Ban inactive users

[Scrubs]

I think all inactive users should be banned. It's just easier to have active users and clear lg's space of trolls who just come to leech. Active can be defined in different ways, but each definition would have a different ban limit. The ban wouldn't be permanent, just as many days as they were inactive. I understand people have lives, but untill it revolves around LG we can't let everyone not contribute o:
For example
Stage 1-Active, has atleast 5 posts today, absent for 2 days a week
Stage 2-Active,has atleast 2 posts today, absent for 3-5 days a week
Stage 3-Active, no posts, absent for 0 days a week
.. and so on. This would increase traffic and with more active users there's a better chance in reeling in staff members, those of which would act as our spam filters & have to oblige by the same limits to keep there status quo.

OR lg could punnish for not making atleast 1 helpfull post per day (OF WHICH I'M GUILTY OF) - If a user does not post one thread or reply per day a post of theres will be deleted taking from the post count.

[lilvoice32]

but what if i go on vacation or something?

[CL0V3R]

Personally I think this is a bad idea. There are lots of users who contribute but go inactive all the time.
I think this would piss more people off than it would help, plus it would give more work to the admins/mods.

[Scrubs]

Ok, for the people who have to go on vacations they have to check in to make it so they won't find there account banned when they come back.& there could be a quota a user has to obtain in order to be free of the limits each month.In order to make it more fun contests are already active so it won't be like a job, but you get rewarded and this would not affect many users.

[Torian]

What about those that come here simply to hang out with their nostalgia buddies in the JY and post just for fun. Sure it's an exploiting community, but it sorta is also like a family.

[Smithno13]

Bad idea. I mean, by your definition I am a leeching troll who deserves to be banned.

[Scrubs]

@Torian yes, but usually people join for a different reason and the JY is just part of the package. If someone joined for maplestory and decided to have most of their posts in JY it's increasing the community, but not the quality of the forum. Its great to have users of all different post relevance, but one (no-spam) post won't harm anyone and will just help the forum.

[Torian]

But don't you think that adding a goal for users to reach such as cash prizes and other incentives would bring more members/force the members that wish to win to post more helpful posts in a positive manner? Why should we force users to become contributers if they don't wish to? This isn't a community that forces you to be anyone you don't wish to be.

[Scrubs]

Well, the levels are adjustable Inactive can be defined differently. You wouldn't need to contribute if you logged on, but to access certain sub forums there's already limits so why not add this feature?

[Torian]

Because we already restrict access to subforums we feel should only be accessed by certain users? xD Iunno, there really is no need for such a drastic measure is there? If inactive users decide to return like a bunch have, what do we tell them when they find out that their account was banned?

[Scrubs]

The reason we should enforce this is because once some users reach a certain status chose to become inactive.The ban would only be temp- just banned for however many days they were "inactive".

[Taz]

No way.

What if the people want to come back but they see there account was banned for no reason

[Taz]

No way.

What if the people want to come back but they see there account was banned for no reason

[Elliot]

I like the thought behind it, but I hate the idea. A better way would be to automatically send an email reminder every month to inactive users. That would bring back a lot of inactive users.

[lilvoice32]

thomas; aggreed. that way i wouldnt have to struggle to get on if my week was filled with.... activities;D

[jimzip]

i say only to the ones that havent has anypost and not been active in a while

[BooBearSH]

Welcome back to LG, ohshit, you took a week off, ban, get the fuck out.

That's the impression they'll get.

99% of the inactive users serve no purpose, except to make our site have more members. If 90% of our members are banned, does that make us look like we're chain scamming members and banning after?

[jimzip]

well boob im talking about the people who hasnt been on at all or ether dosent have post also l

[BooBearSH]

well boob im talking about the people who hasnt been on at all or ether dosent have post also l

If they make no impact, then why get rid of them?

[iMrT]

I think this idea isn't what we need for LG.
But it's going in the right direction.
LG needs more active users, but it doesn't need to lose the slightly less active.
Maybe if you haven't been logged in for a period of months?
3-6 months. People leave and come back all the time.
I'm a great example of that. I left for a long time, and I used to just lurk around.
Yet now, months later I'm posting and being active.
I even referred a user to LG, increasing our user base.
So banning people for inactivity in my opinion is not the way to go.

[Scrubs]

Welcome back to LG, ohshit, you took a week off, ban, get the fuck out.

That's the impression they'll get.

99% of the inactive users serve no purpose, except to make our site have more members. If 90% of our members are banned, does that make us look like we're chain scamming members and banning after?

Actually I think inactive users have a purpose or at least have potential to have one. Even if it is a small one, otherwise they would remain unregistered. Obviously LG staff would have way to many users to ban if they did every inactive user previously registered. it's only a temp. ban & if users are familiar with this system they will know exactly how it works.

[Arcanine]

No. I was gone for four months and I came back. Others probably will too.

Perhaps we can have an OPTION to ban/delete our accounts if we want to save room on the server.

[Souleater]

You cant really suggest this. I just went to the field for 2 weeks and am about to move into a new house. You cant ban people for being inactive.

[Scrubs]

Souleater I actually can suggest this & I have. Stop posting on a thread with things people have already said. Just because it doesn't apply to helping YOU out doesn't mean it couldn't work with variation.This thread should be closed not much else to say on this topic. Majority says no-fine.

[Souleater]

Souleater I actually can suggest this & I have. Stop posting on a thread with things people have already said. Just because it doesn't apply to helping YOU out doesn't mean it couldn't work with variation.This thread should be closed not much else to say on this topic. Majority says no-fine.

It has nothing to do with helping me out. Fact is people do have lives outside of the internet. Many of us have jobs and must do stupid shit for their jobs or spend times with their spouses. Being on LG all day is not productive to that and some times things come up that must be taken care of, that is my point.

[Smithno13]

Actually I think inactive users have a purpose or at least have potential to have one. Even if it is a small one, otherwise they would remain unregistered. Obviously LG staff would have way to many users to ban if they did every inactive user previously registered. it's only a temp. ban & if users are familiar with this system they will know exactly how it works.

You think inactive users have a purpose... Yet you want to ban them to discourage them from having a purpose? Herp.

[Scrubs]

You think inactive users have a purpose... Yet you want to ban them to discourage them from having a purpose? Herp.

Can u read and interpret at the same time? o:

[Kain]

No.

As previously stated, real life happens. I know for a fact I plan on being offline on Spring break next year, and then for a month (at least) in the summer.
Should I be banned for a month and two weeks cause I'm out enjoying real life?
No.
I should be allowed to come back ASAP and start potentially contributing again.

[Scrubs]

No.

As previously stated, real life happens. I know for a fact I plan on being offline on Spring break next year, and then for a month (at least) in the summer.
Should I be banned for a month and two weeks cause I'm out enjoying real life?
No.
I should be allowed to come back ASAP and start potentially contributing again.

It amuses me how u can read what was previously stated and stumble over other essential posts that answer your question for u, but sense u have already done so- I've also stated u can take days off haha. I see this would take a way from the forum, because members don't want to be entitled to lg like a job.

Anyone who posts from here will be reported unless they bring up a new argument.
Requesting Lock when I get the chance.

[Torian]

At this point in LG's life, we don't have the need for such a suggestion. Thank you for it though, you have sparked interesting debates due to it.

Closed.