We seem to be having a bit of a 'wave' of members signing up to sell us something which makes a nice change from the socks who want to fling shit generally. Anyway, looking through the Admin area there are quite a number of members who have registered yet never posted. These may be innocent enough registrations that just didn't get used or they could be spambots/socks 'sat in waiting'.

How do people feel about them being deleted? We could offer a short amnesty so anyone wishing to keep their username has the opportunity to make a post, even if it's just a 'Hello' in the intros thread, or we could just get rid immediately.

Thoughts folks?

I'm happy for them to be deleted. Some of them might be people who registered just so they could view the members only boards, but don't want to contribute.

I dont see any harm in them being there.... and there are some posters who never post but do log in from time to time just to read.


What's the benefits of getting rid?

If they're spambots, can they do any kind of harm?

I know some posters just like to read but a quick 'Hello' in the intros thread so we know they're not a bot isn't asking a lot.

What's the benefit of keeping them?

If this is a discussion community I consider it rude not to participate tbh as it shifts the burden of content onto a few.
There are enough subjects covered on SZ now to accommodate contributions from everyone, be it heavy end conspiracy, politics etc, through to music, art, comedy and wtf-ness.

I would also suspect that a few non-posters are simply lurkers looking for "OMG you'll never believe what this one said about that one!!!" shit to post elsewhere and stir up some drama.

I would reverse your query sketts, What's the benefits of keeping them? xx

To contribute as little as a "hello" in the intro thread is just the most basic level of courtesy imo

Gilly wrote: Any bot could post a link to a site which can/could inject malicious code. (Same could be said of any poster obviously).

Gilly wrote:
Agreed.

I know when I'm outnumbered

Being a cynic I suspect that most of the unused accounts are either awaiting sock activation or are returning flouncers still wanting full access.

There may be some shy bunnies around but I'm sure they can come back when they overcome their timidity.

Gilly wrote:
Surprise surprise!!!!!!!!

Larry Lamb wrote:
It would be fair, not to mention polite, to explain how you came to this reaction.

Hi Larry

I loved you in Triangle.

mikey mikey wrote:
Her reputation and what one has witnessed oneself shows that Gilly is always up for a banning.

Larry Lamb wrote: Are you a spambot for Kinder Eggs?
Or a sad sock puppet with someone's fist up your arse?

Larry Lamb wrote:
Reputation where?

Can you back, sorry, can ONE back up what ONE has witnessed ONESELF?

Or is one talking out of ones arse?

feather wrote:
The picture you posted is of Lamb Chop not Larry Lamb.

Larry Lamb wrote:
It is also a picture of a sock puppet, however.

Larry Lamb wrote: Well done you passed the Captcha test so we at least know you're not a bot.

So tell us a little about yourself Mr