a lot of guests looking at the members list

[John Caswell]

Generally I am against the data protection act as it has been badly implemented, (as usual when you get politicians involved - look at the Covid 19 rules, they are a 13 humped camel).
I agree that the non-members being banned from viewing as it is an easy way for spammers to obtain info, especially email addresses.

John

[bob orbell]

Thank you for the information Richard-John.

[Greg.]

My thanks to you both as well.

[Richard]

Thanks Bob and Greg for alerting us to this. Looking around the bb support forums suggests the setting is what you want it to be. Changing it certainly was just a one button off/on change with no drama – so long as you get the right button!

This lead to a look at some of our older accounts to check things were in order. Many were last visited over 10 years ago and have made no posts. Some had spam messages on the user page. These had come from another “member” not from outside hacking and were spam rather than malicious. So no security issues as far as I could see and regarding privacy laws no issue other than don’t put anything in your profile that you aren’t happy for any other “member” to see. Check your page regularly. If anyone wants their account deleting let us know. You can always register again subject to Matthew’s security screening.

Our spammed accounts have now gone along with the spammer but we haven’t been through all accounts yet. Be assured we don’t have access to PMs nor want it. We can clear, but not view the contents, or delete the account completely. The info we hold is just the info given when you joined up plus what you’ve added since.

The question of removing non-active accounts is always ongoing and it would be good to hear what you all think. I had a quick chat with Matthew about it and we have our own “algorithms” when considering it. Personally I’m glad to find I’ve been removed from some site I’ve not visited for years. What is the consensus?

[pre65]

As a first step, how about this ?

Any member who has never posted, and not logged in for over 5 years gets deleted.

Mind you, do these inactive members cause anyone (apart from Bob) a problem ?

[bob orbell]

Yes, you both no my thoughts, and I told Richard I would not mention it again, so I will leave it to others and the moderators / admin. Bob

[Greg.]

I’ve been considering what benefit there would be to truncate the membership of non visiting members and really their isn’t much. There is one reason that would benefit me. Sometimes, when I am searching for something, my memory is insufficient to make good use of the search engine. Knowing the member’s name who made the entry being searched for is useful, but often I can’t recall that either, but scrolling through the member list can often prompt a recall of the name I’m looking for. It’s a bit like when you’re writing something and there is a word you want to use but you can’t remember it. I find working through the alphabet in my head often prompts me to remember the word when I come to the letter that starts that word.

Therefore, a reduced member list could make (my) life easier in the instance of a shorter list to negotiate.

One thing to consider, though. My understanding is that forums such as this do have a commercial value. Certainly forums such as AOS and HiFi Wigwam have changed ownership for money over the years. Somewhere on the Internet there is a website that lists the commercial value of forums such as this. Certainly I can remember AOS being listed and think it’s value was £15,000 at the time. I believe one of the criteria for that value is the size of the membership, so I suppose the decision to reduce the membership size or not is Matthew’s. If he is unconcerned about the value aspect then a five year no show rule seems fine although I’d go for a three year cut off. Anyone who loses membership this way can readily rejoin if they want or need to.

Just my three p’worth.

[Richard]

All good points thanks,

Philip says, 5 years and 0 posts, and is there a reason or anything to gain,

Bob, I think, would prefer members posting or gone,

Greg points out fewer members would make seaching easier and that there may be a commercial value of the forum which may be affected.

I'll add my thought that deleted members' posts will appear as "guest" and too many posts converted to "guest" might spoil the reading of some older threads.

There might also be a saving in storage and processing time but as they won't have any/many posts it might not be much. Does anyone have experience of the benefits of this?

I should say this is just "sounding out" all our thoughts at this stage and Matthew will decide as part of getting it up to date. Better to ask than wish we hadn't deleted someone in error!

Basing it solely on members who've never posted would be the safest option.

As a guide,

10 years and less than 1 posts would lose about 1/4 of our members
5 years and less than 1 posts would lose about 1/2
3 years and less than 1 posts would lose about 2/3

So, any other thoughts, and based on when members last signed in and how many posts they have made, what would you think was reasonable?

[pre65]

I often look at the page which shows what part of the forum members are looking at, sometimes it prompts me to visit an old topic.

Today, on page 1, there are 6 guests looking at a 2007 thread about off topic PC help.

That seems suspicious to me, but what on earth could be the reason ?