Our oldest forum members?

[stevehuckss396]

I just saw a post of our newest forum member. Fine looking chap Marv!!

Who are the say. . . .. 25 oldest members? The first 25 to become members. This is coming from a purely historical point of view. Must be cool to find something like this when it has a hand full of members and see it swell to 6000+

 

[cfellows]

That's pretty easy to find out. Just go to the members list and click on the join date. That will sort the list on the date members joined the forum.

Chuck

 

[cfellows]

Also interesting to click on the number of posts and see who the more "verbose" (excuse me, contributing) members are. :big:

Chuck

 

[stevehuckss396]

Also interesting to click on the number of posts and see who the more "verbose" (excuse me, contributing) members are. :big:

Chuck

Watch what you type Chuck, we are both on the first page. Haahaha!

That is cool. Never thought to do that.

 

[Majorstrain]

Delving a bit deeper,

Only 26.8% of members have keyboards that still work or 1520 members :big: put another way, only 26.8% of members have posted 1 or more times.
Thats probably a good percentage for an online forum.

One small anomaly, the database has total members at 5666 but the forum total is 6291.

Cheers for now,
Phil

 

[Cedge]

Phil
I can explain the reason for the discrepancy... even if I cant tell you why the board system doesn't pick it up and self correct.

The moderators were recently granted permission to delete/ ban users, in order to give the admins a bit of a breather because of the large number of spammers we've attracted.... due to those very same numbers. Seems we've become a bit of a honey hole for them and they constantly try to invade our space.

I and a few other mods have been going back through the membership list and tracking them down all the way back to day one, when we started the board and we've eliminated them as we found them. We've been careful not to disturb any active members and when in doubt, we've left the member's status alone. Sort of a "tie goes to the runner" criteria.

To say the least, we've all been amazed at just how many of the vermin had tried to nest among us. We've killed off a lot of Johnson enlargement site links, porn links and a huge number of get rich quick schemes, not to mention some other rather strange anomalies that I hesitate to mention here.

The discrepancy is a reflection of the number of people who can no longer bother those of us who want to avoid being spammed, in what has become our sanctuary. Just another way the mods and admins are working quietly behind the scenes to keep the place from being overrun.

Steve

 

[rleete]

As an admin on another forum, and a moderator on a couple more, I appreciate the effort that goes into keeping the spammers at bay.

One rule I use is what I call the 'one and out' member. If someone signs up, makes a single post (or none) and then hasn't been on in a while (usually 6 months, minimum), the account is deleted. I try to send an email explaining, but sometimes the address is a dead one.

This has the added bonus of keeping the membership numbers down, which attracts less attention from the spammers.

 

[Maryak]

As an admin on another forum, and a moderator on a couple more, I appreciate the effort that goes into keeping the spammers at bay.

One rule I use is what I call the 'one and out' member. If someone signs up, makes a single post (or none) and then hasn't been on in a while (usually 6 months, minimum), the account is deleted. I try to send an email explaining, but sometimes the address is a dead one.

This has the added bonus of keeping the membership numbers down, which attracts less attention from the spammers.

Thanks for that some good guidelines :bow: Ah the penalties of success :

Best Regards
Bob

 

[user 4756]

Can I please add a reply so that I have my first post; one more and I may be allowed to stay?

Seriously though, I feel awkward posting unless I have something to contribute; I am, perhaps erroneously, conscious of bandwidths and site sizes.
On second thoughts; if it was a problem there would be a post about it! Doh! :

 

[Cedge]

Andy rest assured, we're taking all precautions not to remove anyone who is actively posting and even bending backwards to make sure "active" lurkers are not caught up in the net. Lurking is still an honored institution on online forums, even if we'd prefer everyone post sometime. Some just can't do it.

Steve

 

[bearcar1]

It is true in my mind that a 'one and out' rule, *could* be an effective method of culling the herd so to speak, but, I do not agree at all with that methodology. As has been discussed, there are numbers of members that enjoy lurkingwatching and keeping a low profile. We as members have no way of knowing how many times or for that matter how often these same individuals are in our midst so it is impossible for us to tell if they are active or not in that manner of speaking. I have every confidence that our administrators are doing the very best possible job they can in performing housecleaning and appreciate all of the hard work they are doing in providing to us a terrific place to gather and share our common interest.

BC1
Jim

 

[itowbig]

im a faily new member and when im watching or lurking i most of the time just log in so i can get the whole experience and then say if i wanted to post i could .
TO mods and admins and all who keep the spammers out very good job THANK YOU

 

[joe d]

Just curious, is there a mechanism for the admins/mods to see how often someone is logged in? I post on this forum, but there are a couple that I have been a member of for quite a while without yet posting as I don't feel I have anything to contribute through either sheer ignorance of the subject, or a really "newby" level of understanding. On those sites, I lurk and learn ;D.

Joe

 

[Lew Hartswick]

This has been an interesting exercise. I never though of looking into those stats.
I see I'm on page5 time wise. and only in 300's post wise.
I thought the subject line was going to show up the "oldest fogies".
...lew...

 

[rleete]

It is true in my mind that a 'one and out' rule, *could* be an effective method of culling the herd so to speak, but, I do not agree at all with that methodology.

You also have to consider last time logged in, hence the 6 month part of it. Posting has little to do with it. If someone shows up, it resets the timer, and no deletion. If they haven't even logged in going on a year, chances are they're not coming back.

Lurkers are not subject to the rule, because every time they lurk, it resets the date.

 

[RollaJohn]

I think it is a good thing that membership isn't dependent just upon posting. Just imagine how bloated the archives would be if every time a new member joined and posted in the Welcome board, almost all 5600+ members posted a welcome comment in response just to keep their membership active! I do enjoy reading the Welcome board even though I seldom if ever post on it.

I missed the first twenty days of the forum's existence. If the number of posts I have contributed are spread evenly over this period they will just barely average one per month. In that time there have been many dry spells, between both posting dates and log in dates.

 

[rake60]

Now you have ME looking!

July 8th 2007 was a rainy Sunday.
The lawn needed a mowing but the rain put that on hold so I was parked in the office chair at the computer
checking replies to questions that I had posted on the hobby machining forums that I was a member of
at that time. That led to reading reading replies to "Newbies" on those forums. I didn't like the way the
"Newbies" were being treated by the "Old Boys Clubs" of those forums.

A combination of my Scottish temper and the beer in my belly convinced me to do something about that
and HMEM was born.

In two days time it had 36 registered members.

I was shocked by THAT!

What has happened since then is absolutely amazing!

Thanks to all of you for your participation and interest in HMEM.

Rick

 

[Tin Falcon]

rest assureed we are not forcing any requirements on folks as far as posting. if you sign on it shows you as active. we like folks to post the only members being cleaned off the roles are one who never posted and signed up at least a year ago and are also have not lurked in that time. If you only lurk as a guest then you are not an active member.
Tin

 

[HS93]

there is a way to tell how long someone has been a member all you do do is wave your mouse pointer over peoples name on the left and look at the bottom of the page stevehuckss396 is 1976 member cfellows 121 etc but I am prob telling people something they already know

Peter

Oh and I am 626

 

[stevehuckss396]

all you do do is wave your mouse pointer over peoples name on the left and look at the bottom of the page but I am prob telling people something they already know

I had no idea!!


That makes Rake60 #2, can I be #1? Who would be #1 if Rake is #2?