might want to reconsider that title, Lukand. This is a SFW site, after all

Why, yes, I do have a filthy mind, why do you ask?

[glauxosdever]

Hi,

Ah, you might want to reconsider that title, Lukand. This is a SFW site, after all

This has an implicit meaning, right?


Regards,
glauxosdever

[Schol-R-LEA]

"Member" is a common English language euphemism for a particular part of the male anatomy, so yes.

[iansjack]

And what happens to the user's posts if you delete the user? Sometimes people revive threads that have been dormant for 8 years and 3 months, or even more.

[Schol-R-LEA]

To clarify: the usual way what Lukand seems to have meant would be "About the ridiculous number of [inactive] members". The way it is written now, it sounds as if Lukand is complaining about the gargantuan male apparatus of the various posters, or perhaps the frequency of DSWs on this site (what I usually refer to as "competitive phallometry", if you aren't familiar with the acronym; just to be wholly lucid here, the last two letters stand for "size war", with the 'd' being the obvious expletive substitution).

[Ycep]

Xaxaxaxa... I meant amount.
I didn't knew there was ...nisologists wandering in this forum.

[gerryg400]

Rather than ask about the ridiculous number of members, let's focus on the number of ridiculous members.

[onlyonemac]

There's no reason to delete inactive accounts. Users that have been active in the past have often left useful information in the forums, which would be undesirable to delete, and users that haven't been active in the past probably aren't taking up too much storage space with a few posts here and there.

[NunoLava1998]

There's no reason to delete inactive accounts. Users that have been active in the past have often left useful information in the forums, which would be undesirable to delete, and users that haven't been active in the past probably aren't taking up too much storage space with a few posts here and there.

but phpbb still saves deleted accounts's threads for whatever reason

[matt11235]

There's no reason to delete inactive accounts. Users that have been active in the past have often left useful information in the forums, which would be undesirable to delete, and users that haven't been active in the past probably aren't taking up too much storage space with a few posts here and there.

but phpbb still saves deleted accounts's threads for whatever reason

It's an option that a mod/admin can pick when deleting an account.

[bubach]

4 years..? Pfft, not nearly enough for some of us lurkers that pop in about every 8:th year or so

[PeterX]

It seems that it's not altogether unheard of for people to take an extended "break" from OSDEV for several years, or more.

Yes, that's true!

But maybe users who have never written a single post in 4 years can be deleted?

Greetings
Peter