Is Poly ever going to clean the 'members' list?

[DrSpike]

Originally posted by alva
Interesting, funny enough I just did one thread in this community and look what came up:

User Posts 
ThePlagueRat  41 
Big Crunch  36 
Ming  32 
Asuka  26 
Kamrat X  26 
devilmunchkin  24 
red_jon  22 
DrSpike  20 
FrustratedPoet  19

Yeah, when I saw BC's numbers last night I suspected he may have somehow cooked them. Your numbers seem much more representative of the true nature of my posts.

[Rasbelin]

Alva,

I assume that's from the picture thread, right?

[FrustratedPoet]

Probably. I can't think of any other thread here that devilmunchkin has posted a lot in.

Although I'm surprised I have 19 posts in it. The spam really starts to mount up after a while, doesn't it?

[Dauphin]

That thread is nearly a year old, and even if you add it to my tally of 15 most recently active threads you notice that alva, Ming and DrSpike are still head and shoulders above the rest.

It reveals even more how much spam Ming makes if you add in the other two topped threads.

[DrSpike]

I did some checking on the metaspam statistics. For those of you that don't know metaspamming is getting your +1's by commenting on the nature of others' spam.

The numbers for the same 15 threads are as follows:

BC: 124
Alva: 18
DrSpike: 18
FP: 17

Assorted others: less than 15.

[Harry Seldon]

Fifth place isn't too shabby. I think I'm the only non-emperor on the list.

[Panag]

hi ,

Mark , Dan , or Ming , how many people are members who have never posted , .....

how many people have not posted or logged on in 18 months , .....

if apolyton would need a clean up that seems to be the most logical , .....

have a nice day

[rah]

Originally posted by DrSpike
I did some checking on the metaspam statistics. For those of you that don't know metaspamming is getting your +1's by commenting on the nature of others' spam.

The numbers for the same 15 threads are as follows:

BC: 124
Alva: 18
DrSpike: 18
FP: 17

Assorted others: less than 15.

BC 124


RAH

[FrustratedPoet]

Ah, we appear to have entered the post-ironic meta-spam age, where the true artists - not content with spamming to comment on the spam of others - choose to spam to comment on people's spam that comments on the spam of others.

Where will it all end?

.... and I suspect Spike may have marginally embelished his statistics.

[DrSpike]

Originally posted by FrustratedPoet
.... and I suspect Spike may have marginally embelished his statistics.

How dare you!!

I am mortified............mortified I tell you!!

A fellow Southamptoner as well.

I truly am deeply insulted.





Ok maybe I embellished a little.

[FrustratedPoet]

At least you still had the good grace to put me beneath you in the list. Some things are impossible to deny even when you make up the results.

/me hopes Spikey doesn't notice FP's posts-per-day stat ... again

[Skanky Burns]

Sure, FP. We all know you don't spam. Honest.

/me can't help but feel no-one believes him

[Eli]

We should add a "_" to the beginning of the inactive users names. This way they dont get deleted, and active users can register the good nicknames.

[Adagio]

Eli >> That sounds like a solution... I don't those with 0 posts anyway, would mind it, since they aren't posting anyway...
There could be an "Last logged in" date, for each user, and if that date is more than 6 months old, they could just add '_' to the name

[Ming]

Just because somebody doesn't post, doesn't mean they aren't active users of the site. Just in case some of you aren't aware of it, there is a lot more here than just the forums.

And again... these "solutions" just sound like more work for the Admin... who have FAR better things to do with their time while on the site.