Member number... Topic is solved

[gmads]

If I were the admin I would certainly remove all the inactive accounts —meaning, those that haven't posted anything— older than two months

These must be the silent readers that often visit us. I don't know if that would encourage views if we started deleting them!

That's why I set a time frame. Ok, extend it to three or four months. Anyway, it was an "if I were…" comment, not an actual recommendation.

*** added

It would be interesting to have the statistics of { registered, last-logged-in, and number of visits } data.

[Corinnebelle]

@gmads I think there is such a thing. viewtopic.php?p=65716-173-nationalities ... ome#p65716

It may be a good idea to delete them after a certain time frame, I don't know too much about this.

An interesting metric would be see how much of a drop off there is between the time a person signs up and when a person has about 0% chance of posting anything.

They may sign up as a way to support Duome. If they never log in, I wonder if they'd know their account has been deleted?

[gmads]

I was thinking about more detailed stats. If there were a page listing the registered, number of visits and last-logged-in info… a more accurate picture could be made regarding user interaction.

I wonder if they'd know their account has been deleted?

They wouldn't, unless a message were to be sent. But… would it matter?

[Deleted User 4833]

If I were the admin I would certainly remove all the inactive accounts —meaning, those that haven't posted anything— older than two months

These must be the silent readers that often visit us. I don't know if that would encourage views if we started deleting them!

I would definitely expect there to be people who join just to read and keep track of what is "unread" for them. Which is hard if you don't have an account.

[Corinnebelle]

I would definitely expect there to be people who join just to read and keep track of what is "unread" for them. Which is hard if you don't have an account.

Do you have be signed in to see the unread?

[gmads]

If I were the admin I would certainly remove all the inactive accounts —meaning, those that haven't posted anything— older than two months

These must be the silent readers that often visit us. I don't know if that would encourage views if we started deleting them!

I would definitely expect there to be people who join just to read and keep track of what is "unread" for them. Which is hard if you don't have an account.

Thus, the time frame criteria.

[gmads]

I would definitely expect there to be people who join just to read and keep track of what is "unread" for them. Which is hard if you don't have an account.

Do you have be signed in to see the unread?

To see the list, yes. To read the thread, no, but you need to have the link (address).

[Deleted User 4833]

I would definitely expect there to be people who join just to read and keep track of what is "unread" for them. Which is hard if you don't have an account.

Do you have be signed in to see the unread?

Yes. Further, if you have an account and are signed in, you can go directly to the last post you yourself read, which you can't do if you are just lurking on the forum without an account.

I created an account on a different forum for exactly that purpose, so I could come back and continue reading where I left off without having to figure out what I had and hadn't read each time I came back. And I never ended up posting on that forum, but I was on the forum for a number of years (as far as I know my account my still be active).

Which is why, @gmads, a time limit for deleting users who never posted doesn't make sense.

Plus, it'd be a turn-off to people, why bother doing it?

[gmads]

And I never ended up posting on that forum, but I was on the forum for a number of years (as far as I know my account my still be active).

Which is why, @gmads, a time limit for deleting users who never posted doesn't make sense.

Plus, it'd be a turn-off to people, why bother doing it?

The last-logged info would be considered in the criteria: that haven't posted anything and that haven't logged in the last x months.

I can imagine two possible reasons.

1. Database cleanup/optimization. I know, it isn't that much, but nevertheless, I'd do it.

2. improving stats. I'd rather have my site numbers show that there is almost a 100% user participation than showing that only a 16% of my users participate.

Facts are stubborn, but statistics are more pliable. — Mark Twain

[MoniqueMaRie]

The member number 10000 has already been reached and soon there will be 10000 users in the forum.

[Corinnebelle]

The front end listed member number [Actual member number is higher.]

9999.jpg (8.88 KiB) Viewed 840 times

1000 members.jpg (8.28 KiB) Viewed 838 times

[gmads]

Now we need them to start posting and interacting!

[dakanga]

I have just done a brief analysis of our membership in this community, and thought others may be interested.

Accounts that have joined
2498 from 9 Feb 22 to 30 Jun 22
2479 from 1 Jul 22 to 31 Dec 22
2607 from 1 Jan 23 to 30 Jun 23
97 from 1 Jul 23 to 19 Dec 23

Of those that have made more than 1 post

Last posted date :
257 from 9 Feb 22 to 30 Jun 22
309 from 1 Jul 22 to 31 Dec 22
371 from 1 Jan 23 to 30 Jun 23
685 from 1 Jul 23 to 19 Dec 23

So while joining rates are less, we have improved participation rates. If it is I have analysed these results correctly.
Or is it that the final period of figures is harder to compare ?

Last posted date for the last 6 months:
68 July 23
79 Aug 23
106 Sep 23
114 Oct 23
116 Nov 23
202 1st Dec to 19 Dec 23

I will have to think about this some more. What do others think about these figures, that it tells us about the interaction on our site ?

[gmads]

At the "Member number" thread there have been some other similar reviews.

• BB
• gmads

[dakanga]

Thank you for this - that is a VERY interesting thread I had not read.

This post has now been moved to this Discussion Thread

Thanks also for all you do @gmads !

[dakanga]

Along with the figures of total members

figures
8932 with 0 posts (no moderation required)
1544 with under 100 posts
78 over 100 posts

10554 total members

So that means that for the couple of years this forum has been up there are under 1700 members that actively participated up until 19/12/23.

also see : viewtopic.php?p=90758-looking-for-moderators#p90758

This may also be a factor for why there are not many people that have been asked would they be interested in being a moderator here - as this is not a very large community when considering this especially in a global sense.

edited and added :
we have one admin
15 global moderators and
15 forum moderators.

approx ratio 1 mod to 57 users that have been active in the last 2 years. Though this does not in any way tell the true picture. It is an interesting figure.

Number of active posters since 30 Jun 23 : 685 / 31 =
ratio 1 mod to about 22 posters that have been active in about this last 6 months

this also does not show the full picture, as some mods are not active for example.

[Corinnebelle]

We've hit the 15,000 member and over! I missed it. Nearly a year since the 10,000th member.

viewtopic.php?p=85714#p85714

15338 members now.

We also have 203 flags!

app.php/flags

Nearly 3,000 US members!

Last year:

viewtopic.php?p=89604#p89604

[gmads]

And things remain basically the same, in every possible sense…

Aber keine Sorge, ich werde schweigen…

[XeO3]

We've hit the 15,000 member and over! I missed it. Nearly a year since the 10,000th member.

viewtopic.php?p=85714#p85714

15338 members now.

We also have 203 nations!

app.php/flags

Nearly 3,000 US members!

Last year:

viewtopic.php?p=89604#p89604

Are we counting each flag as a nationality? Because I have no link at all to the flag I used when I signed up (Botswana's) or the one I'm currently flying (Swaziland's) - other than I'm a flag buff & like the designs & colors. Those two are part of my collection...

[Corinnebelle]

@XeO3 Okay I should say flags not nations. The EU flag is not a nation, and people pick flags for the language they're learning or they pick their own depending on their choice.