Importing Users Tuesday Night Live From Fusion

[ncttrnl]

I am going to be bringing over the users first and then the old posts.

I will be at fusion on tuesday night with my trusty G4 to import all of the old users and POST COUNTS. Before I do it, we will have to determine how we should axe accounts. I say any account more than a month old with a post count of 0 is a definate deletion and should be in the future as well.

[mario]

I am going to be bringing over the users first and then the old posts.

I will be at fusion on tuesday night with my trusty G4 to import all of the old users and POST COUNTS. Before I do it, we will have to determine how we should axe accounts. I say any account more than a month old with a post count of 0 is a definate deletion and should be in the future as well.
cool, we get our old post counts :thumbsup:

so if we're already registered on this site, does that affect it?

[JoeVeeDubber]

I am going to be bringing over the users first and then the old posts.

I will be at fusion on tuesday night with my trusty G4 to import all of the old users and POST COUNTS. Before I do it, we will have to determine how we should axe accounts. I say any account more than a month old with a post count of 0 is a definate deletion and should be in the future as well.

I had the same question as Mario and my input for the deletion of accounts would be any account over 3 months old with posts less than 5. There may be new people who registered within the past month.

[bugzy]

I am going to be bringing over the users first and then the old posts.

I will be at fusion on tuesday night with my trusty G4 to import all of the old users and POST COUNTS. Before I do it, we will have to determine how we should axe accounts. I say any account more than a month old with a post count of 0 is a definate deletion and should be in the future as well.
Last visited over 1 months old and 0 posts is deletion.

[ncttrnl]

if youre already registered here, I'm probably gonna delete your account here and replace it with your old info.

[bugzy]

Hey tony, you can probably get rid of excess info from Chatterbox.

I think the profile for Vbulletin is different.

Anyway we can email everyone from Chatterbox to let them know to update their profile etc etc

[ncttrnl]

Yeah... I was actually just going to grab the usernames, passwords, and a couple other key fields. I was also going to see if I can leave the email address unvalidated so they have to validate it before posting.

[madajb]

One month? That's a bit quick.
-ajb

[creanium]

If my opinion ever mattered, I would say older than 3 months with fewer than 5 posts, and we could just clean out people's accounts every month in the future?

[cynicalgeek]

Yeah, 3 months 5 posts sounds better to me as well.

Oh, and don't forget my NWF access. :D

[cynicalgeek]

Nevermind on the NWF access. (Thanks Creanium)

The whole group membership for NWF access brings up interesting issues I think. If NWF is open to anyone who joins the group instead of invite-only, the traffic may go through the roof just for access to the pr0n. Also, there may (will?) be complaints from people since the NWF posts are still showing up even if they aren't members of the group.

[cynicalgeek]

A few more things-
Considering the avatars are in the header of every post, I think the dimensional size limitation should be smaller (my current one is a case in point). In addition, allow images in the sigs.

More smilies!

[cynicalgeek]

Mine and others' titles under their screenname says 'Stock'. I don't see any way to change this - at least not for a normal user account.

[madajb]

Nevermind on the NWF access. (Thanks Creanium)

The whole group membership for NWF access brings up interesting issues I think. If NWF is open to anyone who joins the group instead of invite-only, the traffic may go through the roof just for access to the pr0n. Also, there may (will?) be complaints from people since the NWF posts are still showing up even if they aren't members of the group.
NWF should certainly be "limited access".
-ajb

[madajb]

A few more things-
Considering the avatars are in the header of every post, I think the dimensional size limitation should be smaller (my current one is a case in point). In addition, allow images in the sigs.

More smilies!
Well, hopefully we will get a better forum template that doesn't have that huge block across the top, and also takes up the entire page rather than being centered. =)
-ajb

[bugzy]

So you dont like the fact that people can add themselves to the NotWorkFriendly usergroup?

And you think that 150x150 pixel is too big for Avatar?

Problem with signatures is, need to find a way to watch the size and dimensions of images in signatures ... which havent figured out yet, til then, i dont htink we'll allow imgs in sigs

i think there is some code to verify size of a sig pic is within specs, then we'll allow sigs

[creanium]

Well, hopefully we will get a better forum template that doesn't have that huge block across the top, and also takes up the entire page rather than being centered. =)
-ajb
That's my hope too.

[madajb]

So you dont like the fact that people can add themselves to the NotWorkFriendly usergroup?

And you think that 150x150 pixel is too big for Avatar?

Problem with signatures is, need to find a way to watch the size and dimensions of images in signatures ... which havent figured out yet, til then, i dont htink we'll allow imgs in sigs

i think there is some code to verify size of a sig pic is within specs, then we'll allow sigs
Having people add themselves is cool, but I think it would be wise to have some sort of control on it. Maybe a verification by a mod?
The avatar is fine, I think, just the layout is a bit off.
We haven't had much trouble with the sigs lately. Normally, if I see one that is too big, I just send a nice PM, and that takes care of it.

-ajb

[creanium]

So you dont like the fact that people can add themselves to the NotWorkFriendly usergroup?

And you think that 150x150 pixel is too big for Avatar?

Problem with signatures is, need to find a way to watch the size and dimensions of images in signatures ... which havent figured out yet, til then, i dont htink we'll allow imgs in sigs

i think there is some code to verify size of a sig pic is within specs, then we'll allow sigs
1. I agree with Dan on not allowing people to add themselves to NWF.

2. I think we need a new vBulletin skin that goes with Alan's suggestions. A) Stretches across the screen and B) avatars and other info are on the left side of the post instead of the top (like it is on Chatterbox) If we get a skin that has avatars on the left side, then I think we should set a limit of 100 wide by 150 tall for avatars.

3. I personally think that for the most part, people have been pretty good at adhering to the rules for sigs. And those that don't, the mods have been right on them to change it. So I think that for now we should allow images in the sigs and just continue to police as necessary and then find a way to enforce the sig size using code. One of the best aspects of Socal was the way people expressed themselves using the sig images and it's a way to easily identify an author.

[Greenwing]

I agree on not letting people add themselves to NWF as well. If some kid does so, and his parents do not approve, that could be an issue.