To cull or not to cull

**happygolucky** · 22-12-2010, 12:14 PM

That is the question - or at least one of them...

We have 7,240 members of whom a little under 2000 have not visited for 365 days. Should I cull them or keep them; think Roman amphitheatre; thumb up or down? On the other hand the limit could be two years or six months - thoughts?

Also there are many of those 7000 who have never posted at all; should they feel the steel of the guillotine or be allowed to lurk in the hope that they're having and providing all sorts of fun around the back door with the PM system?

Should we insist that new members post an introductory piece so that the community can know a little more about them and that failure to do so will result in an automatic ban.

Even more controversial; should I enable the 'user reputation' part of the system. See "http://www.vbulletin.com/docs/html/reputation" to understand a bit more about how it works and how thrillingly dangerous it could be.

Thoughts please either by reply or PM very welcome.

Chief Bottom

**Ronboyem** · 22-12-2010, 01:10 PM

Would it be too difficult to email these members to ask if they are still interested?

All they would need to do was log on again to remain members, otherwise if they do not take any action within two weeks they get deleted. If a member is still genuinly interested then they will have the chance to remain on the site.

I belive a cull is necessary to avoid wading through lots of defunct members and wating lots of time.

Ron

**anarchistic_masochist** · 22-12-2010, 06:21 PM

What's this "user reputation" thing? I daren't use the link lest I get locked out like Covspank did.

Cherry x

**jennyTv** · 23-12-2010, 11:47 AM

Originally Posted by anarchistic_masochist

What's this "user reputation" thing? I daren't use the link lest I get locked out like Covspank did.

Cherry x

I shouldn't worry about it Cherry your good reputation is long gone.

**Tutor** · 27-12-2010, 06:18 PM

You can't be sure that a member hasn't visited just because they haven't logged in. Posts can be read without logging in, so unless you want to post or read mail it saves time just to visit the site anonymously. As I get very little mail I tend to log in only once a week or so, just to make sure, though I visit the site most days. Maybe the site should be restricted to those who log in?

**mike_redbotham** · 28-12-2010, 08:38 PM

Originally Posted by algonania

That is the question - or at least one of them...

Even more controversial; should I enable the 'user reputation' part of the system. See "http://www.vbulletin.com/docs/html/reputation" to understand a bit more about how it works and how thrillingly dangerous it could be.

Thoughts please either by reply or PM very welcome.

Chief Bottom

This could be very useful, especially to record those who don't honour arrangements.
It could save us a lot of time and money if we knew who was not likely to turn up1

**happygolucky** · 07-01-2011, 04:12 PM

Very many thanks to those who've responded here, via PM and email. In reverse order I think the way forward is to not institute the reputation system at this time - it's too open to abuse and, I suspect would require continual moderation.

I think it's appropriate to email all members advising them that those who have not visited the site for a year will be removed in a months time. This has been suggested by at least four members - in varying forms - and I think it represents the best balance.

In the same email I would like to emphasise the successes that people have had so please post your experiences up in the appropriate place; the more 'flesh' we can encourage to regularly visit the site the more 'meat' there will be to go around and I suspect they'll visit if they can see it has a chance of offering what they want.

**anarchistic_masochist** · 07-01-2011, 07:23 PM

Originally Posted by algonania

Very many thanks to those who've responded here, via PM and email. In reverse order I think the way forward is to not institute the reputation system at this time - it's too open to abuse and, I suspect would require continual moderation.

I think it's appropriate to email all members advising them that those who have not visited the site for a year will be removed in a months time. This has been suggested by at least four members - in varying forms - and I think it represents the best balance.

In the same email I would like to emphasise the successes that people have had so please post your experiences up in the appropriate place; the more 'flesh' we can encourage to regularly visit the site the more 'meat' there will be to go around and I suspect they'll visit if they can see it has a chance of offering what they want.

Sounds very sensible and fair!

Nice one, algo!

Cherry x

**Smokey** · 09-01-2011, 12:57 PM

Maybe a cull of all the old posts had have run their course, and are hanging round like a bad smell, waiting for some newbie to drag them back up from the depths might also serve some purpose, also?
I'm sure i speak for others, too, who are fed up seeing a "new" post, replied to, only to find its from a "one post wonder" who hasnt even been on the site for 2 years, let alone contributed in that time.
Also (has this been mentioned?) .... is there a way to make people log on to see most of the stuff the forum has on it?
I tend to visit daily, but for personal reasons dont have passwords saved to computer. But i dont even have to log on to see whats new, etc.

Hanky

**happygolucky** · 10-01-2011, 10:12 AM

Thank you Hanky, Some good points.

Old posts can be culled but it's hard to draw the line in a satisfactory way. I'll certainly look into making users log in prior to being able to see too much content. I know that other sites do this but I've always been of the opinion that it might be counterproductive since some want to see what's available prior to joining up. Like a sort of free trial but then they, hopefully decide to buy.

I believe it's possible to restrict replies to those who have started a set number of their own threads and, in that way only those more engaged with the site would be able to rev-up an old thread.