23 Mar 07
Originally posted by beatlemaniaWhat if they had to go and do some kind of duty for a year and wanted to carry on when they get back? Not only Armed Forces personnel, but volunteers in third world countries? Imagine having survived drought and famine, bullets and bombs, or worse, and the thing that kept someone going was that when they got back they were going to win a game, only to find that they'd been removed?
something that would help this site is if people that have not moved within the past year be deleted
One of my clan members in currently in Afghanistan. He hasn't played for 190 days, and he won't move for another 200 at least. He's still got 2 clan games going and his opponents haven't timed him out (yet...). I'll be happy to see him back.
23 Mar 07
Originally posted by beatlemaniaSo what happens to all the games they played? Do they disappear to? Wouldn't want old games cluttering up the Public Games page.
it would take off a lot of the people on "Find Player" and also when you seach by country because there are some people that I have seen who have not moved for 500+ days
23 Mar 07
Originally posted by belgianfreakStopping them from posting in the forums would be a posative move.
maybe move them to an 'inactive player' status? They would reactivate their account instantly just by logging in or making a move, but if they hadn't moved for 3/6/12 months they wouldn't appear on searches or player tables.
23 Mar 07
Originally posted by huckleberryhoundsorry, I don't follow. Are you suggesting that people who hadn't moved should be restricted from posting? You of course know that this would simply result in people creating games simply to allow them to post
Stopping them from posting in the forums would be a posative move.
25 Mar 07
I think most sites never delete old, inactive accounts because they can boast to having 200,000+ members or whatever, even though maybe only 50,000 may have used a site in the last year.
The boast can be used for revenue-raising motives. A site that, on the face of it seems well-populated would be more attractive to join & subscribe to than if you knew only 25% of the total membership still actually use it.
Of course a member may re-join after a year or more, but I would think this happens fairly infrequently.
25 Mar 07
Originally posted by SquelchbelchMy account was closed at another chess site because I hadn't moved in thirty days. It didn't bother me because I don't play there, but just saying that it does happen. And there are people who haven't moved in 300-650 days but post on the forums. That seems a bit tacky at best.
I think most sites never delete old, inactive accounts because they can boast to having 200,000+ members or whatever, even though maybe only 50,000 may have used a site in the last year.
The boast can be used for revenue-raising motives. A site that, on the face of it seems well-populated would be more attractive to join & subscribe to than if you kne ...[text shortened]... e a member may re-join after a year or more, but I would think this happens fairly infrequently.