# So many posters, so few posts....



## Nyaricus (Jul 8, 2006)

Just a question from a curious ENny, but I was wondering: why is it that there are something like 655 *pages* of members who have never posted once listed in EN Worlds memeber list who haven't had their accounts deleted? I mean, there are those who lurk here an whatnot, spare those people, of course - but for those whom have (a) zero posts and (b) haven't been back since November of 2002 - why are they still registered?

Is it simply too much work to go through and delete them all? Would EN World experience any signifigant difference, in regards to the speed of page loading - heck, is this a good idea at all?

I'm just curious - it just seems like a lot of wasted space, is all.

I guess that's all


----------



## Morrus (Jul 8, 2006)

It takes up pretty much zero space, you never know when or if they might choose to use their account - so there's no real gain in deleting them.   In addition, messageboards which prune suffer advertising disadvantages compared to those which don't (and not pruning seems to the standard).  

We used to prune all the time (in fact, I think I recall us having a thing where any thread over 2 years old or something got deleted, as well as members).  We currently, therefore, suffer from much lower "stats" than some similar sized messageboards who have not pruned.  It makes it harder to attract advertisers with limited budgets who therefore see other locations as more desirable when, in fact, they're not.


----------



## Dog Moon (Jul 8, 2006)

Hehe.  I started a thread on EnWorld a while ago on the same subject.  I think it got lost in the crash though.  I curious as to why there were so many people who had signed up and didn't have a single post, though it's neat to think that with one post, you're already ahead of half the people on EnWorld.


----------



## Mark (Jul 8, 2006)

Gotta have a screenname to vote in polls, for one thing.


----------



## Henry (Jul 8, 2006)

We've found that our community is made up of about four different types of posters:

--The limited core, such as myself, of guys and gals who regularly post; the devoted netizen.

--Those who lurk a LOT, either as much or more than the devoted crowd, but who might have all of 4 to 10 posts a year to their name. They just don't see the need to post most of the time when someone else has already voiced their particular opinion.

--Those who signed up, and NEVER posted. I've even known WotC personnel and freelancers who have done this. Maybe they vote in a poll occasionally, maybe not, but they signed up, and just log in and really don't have a lot to say publically.

--Alternate ID's. Some of the alts are as active as the first account the person signed up with. 

We do some pruning, but we're sometimes reluctant to prune member accounts exactly because of what Russ said; it'd be more of an annoyance to finally have something to say, and can't, than any annoyance for us to prune something that costs minimal server space and time. Heck, I know for a fact that there are members of my own gaming group who fall into EACH of the FOUR categories! (One has alts, two regularly post, one posts infrequently, and one has registered and NEVER ONCE posted.)


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jul 9, 2006)

Mark said:
			
		

> Gotta have a screenname to vote in polls, for one thing.



 You also need a screenname to view attachments and such.

There are reasons for lurkers to have a screenname. Just because they have no posts means little.


----------



## Knight Otu (Jul 9, 2006)

Henry said:
			
		

> --Alternate ID's. Some of the alts are as active as the first account the person signed up with.



There are only five real people on ENWorld. Everyone else is an alt of those.  
There are a few shared accounts as well, sometimes being an alternate account (the Living ... Judges for example).


----------



## Alzrius (Jul 9, 2006)

Henry said:
			
		

> --The limited core, such as myself, of guys and gals who regularly post; the devoted netizen.




We be representin'!


----------



## EricNoah (Jul 9, 2006)

Let's see, you probably have to be registered in order to subscribe to threads, too, right?  So if you were interested in following a thread (a story hour, a house rules thread, etc.) without actually posting, you'd register but not necessarily post.


----------



## Siriak (Jul 9, 2006)

I am one of the lurkers.  I really enjoy going through the lists of forum topics since I can almost always find a recent thread covering something that I have been thinking about.  I only post, however, if I have something new or insightful to add to the thread.  I can't monitor this list at work, so, by the time I read these posts at home,  all of my thoughts have already been covered.  Also not making use of the "me too!" types of posts really cuts down on my stats.

Anyway, I am curious to see whay number post this is for me.  It has been a while !   

Vince


----------



## Nyaricus (Jul 9, 2006)

Henry said:
			
		

> --Those who signed up, and NEVER posted. I've even known WotC personnel and freelancers who have done this. Maybe they vote in a poll occasionally, maybe not, but they signed up, and just log in and really don't have a lot to say publically.



What about those who have signed up and never posted and now no longer frequent EN World? That was kinda the (yes, slightly obscure) point I was trying to ask about.

I understand (and am completely cool with) the lurkers here at EN World (hi *Siriak*!) but what about those who no longer lurk - who simply aren't here.

*Morrus*, I understand how pruning generally doesn't seem very nice - heck I don't like that idea of it personally - but what I am talking about is not the fruit of the tree, but the seeds sitting on the ground rotting; even lurkers have the potential to get a postcount.

What about deleting accounts that haven't _visited_ EN World in the last 3 years, and who have not posted once? That was the question I was trying to ask.


----------



## Dog Moon (Jul 9, 2006)

I hope I don't sound like an ass in saying this, Nyaricus, but what's the point in deleting the accounts?  Is there any real reason besides to make the number of pages with accounts a little shorter?

[We've seen some reasons NOT to, but I was wondering if there were any reasons to.  Heck, if people like us hadn't spent time looking at the Member's List, we would never know how many users there are with zero posts.  If it really does take up like no space, it isn't really affecting us in any way...]  So, just curious.


----------



## Glyfair (Jul 9, 2006)

Knight Otu said:
			
		

> There are only five real people on ENWorld. Everyone else is an alt of those.




IIRC, it was 3 originally (Bill Gates, Eric & the person reading the post).  We get up to 4 counting Morrus.  Whose the 5th?


----------



## Crothian (Jul 9, 2006)

Glyfair said:
			
		

> IIRC, it was 3 originally (Bill Gates, Eric & the person reading the post).  We get up to 4 counting Morrus.  Whose the 5th?




Piratecat.  I'm some random computer program someone forgot to turn off.


----------



## Morrus (Jul 9, 2006)

Nyaricus said:
			
		

> *Morrus*, I understand how pruning generally doesn't seem very nice - heck I don't like that idea of it personally - but what I am talking about is not the fruit of the tree, but the seeds sitting on the ground rotting; even lurkers have the potential to get a postcount.
> 
> What about deleting accounts that haven't _visited_ EN World in the last 3 years, and who have not posted once? That was the question I was trying to ask.




Because there's no absolutely no reason to!


----------



## Mark (Jul 10, 2006)

Knight Otu said:
			
		

> There are only five real people on ENWorld. Everyone else is an alt of those.







			
				Glyfair said:
			
		

> IIRC, it was 3 originally (Bill Gates, Eric & the person reading the post).  We get up to 4 counting Morrus.  Whose the 5th?







			
				Crothian said:
			
		

> Piratecat.





Nope.  Sorry.  I always take the fifth.  I'd rather not elaborate, for obvious reasons.


----------



## WanderingMonster (Jul 10, 2006)

Mark said:
			
		

> Nope.  Sorry.  I always take the fifth.  I'd rather not elaborate, for obvious reasons.




Bwahaha!  And then some of us only post to point at teh funny and laugh.


----------



## Mark (Jul 10, 2006)

WanderingMonster said:
			
		

> Bwahaha!  And then some of us only post to point at teh funny and laugh.




Those are the most important posts. 


Oh, yeah.  Gotta have an account to read those groovy articles from the front page of the site.


----------



## hafrogman (Jul 11, 2006)

Glyfair said:
			
		

> IIRC, it was 3 originally (Bill Gates, Eric & the person reading the post).  We get up to 4 counting Morrus.  Whose the 5th?




Eric's grandmother, duh.


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jul 12, 2006)

hafrogman said:
			
		

> Eric's grandmother, duh.



 I thought she was a lurker.


----------



## Knight Otu (Jul 12, 2006)

Jdvn1 said:
			
		

> I thought she was a lurker.



Are you trying to imply that, somehow, she doesn't count?


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jul 13, 2006)

Knight Otu said:
			
		

> Are you trying to imply that, somehow, she doesn't count?



 Why would I imply that? Just that she doesn't have an account.

One could argue she doesn't _need_ an account.


----------

