Why was my "12 Days" thread deleted?

[ixnay]

I would say every 5000 starting with 35K since it's a nice round number.

[DrSpike]

And the big milestone threads can always be bumped for small milestones anyway.

[Adagio]

Originally posted by Ming
I thought it was obvious... with the record speed of new registrations, the last thing we need is YET ANOTHER thread everytime we pass a meaningless new thousand level. Try to keep them to important levels.

What

You mean 1,000 isn't an important level

[Tuberski]

Originally posted by Ming
I thought it was obvious... with the record speed of new registrations, the last thing we need is YET ANOTHER thread everytime we pass a meaningless new thousand level. Try to keep them to important levels.

What is an important level?

Besides, that was the point, the speed in which we increased by 1000 members. Not the 1000 members themselves.

ACK!

[ixnay]

Since it looks like Apolyton is going to hit 34,000 members while I'm on my plane tomorrow, I'll celebrate prematurely.

[alva]

I'll celebrate prematurely.

Frequent occurence?

[Kuciwalker]

They should delete every member with zero posts who registered over, say four months ago. Start there, then slowly start tightening it. Get rid of all of the inactives.

[Locutus]

Originally posted by alva
In a year Locutus is gonna be P O for not being able to find this one

Don't worry, I had already added 33k to the table (as well as 34k prematurely for today )

They should delete every member with zero posts who registered over, say four months ago. Start there, then slowly start tightening it. Get rid of all of the inactives.

Nah, then CFC would catch up with us and might get over their inferiority complex -- we wouldn't want that to happen

[Skanky Burns]

Originally posted by skywalker
They should delete every member with zero posts who registered over, say four months ago. Start there, then slowly start tightening it. Get rid of all of the inactives.

Why?


They don't take up much space in the database, and being inactive they take up absolutely no CPU cycles of the server. There is also a problem with defining inactives as those with zero posts - it is possible to be an active off-topicer and have no on-topic posts. Add to that the fact that comparisons between Apolyton and similar sites will be skewed in their favour (unless they delete most of there registered users too). Finally there is the risk of deleting someone who registered but hasn't posted yet. There may be many a lurker that has registered just so they have access to the 2nd page of threads/forums.

Although apart from those trifles it is a good idea.

[alva]

Although apart from those trifles it is a good idea.

You sound like a manager...