Removing older and unactive members...

At the very least I'd say delete those who registered 1+ years ago and never posted. It wouldn't be the largest number of accounts, but it would clean things up.
 
Dont do it.

Loosing numbers on a forum is never a good idea. First thing I do when I register at a new forum is check the member base, never who has how many posts of what. Granted I will look at the top posters but different story.

Anyways, we all know how many people actually are active here. And deleting anyone over a year old with 0 posts would be murder. Does anyone have any idea how many that would actually be? Not to mention you loose the "Members: 43,217". Who knows what that could go down to. Its a large number regardless, even if we lost half. But you gotta see my point.

Smaller, more efficient, faster database? Would improve performance.

Shouldnt be a problem. Plenty of forums with 100,000 plus members, and they run just as fast, or faster then this one. Minus the white screens as well.
 
Dont do it.

Loosing numbers on a forum is never a good idea. First thing I do when I register at a new forum is check the member base, never who has how many posts of what. Granted I will look at the top posters but different story.

Anyways, we all know how many people actually are active here. And deleting anyone over a year old with 0 posts would be murder. Does anyone have any idea how many that would actually be? Not to mention you loose the "Members: 43,217". Who knows what that could go down to. Its a large number regardless, even if we lost half. But you gotta see my point.



Shouldnt be a problem. Plenty of forums with 100,000 plus members, and they run just as fast, or faster then this one. Minus the white screens as well.

We can still keep that number but rename it as:
Registrations: xxxx
instead of
Members: xxxx

Or something RELATED to what I've said.
 
So you're all saying quantity over quality? I don't know about you, but I'd rather be part of something known for quality rather than quantity.
 
Dont do it.

Loosing numbers on a forum is never a good idea. First thing I do when I register at a new forum is check the member base, never who has how many posts of what. Granted I will look at the top posters but different story.

Anyways, we all know how many people actually are active here. And deleting anyone over a year old with 0 posts would be murder. Does anyone have any idea how many that would actually be? Not to mention you loose the "Members: 43,217". Who knows what that could go down to. Its a large number regardless, even if we lost half. But you gotta see my point.



Shouldnt be a problem. Plenty of forums with 100,000 plus members, and they run just as fast, or faster then this one. Minus the white screens as well.
I concur. I don't see how deleting a few members from the database will speed it up or make it more efficient. There are many forums with way more members than this one with perfectly functioning databases.
 
exactly. theres onlt 42k members overall. one forum i go on has over 750k members, then theres guests. it runs fine.
stats are quite important. if i see a site with few members i dont tend to stick around much. thats also the reason why its hard to make a new forum work.
 
Back
Top Bottom