ok, this website currently has over 5000 registered members. This must be because

a) Jeremy wants to trick people into thinking this site is more popular than it is

or

b) 96% of 'members' only ever posted once.

I know it's kinda pointless maybe, but why not remove users who've not posted for more than 3 months or something?

i was kinda curious, so i ran down the list of the top posters, and i am happy to report that 96% is a bit of an exaggeration.



anyway, it might not be a bad idea to retire old non-posters, but i think that would be more of an admin decision than anything esthetic. if jeremy wants to retire names, then it will probably create problems with the searches and the archiving that he would have to write some work-arounds for. otherwise, half the posts in the archive would be listed under "non-existent member"

it's not a bad idea... i just don't know how much of a pain it would be to implement it.

I have considered it, but posting is not a requirement of being a member. There are members who browse the board everyday but never post. I do not want to remove them. That being said I am considering removing members who have not VISITED the board in 3 months. At this point it is not a top priority though.

I am a newbie, but what about this:

After three months of non-posting or non-visiting I am erased. OK.
Now, if, somehow, I have something to say or (in my case) to ask a question what happens?
Should I have to login again as a new user? It is permitted? After all I haven't post or visit the board for more than three months.

And, let's say, if I only want to read the posts (threads, whatever) it is necessary to login?

Currently the only things you have to be logged in for are posting and rating. Viewing, searching, etc. can all be done by non-members.

The only reason I could see for actually removing old/non-existant users is that their data might be slowing down the system. Out of the approx. 6000 members, there are about 2500 that have never actually posted, ever - some are quite obviously never going to (does anyone else think that BillGates thought he was being funny? Trying to piss us off maybe? Is it working?). Although I imagine that the amount of HDD space their info. is taking up is probably minimal, it is still a valuable commodity (HDD space, that is). Since they have never posted, and are unlikely to do so, I can't see that it would pose a problem when it comes to searches.

Also, although I have only been a member of this site for approx. 6 months (at the time of writing) I do not feel that acid_kewpie's first statement is at all likely (Jeremy wants to trick people into thinking this site is more popular than it is). I am a firm believer in a well-deserved flame, but I can't see that provocation with a lack of motive is a good idea acid_pewpie.

uuuhhhh... unrelated to the subject of this post but...

Thymox i think acid's first post was more of a joke than anything... don't take it so hard man...

as for my 2 cents worth about THE subject of this post itself...

while i can't grudge anyone about whatever they've said so far (they all have their weight minus the quips and gripes) i started using this forum much about 5 months ago (i think, i can't remember) and stopped after my 2nd post. why? coz i had to do some work on windows alone until recently. now i have to do my stuff on both. so i came back. and i'm glad i didn't have to re-register.

just a view from the far side of the this planet.

thanks fer listening...

I wish I know where is this website can let me cancel my membership???

Just stop logging in and visiting the site is one way. Turn off email notification if its enabled currently and you will never be emailed for any reason, etc.

perhaps, if the number of registered users is not a big deal as far as affecting performance of the lq servers and Jeremy is not at a loss for space an idea would be not to remove the member, but to remove that member from the member count after about 3 months inactivity, at such a time if they permit an email would be sent to them asking them to please follow the link in order to verify that they still wish for their account to be active and included in the count, I dont know much about how the software of these forums actually work but other sites such as the linux counter do somewhat the same thing, if it wouldnt be that hard for Jeremy to do I would much prefer a more accurate member count than a number that due to its inflation, means approximately nothing. This would save Jeremy the trouble of making workarounds that may not be feasible and at the same time helping us to accurately count our ranks.

Beyond that, you could set the time limit differently based on post count, for the sole idea that someone who has made a few hundred posts is much less likely to leave than a newbie with 5-10 you could then give the members 5 months and the guru/lq addicts 7. Just an idea.

The only downside, is it does nothing to alleviate strain on Jeremy's servers, I dont know if thats an issue though, and if it is I should think simply removing entirely useless threads out of general would be a more efficient way to free up resources.

If members have posted they will not be removed at all - it would just leave gaps where usernames should be.