Lurker Accounts

Should there be Lurker Accounts?


  • Total voters
    199
C

college22punk9

Guest
yeah, no login or activity after 90 days, or maybe 180 days should be deletion of account. as simple as that. its not like we have THAT many members that finding a suitable name is that difficult....
 

Average_joe

1st Like
Joined
May 10, 2004
Posts
120
Media
1
Likes
1
Points
238
Location
Minnesota
Sexuality
90% Straight, 10% Gay
Gender
Male
I have to say, I feel a bit dismayed with how fast some members are to condemn the whole group of lurkers as being the "undesirable" sort, or that its more important to get rid of the undesirables than the people who are actually here for support. It smacks of elitism, that those who post more are better than those who do not always wish to join in the discussion (or get to them too late).

Myself (and others I'm sure), read a good deal of what goes on here, sometimes we feel the need to contribute, and sometimes we don't. Is that so wrong?
 

Bavarian

Sexy Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Jul 12, 2004
Posts
90
Media
3
Likes
76
Points
588
Age
54
Location
Chicago (Illinois, United States)
Verification
View
Sexuality
99% Straight, 1% Gay
Gender
Male
As someone who prefers to let silence be my wisdom when I have little to contribute, I'm against the automatic deletion of 'lurker' accounts, and after reading the posts on this poll I think I see where the real problem is, namely being pestered/'spammed' by people who do not contribute to the board and seem to only be able to communicate with that infantile 'netspeak.'

There are a number of solutions to this problem, one is already implemented in the site: the ignore list. Granted that can only work after the lurker/spammer has already done his harrassment and abandoned the account, but perhaps a variation, where a member could set his account to auto-ignore anyone with an account less than 30 days old who tries to PM him. There should also be something in the coding to 'whitelist' a newbie if the vetran choses to sent the new member a PM.

So in summary.

1) Veteran sets his 'Ignore newbies' flag.

2) Newbie A tries to PM Veteran -> message deleted, Veteran isn't even aware of the attempt.

3) Newbie B posts an interesting message on the boards, piquing the interest of Veteran.

4) Veteran sends a PM to Newbie B, which automatically adds Newbie B to Veteran's 'whitelist'

5) Newbie B PM's Veteran, and proves to be a complete loser.

6) Veteran adds Newbie B to his ignore list, and never has to hear from him again.


(Note: use of the masculine pronouns is not intented to offend those of the fairer sex, but are being used as 'generic' pronouns to refer to both sexes.)
 

madame_zora

Sexy Member
Joined
May 5, 2004
Posts
9,608
Media
0
Likes
51
Points
258
Location
Ohio
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Bavarian said:
As someone who prefers to let silence be my wisdom when I have little to contribute, I'm against the automatic deletion of 'lurker' accounts, and after reading the posts on this poll I think I see where the real problem is, namely being pestered/'spammed' by people who do not contribute to the board and seem to only be able to communicate with that infantile 'netspeak.'

There are a number of solutions to this problem, one is already implemented in the site: the ignore list. Granted that can only work after the lurker/spammer has already done his harrassment and abandoned the account, but perhaps a variation, where a member could set his account to auto-ignore anyone with an account less than 30 days old who tries to PM him. There should also be something in the coding to 'whitelist' a newbie if the vetran choses to sent the new member a PM.

So in summary.

1) Veteran sets his 'Ignore newbies' flag.

2) Newbie A tries to PM Veteran -> message deleted, Veteran isn't even aware of the attempt.

3) Newbie B posts an interesting message on the boards, piquing the interest of Veteran.

4) Veteran sends a PM to Newbie B, which automatically adds Newbie B to Veteran's 'whitelist'

5) Newbie B PM's Veteran, and proves to be a complete loser.

6) Veteran adds Newbie B to his ignore list, and never has to hear from him again.


(Note: use of the masculine pronouns is not intented to offend those of the fairer sex, but are being used as 'generic' pronouns to refer to both sexes.)

Please keep posting, this was excellent!

As you can tell from the thread, the irritation is beyond the rude PMs. A lot of "lurkers" just won't read a thread so they keep posting to the oringinal poster and don't recognise that the thread has developed. No one (that I'm aware of) minds that there are people who prefer to read rather than post. What we're frustrated by is that they send stupid messages, or on the rare occasion that they DO post, what they say is on response to something ages old and no longer being discussed, like here.

Thus far, we do not have the ability to "pre-emptively block" pms from people based on the age of their account, or frequency of it's use, but that is an excellent suggestion. Perhaps you could forward to to Rob in the help desk section?
 

Bavarian

Sexy Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Jul 12, 2004
Posts
90
Media
3
Likes
76
Points
588
Age
54
Location
Chicago (Illinois, United States)
Verification
View
Sexuality
99% Straight, 1% Gay
Gender
Male
madame_zora said:
Please keep posting, this was excellent!

As you can tell from the thread, the irritation is beyond the rude PMs. A lot of "lurkers" just won't read a thread so they keep posting to the oringinal poster and don't recognise that the thread has developed. No one (that I'm aware of) minds that there are people who prefer to read rather than post. What we're frustrated by is that they send stupid messages, or on the rare occasion that they DO post, what they say is on response to something ages old and no longer being discussed, like here.

Thus far, we do not have the ability to "pre-emptively block" pms from people based on the age of their account, or frequency of it's use, but that is an excellent suggestion. Perhaps you could forward to to Rob in the help desk section?
Thinking over the 'multi-posting' phenomenon in the boards, the only solution I could see would be a bit labor-intensive: having the Mods go through and delete the innane multi-posts, or amending the Terms of Use to make such a breach of ettiquite worthy of a 1 to 12 month suspension, depending on the severity and frequency of the offence.

Sadly, not every thing has a simple technical solution.
 

bigbadger

Expert Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2006
Posts
249
Media
4
Likes
131
Points
173
Location
wisconsin
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
Hi,
This is my first post, so bear with me. I do not think that all members here should have to post. But I do think there should be a certain amount of activity and posting required in order to use some of the member contacting options available. I think people should contribute and indetify themselves and some of the things they have to say in order to use certain features. Should all lurkers be banned, no, of course not. I just think certain limits and guidlines should be set on some features. I myself until now never bothered posting so I had no need to register. Now that I have decided to start posting/contributing, I registered and will hopefully make use of this. And remember just because someone posts a whole ton does not mean what they have to say is worthwhile or positive. While most of the members here who post make positive and insightful postings/contributions, I still see some who I have to wonder what the hell they are doing or thinking. Thanks, that is my two cents on this matter.
 

Joseph

Expert Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
May 6, 2006
Posts
569
Media
25
Likes
117
Points
363
Location
Poland
Verification
View
Sexuality
80% Gay, 20% Straight
Gender
Male
I think they should be banned after ,... let's say 90 days or so.
They should at least say "hi" or something
I always found it stupid on certain forums that some guys that just registered and forgot to use they're acounts waste space and nicks!

but if they just posted once they should be left alone.
 

papermate

Experimental Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2006
Posts
52
Media
0
Likes
4
Points
153
Location
Belgium
Sexuality
60% Gay, 40% Straight
Gender
Male
Pecker said:
Those who are listed as "Member"s but who have 0 posts should be removed from the Members List after 90 days or so.

They can accomplish the same thing as lurkers without swelling the rolls needlessly.

I fully agree.
 

DaveyR

Retired Moderator
Joined
Jun 15, 2006
Posts
5,422
Media
0
Likes
30
Points
258
Location
Northumberland
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
Obviously quite an emotive subject from the posts above.

Should a member receive an undesirable PM from a Lurker could they not forward it to a Moderator. The Moderator receiving it could then send them a warning and a reminder of the site etiquette.

Any reoccurence and that member would be suspended.

Alternatively set up a new section within the Admin/Helpdesk area where all PMs of this ilk could be sent to for all to see - "Name and Shame" is often very effective.

It seems from reading the threads that most people don't mind harmless Lurkers and that it is the PM issue that appears to present the problems. My two suggestions above target the PM issue without affecting the so called harmless Lurkers.
 

Matthew

Legendary Member
Gold
Platinum Gold
Joined
Aug 27, 2005
Posts
7,291
Media
0
Likes
1,503
Points
583
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
Daverock said:
Obviously quite an emotive subject from the posts above.

Should a member receive an undesirable PM from a Lurker could they not forward it to a Moderator. The Moderator receiving it could then send them a warning and a reminder of the site etiquette.

People are welcome to forward that stuff to the Moderators if you wish. For everyone's information, you can also put such a person on your Ignore List and you will not receive any more PMs from them.
 

DaveyR

Retired Moderator
Joined
Jun 15, 2006
Posts
5,422
Media
0
Likes
30
Points
258
Location
Northumberland
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
Matthew said:
People are welcome to forward that stuff to the Moderators if you wish. For everyone's information, you can also put such a person on your Ignore List and you will not receive any more PMs from them.


That's fine putting them on ignore but

a) They don't even know that you have done so.

b) It just passes the problem on to someone as they are free to keep PMing at will.

Surely it is better that the problematic people be addressed head on is it not?
 

chyestatorian

1st Like
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Posts
8
Media
0
Likes
1
Points
146
Location
south texas
Sexuality
60% Gay, 40% Straight
I don't have a large cock, but love to worship those who do.... I don't have a cam so I can't post pics.... Is this a bad thing? If so I do apologize and will stop worshipping large cocks....
 

DaveyR

Retired Moderator
Joined
Jun 15, 2006
Posts
5,422
Media
0
Likes
30
Points
258
Location
Northumberland
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
chyestatorian said:
I don't have a large cock, but love to worship those who do.... I don't have a cam so I can't post pics.... Is this a bad thing? If so I do apologize and will stop worshipping large cocks....

I think if you read through the whole thread you will find that generally although not universally people don't have a problem with what you are doing. The biggest gripe seems to be about unwanted PMs.
 

Matthew

Legendary Member
Gold
Platinum Gold
Joined
Aug 27, 2005
Posts
7,291
Media
0
Likes
1,503
Points
583
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
Daverock said:
That's fine putting them on ignore but

a) They don't even know that you have done so.

b) It just passes the problem on to someone as they are free to keep PMing at will.

Surely it is better that the problematic people be addressed head on is it not?

I do agree with point b), and as I said, people are welcome to pass such a PM to the Moderators and we'll have a look to see if any action is warranted. A few offenders have had their stuff publicly posted, and all I'd say about that is if you choose that angle, don't feel bad if someone does the same to you, ha ha.

In terms of your point a), what difference does it make if they know or not? The point is to get them to stop bothering you, no?
 

DaveyR

Retired Moderator
Joined
Jun 15, 2006
Posts
5,422
Media
0
Likes
30
Points
258
Location
Northumberland
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
Matthew said:
I do agree with point b), and as I said, people are welcome to pass such a PM to the Moderators and we'll have a look to see if any action is warranted. A few offenders have had their stuff publicly posted, and all I'd say about that is if you choose that angle, don't feel bad if someone does the same to you, ha ha.

In terms of your point a), what difference does it make if they know or not? The point is to get them to stop bothering you, no?

Point taken on both counts - I suppose them knowing would just make some people fell better :biggrin1:
 

mainer1

Experimental Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2006
Posts
265
Media
0
Likes
22
Points
163
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
Dr Rock said:
I don't get why there's a "no opinion" option for the poll. if someone has no opinion, then why the fuck would they wanna respond to a poll in the first place? :confused:
I voted no opinion because The only way I'd give a shit about silent lurkers is if they are screwing something up technically for the site...then I'd vote NO