Guests, Ungrouped Members, and non-members

[IMSassafras]

First, are "guests" and "ungrouped members" the same?  Or are "guests" non-members (people who haven't joined yet)?

Second, can I acquire a list of "guests" or "ungrouped members"?

Third, when I delete a registered member (unworthy because of spam history) and forget to delete his/her posts and topics, those posts and topics are left behind and the membergroup changes to "Guest".  But I can't find a list of these people.

Also, how do other administrators deal with members who turn into spammers?  Do you delete them?  Ban them?  Take away (limit) their permissions?  This is especially a concern when another member posts a comment in response to them.  Do members get upset if their post is deleted when you delete an whole topic?  This seems to boggle me more and more.

Sass

[Arantor]

Guests are guests - people not registered nor signed in. Ungrouped members are those who are signed in but have no primary member group set. They are also known as regular members.

In this forum, for example you are in the Regular Members group - you have no primary group (so it displays post count group instead), while I am not in Regular Members as I am currently in the SMF Friend primary group.

Second... guests, not really beyond what's in the who's online list because they're just people visiting who aren't members. As for ungrouped members that should be in the admin panel.

Members who turn into spammers, there's talking to them (because they are people after all), there's warnings (which can remove posting permissions) and there's bans (which remove everything, temporarily or permanently). Deletion is not typically a good tactic.

It really depends on the situation. Inflammatory posts sometimes just merit deleting the post and moving on, other times more drastic measures.

[Ninja ZX-10RR]

Members who turn into spammers, there's talking to them (because they are people after all), there's warnings (which can remove posting permissions) and there's bans (which remove everything, temporarily or permanently). Deletion is not typically a good tactic.

It really depends on the situation. Inflammatory posts sometimes just merit deleting the post and moving on, other times more drastic measures.

And there is also Annoy user, right?

[Arantor]

Yes, yes there is always Annoy User. The pro version will be more awesome though.

[Ninja ZX-10RR]

I don't really see any way for it to be more awesome than it already is that but ok xD

[IMSassafras]

Thank you for your replies.

Annoy User is a very interesting mod.  Clever with a hint of backlash.  "[***] with me and I will make your forum experience a living [****]."

Concerning deletion vs not deletion.  If I hadn't used the delete button for the past eight years I would have over 20,000 more members than what I have now.  That seems like a good thing, but if only 10% of those are legit (real people) and only 10% of them post something, then I should have over 200 active people.  I don't, but I do have over over 2000 posts.

I have changed quick a few things over the past couple years which has helped with not have to use the delete button, thanks to spam filters.

I did delete one poster recently do to spam-like activity and possible nefarious potential.  His location said California but his signature gave a link to a construction company in New Jersey.  His posts were about stupid stuff, so I have no hurt feelings over deleting his membership.  But from what you are saying, I had other options.  But on the other hand, why would an admin waste their time?

About my first post, I really didn't understand whether or not I am suppose to see "Ungrouped Members".  I would think "yes" because they are considered Regular Members, but they aren't listed in the Members list.  I find it hard to believe I found the only Guest on the Forum.  I killed the Last Mohican.  I killed Kenny.  ******.

Got go.  Suddenly I don't feel so hot.

[Ninja ZX-10RR]

Let's put it this way...
ALL users registering to SMF are AUTOMATICALLY and INEVITABLY (unless you use a mod but that's another discourse...) grouped into the "Regular Members" membergroups and ALSO in a post-count membergroup as soon as they get to the lowest required posts to get into it. It's fairly obvious that if you create a post-count membergroup whose required posts is set to 0 then ALL users will be joining it AUTOMATICALLY after registering.
You CAN'T remove them from a post-count membergroup unless you either delete the membergroup itself or manually change the post number of the member to put him into another one, but he will always have a post-count membergroup unless you delete all of them or you decide not to show it. And they DO list in members list, for sure. Guests are not being listed there but ANY other member will be listed there.

[Arantor]

You CAN'T remove them from a post-count membergroup unless you either delete the membergroup itself

One correction; users must ALWAYS be in a post count group. Always. The database requires it.

And if you ever end up users who don't exist in a post count group - e.g. you delete all the groups except for one that starts at 100 posts, everyone who doesn't have 100 posts ends up potentially getting *ADMIN* privileges.

[Ninja ZX-10RR]

It's also not really smart IMO... Thanks for the correction, then setting a single post-count membergroup at 0 post would be the "way to go".

Besides I don't like quite much this "getting *ADMIN* privileges", wtf is that? Why? There should be a reason for it but honestly I can't think of any atm.

[Arantor]

There is a technical reason for it.

Internally, any group that is assigned rather than post-count has a minimum number of posts of -1. That's how it differentiates internally.

So when it looks, it's looking for the group the user falls into based on the group with the highest number of posts that is less than or equal to the current post count (e.g. a user with 150 posts would be looked at against, say, post groups of 50+ and 100+ and pick the 100+ one)

But if there aren't any, it then looks at what's left. Which invariably is group 1.

Fixing it is complicated - which is why I've never attempted to fix it yet - because there's *other* consequences in other ways if you're not really, really careful.

[Ninja ZX-10RR]

Oooooh howdy. Now I get it entirely, you also solved me another doubt about that -1, I had already saw it and I was like wtf a negative number there... Now I know why, many thanks. It's indeed interesting to learn how things were coded even if I couldn't do that.

[Arantor]

Yup, that's the reason for it. Better to do it that way than to create a new column for it, at least that was the original thinking for it.

[IMSassafras]

OK.  I did a test.  I registered a bogus member.  Posted under the bogus membership.  Deleted the bogus membership.  The member was in the list of members BEFORE deletion, now the member is GONE.  Where did the member go?  The post is still there.  And the title name under the member reads "Guest".

Link to post:  http://www.misfitcityforum.com/forum/index.php?topic=1386.0

What's the deal-e-o, boys?!!!

Sass

[Arantor]

You deleted the member. The post remains. Why would deleting members automatically delete all their posts too?

[IMSassafras]

You deleted the member. The post remains. Why would deleting members automatically delete all their posts too?

I didn't expect their post to be deleted unless I used my ban and delete mod properly.  I have to select "delete all topics and post" created by member to delete THEM and THEIR POST.  I am asking "why can't I see the "Guest" in a list like Members?  Is there a way I can see this "membership" "Guest" is a list other than "Members"?

I want to be able to see if there are other "guest"-like memberships lurking in the background like ghosts.  I figure they can't do any harm since them don't technically have a true membership anymore but why have them there if they can be properly deleted?

Sass

[Arantor]

Because they're NOT a member. That's the point.

The post is made by someone who is NOT a user at the current time. That's what 'guest' means.

[IMSassafras]

Because they're NOT a member. That's the point.

The post is made by someone who is NOT a user at the current time. That's what 'guest' means.

Ummm.  Ok.  I see.  The only footprint left behind is the post.  Once the post is gone, nothing is left.

Two more questions:  Is there a way to search for other "guest" posts left behind?  Or do I have to manually find these "footprints" and delete them when I find them?

[Ninja ZX-10RR]

I have to select "delete all topics and post" created by member to delete THEM and THEIR POST.

That's the way to do it. otherwise yes you would have to do that manually.

[margarett]

Well, more or less.

You can go through the database itself, table smf_messages, run the following query:
SELECT *
FROM smf_messages
WHERE id_member=0

It will return all posts with "guest" poster From the info retrieved, you can easily go to the adequate topic or to the post itself

It's not integrated into SMF but it works

[Kindred]

you could create a new_user...   then assign all posts by user#0 to that new_user... (best done directly in phpmyadmin probably)

THEN, delete the new_user and choose to delete all posts by that new_user...