Latest Club News from Bootie
- Thread starter Bootie
- Start date
Is there a downside (tech wise) to have members who are inactive? I'm not for kicking members out if not absolutely necessary. Let's say something happens in RL that forces you to take a time out from gaming, then it is unfortunaty to have to start all over with a new memebership.
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2010
- Messages
- 13,066
- Reaction score
- 8,053
- Age
- 61
The day came, a pity ... [emoji53]
Enviado desde mi LG-D375AR mediante Tapatalk
Like i said in a earlier post Richtig told me he was dropping out of CM playing.....Didn't think he meant the Forum as well
I like it as it cuts away 'the baggage.' (Will also be key for a new ELO driven ladder). However if a member does return (particularly from RL circumstances) then maybe there should be a way to reinstate them with their old account.I hate seeing members leave... sometimes I consider abolishing the cron job entirely as so many members joining are re-joining.
Also helps us lot still here with regarding who's who.
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
I hate seeing members leave... sometimes I consider abolishing the cron job entirely as so many members joining are re-joining.
I'm sure its been discussed previously, but any reason not to at least raise the cut-off time to say 12 months?
Both sides of this discussion have merit. The cronjob serves a purpose in weeding out the "chaff". However, it is indiscriminate. It would be good to have a way to reinstate those who were deleted by the cronjob, and later wish to return.
I don't understand the whining about deleting members who stop participating. I really don't.
@mTk ... I agree.
However, if you wanted to insert a variable period of reply for the mighty cron, if it was possible, is to tie it to something like messages.
ie: If mTg did not contribute for three months... he would have a further 4572 days to remain a member!
Whereas a "non-member" who never posted would be gone after a day.
However, if you wanted to insert a variable period of reply for the mighty cron, if it was possible, is to tie it to something like messages.
ie: If mTg did not contribute for three months... he would have a further 4572 days to remain a member!
Whereas a "non-member" who never posted would be gone after a day.
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2010
- Messages
- 13,066
- Reaction score
- 8,053
- Age
- 61
I always agreed that three months of waiting was enough.
I keep that criterion.
But I do not like to see old members disappear without really knowing what happened to them.
I once proposed that antiquity should be respected, for example members of more than one or two years old, be expected more than three months.
Mr. Numbers or Mehlsack are examples to consider.
I keep that criterion.
But I do not like to see old members disappear without really knowing what happened to them.
I once proposed that antiquity should be respected, for example members of more than one or two years old, be expected more than three months.
Mr. Numbers or Mehlsack are examples to consider.
Bootie sends members that are about to be dropped emails letting them know of their pending removal. Only after they fail to respond to even that overture do they get removed. If they don't want us to know why they're leaving (or can't be "bothered") off with their heads!
The cronjob has just run and this is the list of deleted users: Andrew Kulin, mad_col, oldmanjim43, Frawd Digger, Gavran Tulugaq, Brogan Redwood, Lt Charles, Midgard, Richardtravis6191, Scott Wiebke, Whiskeypapa, Richardwalter
No harm...
The cronjob is literally evil. It did TakeTheBody.
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
I guess the CJ can get away with anything. Like no Harmes, no foul.