Rules change - Four Spare Tires section - to be removed

[Jim]

Hello Folks,

Several years back I proposed, we discussed, and then added the concept of "Four Spare Tires" available to be used for account re-activations.

While the majority of members fall into one of two groups - 1) those that stay active and never go inactive (and never ask to be reactivated) and 2) those that inactivate and never return to be reactivated, there is a small number of people where reactivations can be a revolving door. The admin's desire (my desire) was to remove subjectivity to not reactivate a member - to have it be objective - if there's an available "spare", it would be used. If not, then not.

Well, now that the spares process has been in effect for many years, I find it is not needed. In the mind of keeping life (the rules) simple / short / clean - I think the section can be removed.

Thoughts and comments always welcome.

[FINOCJ]

Are you saying the spare tire process has essentially filtered out all the inactive members over the last few years - in other words it's essentially done it's job? Basically, my thoughts are typically whatever works best for you Jim as it's typically your time and energy being used.

[Jim]

No. The spare tires only assists for a RE-activation of an account. It has no effect for when an account transitions to inactive.

The Four Spare Tires would be an objective policy should the admin be asked to re-active a membership. If there's a spare, it'd be reactivated, if not, then not. The subjective issue - does the admin want to reactivate the account in question. My desire when spare tires was proposed was to remove me from being subjectively deciding if an account is reactivated. Bottom line - I find it to be a non-issue and thus the spare tires process is needless baggage that can be removed.

As for an account going inactive, that is fairly cut and dry. When an account shows no login for X days, the system is supposed to automatically inactivate an account. Some security update broke that function. I manually (once or twice a year, maybe-ish) run an inactivate members process. I ask the forum to show accounts not logged in for at least X days (60 to 95 or maybe 120 is often what I filter on) and I then review the list. Vendors are exempt (we have one vendor account). Members that move out of state are exempt (but I do inactivate when they have not logged in for more than two years). A few noted accounts are exempt from inactivations. Once the review is complete, those remaining are set to inactive state.

The inactive process is not intended to "kick people out". The purpose is to get the online forum software to match who is showing up for trail runs.

Chris, who founded the group, would delete the accounts. While I like the delete process in concept, doing so causes posts made by a member to be left hanging with no name attached to who made the post. The post stays - but who made it - is removed. I like to have member info attached to posts so I prefer the inactivate (vs delete) process.

[FINOCJ]

Jim previously posted:

[FINOCJ]

Thanks for the explanation...I might have been a bit unclear in my question. It wasn't so much whether the spare tire system was automatic, but rather whether it helped with the 'objective' or clear rules regarding maintaining active membership. At one time, and its fair to argue whether it's truly an issue or not, membership had discussions about too many members that were not participating in trail runs, too many 'web wheelers' etc.... honestly I am not sure I remember other reasons. Basically, there was some consternation about whether we are a web forum or a wheeling club. Truly, we are some of both, but the club rules are there, and whether to enforce them or change them are also valid questions. In a sense, the spare tire idea was a sort of formal allowance to bend the rules and provide 5 strikes and your out idea instead of just one strike. And it was motivated somewhat from an understanding POV that life happens and recreation sometimes gets pushed aside. So I guess my question is, was the idea of reactivating an account 4-5 times (spare tires) worth it, or should we stick to the rules more rigorously and not reactivate so readily, or just remove the concern and never deactivate an account. Just to ask, how often and how many accounts are truly using up the spare tire allowances, or is it just too difficult to keep track of?

As some of the active members of those previous discussions have moved on, and our active members change with time, its fair to revisit. As an 'outgoing' member who will be much less active, JMO, but I continue to support the idea that going on trail runs is paramount. Along those lines, some of the discussion of how often a member logs in, or filtering active/inactive based on forum posts and activity is secondary. Members creating and joining in trail runs is what matters...but that may be harder to filter electronically/automatically via the software.

Also, many thanks to Jim for all the software and forum admin time and effort.

[Tom]

I remember those discussions James and you conveyed them quite accurately. imo

[Jim]

FINOCJ previously posted:

[Jim]

FINOCJ previously posted:

[Jim]

FINOCJ previously posted:

[FINOCJ]

Purely my opinion....I am not a huge fan of the 4 spare tires or whatever (felt it was a bit too generous), so fine by me to remove it from the "rules". I kind of like or appreciate the original rules as written....if we want a single spare tire, that would work. I'd say if you go two years without joining a wheeling trip (and no extenuating circumstance like military service), then you are not really a participating member. All the log in or forum activity stuff is less important to me...just my opinion....and also, if the admin management of active/inactive accounts is not benefiting from the four spare tires, or if it complicates it even more, then seems reasonable to remove superfluous "rules" description.

[Bob]

I have no objection to removing the spare tire mechanism; whatever works, is reasonably objective, and is easy to administer is fine.

I agree that no wheeling for two years is probably a good reason to be inactivated. In addition to the example of military service there can be things like medical problems. Consider someone who develops back problems. I’d hate to lose an experienced voice on the forums just because he/she can no longer tolerate bouncing around on trail or riding in a car for hours.

I also don’t care so much about the forum activity as a requirement, but agree it ought to have some weight. I expect that in order to satisfy the wheeling requirement one would typically sign up for a run on the site which perhaps ought to count as forum activity.

[Jim]

Bob, yes, while military service is one item that will keep an account active, health / medical issues is another topic that will keep an account active. Those health "keep active" accounts are not typically advertised or discussed (at least by me, a member might themselves). It comes up from time to time.

[speedkills]

Do we actually ever retire accounts? I see people post who haven't been on a run in the few years I have been here. Not that my opinion should count for too much as I am not one of the members with a long history here, but I would suggest interest in wheeling should matter even for the "keep active" accounts. If you are having some health issues and need to take a couple of years off but plan on getting back to it, I say sure, stick around, but if you sell your truck, lose interest in wheeling and never plan to go again, then the health issue is just a coincidence isn't it?

I guess if you still have interest and want to relive glory days and post pics of wheeling trips from 10 years ago once in a while knowing you will never make it out again, that is even still interesting to me. But if you have just lost interest and want folks to talk to about random stuff, I don't really need to see someone who has lost all interest in wheeling and 4x4 rigs in general making posts about their model train collection or something else completely unrelated to wheeling in the front range.

[Jim]

speedkills previously posted: