Quote:

Well the number is lower than it was when I did a spot check about 8-12 months ago. Back then, the number of accounts that hadn't logged in for more than 12 months was in the 2-2400 range.

Hmmm --- on October 8th, it was 2247 accounts which hadn't logged in for 12 months or more (and 3186 which hadn't logged in for at least 3 months).

In comparison, on February 2nd (9 months ago), it was 1578 accounts inactive for 12 months or more, and 2603 inactive for 3+ months.


Between the two dates, the number of active accounts dropped from 2484 to 2245 (where "active" means logged in in the last 12 months), or from 1459 to 1306 (3 months) --- meanwhile, the total number of accounts rose by about 400.


The generous "18 month inactivity leads to deletion" rule would have left

3054 accounts on February 2nd
3068 accounts on March 21st
2888 accounts on July 15th
2767 accounts on September 24th
2744 accounts on October 8th

I am not sure you aren't misremembering something.

@ #6

Uhm, you're right. Sorry.

/me hides

@yak

Quote:

Uhm, you're right. Sorry.

Heh! Don't be sorry. You brought up an excellent point about this website, and
I would not have followed up without your post. In fact, your post helped serve
as a reminder to me.
Based on the preceeding, it is clear that AW can be structured, to some degree,
from the standpoint of -encouraging- people to become members OR not.

#6

_________________
This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author.
*Secrecy has served us so well*

I know a few active accounts need same treatment!

_________________
4000T/BFG9060
CD32/Elsat ProModule, TF360
CD32/ Edu's CD32 <> A1200 Adapter, Vampire V2
CD32/ FMV Module

Good job I logged back in then :)

_________________
hmmmm
A3000 - 040 - 32Mb Ram - 1.2GB SCSI HD - OS 3.9 - Cybervision 64/3D / 19" Rackmount - Int

Quote:

I know a few active accounts need same treatment!

lol, was thinking the same thing.


@DaveyD

I'm assuming that deleted users can alway open a new account if they want to later on?

_________________
Hate tends to make you look stupid...

@sundown

Quote:

I'm assuming that deleted users can alway open a new account if they want to later on?

Good point.
In addition, some readers look for particular "nicks" that they trust to write
reasonably accurate represetations of truth.
I wonder if we are talking about potentially thousands of posts here on AW
instantly reading "by anonymous" and thereby losing our reference points.
Sure, prior to this, nicks went anonymous by -request-, but this is an entirely
different case.

#6

_________________
This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author.
*Secrecy has served us so well*

if june/july 2004 marked the intro of OS4pre and
june/july 2005 marks the number of no logs, then
i conclude that OS4 failed to impress a lot of users,
or it was total failure of hardware for users to use
the OS4. Not good stats for company's profit margin.
Amiga is going nowhere isn't it?

_________________

@Snuffy

Its more likely that matches the same time when hardware availability dried up.

Rude!

_________________
2017 Camaro 2SS

Quote:

I'm here... Don't Nuke me... Pleeeeeease

DaveyD- I think this (above) is an imposter. best wipe the account to be safe!

_________________
Are we not done with the same silly arguments and flames yet??!

Sweet! Does that mean a certain "Military Grade" user account name will be available to register?

_________________
A3000D (16mhz, 2MB Chip, 4MB Fast, SCSI (300+MB), SuperGen Genlock, Kick 3.1)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Back in my day, we didn't have water. We only had Oxygen & Hydrogen, & we'd just shove 'em together

@wegster

And risk loosing Edit-Chick? Think about it.

_________________
Hate tends to make you look stupid...

Didn't AO do that once before and ended up with a lot of posts posted by Anonymous? Do the inactive accounts really cause a problem? Deleting them might well do.

Sweet! Does that mean a certain "Military Grade" user account name will be available to register?

Don't even think about that.

DaveyD, how about another TOS update

_________________
~
Everything you say will be misquoted and used against you..
~

@ snuffy
Quote:

if june/july 2004 marked the intro of OS4pre and june/july 2005 marks the number of no logs, then i conclude that OS4 failed to impress a lot of users, or it was total failure of hardware for users to use the OS4. Not good stats for company's profit margin. Amiga is going nowhere isn't it?

I suppose you also held credence with the 'chemtrail conspiracy theory' and the Virgin Mary appearing on a used DVD-RW?

Please don't troll or you'll have to clean up after yourself.

_________________
¤¤ Official Hyperion Zealot ¤¤

(No, I didn't type that with a straight face.)

Logged :)

Quote:

Sweet! Does that mean a certain "Military Grade" user account name will be available to register?

Heh, uh oh...good point! We may need to put a few names on the ban list to prevent that

_________________
Are we not done with the same silly arguments and flames yet??!

Quote:

Didn't AO do that once before and ended up with a lot of posts posted by Anonymous? Do the inactive accounts really cause a problem? Deleting them might well do.

Yes. Annoyingly, if an account is deleted versus 'permanently disabled,' it will currently show up as Anonymous. Dunno if DaveyD is intending a 'real' deletion,' but am assuming so...although if a post was done that long ago, it might stand to reason no one really worries about who it was made by, although I do find it personally annoying.

_________________
Are we not done with the same silly arguments and flames yet??!

@umisef

Back when I posted this, on the 5th Jan 2006, we had 1458 members that hadn't logged in, leaving around 2300 users on the site.

I may have therefore just muddled the two figures

_________________
Test sig (new)

You know, it's interesting... I had joined this forum many moons ago... perhaps 2001 or so, but that's just a guess... but at that time, I was on dialup, and using a shared peecee with my folks, so it was inconvenient to go participate in forums.

I came on here and posted occasionally, but sometimes it would be months to years between visits.

When we got highspeed, always-on internet service (and by that point, I already had a dedicated peecee of my own), I soon started hanging out on the connected IRC server here, and at the same time wound up becoming very active on this forum. Basically, I now pop in here every day, and typically have a browser window open to the top-threads page here, and then minimized, which I then maximize again and check every few hours to see what threads have updated.

Had we made this delete-the-inactive-users action a few months ago, or if my decision to become active on here hadn't happened yet... my older posts here would now say "Guest" on them, and it would no longer be possible to track what I'd said way back when...

That may or may not be a major issue, though.

On the other hand, how many highly-respected users are there who used to post here alot but haven't been around in awhile? What if Carl-S had been an active user here once, but went away for two years due to being busy with tech development? What if Dave Haynie had posted here alot at one point, but hadn't been here for awhile? What about the late Jay Miner, if he'd ever had one? Want to delete his account?

Maybe the delete-inactive-users thing should apply only to those that haven't had very many posts over the years, or that signed on but never posted... or maybe we should devise a way to restore those posts to that user if he ever returns and gets a new account under the old name... so that the Guest name gets replaced again with his username and avatar for those posts.

_________________
"I love peacenicks, they're so easy to conquer." --Ivan J Ironfist, the Dictator