Deleting Abandoned Accounts

narvix • 5 May 2014 at 11:24 PM

Maybe deleting long inactive accounts wouldn't hurt. It would certainly clean up the member list and free up the names used. Plus, people wouldn't need to worry about feeding dying coves.

vampire666 • 5 May 2014 at 11:36 PM

@narvix - Or if someone is leaving, they can tell someone to close the account? I think randomly shutting down inactive accounts could backfire if someone wanted to come back on (it's happened before). But I agree. 😊

narvix • 5 May 2014 at 11:39 PM

There is that. So, would pros outweigh cons or vice versa?
@vampire666

vampire666 • 5 May 2014 at 11:43 PM

@narvix - I think it would be a good idea to give people to option to delete accounts (such as if they want a new name or if they're leaving permanently), however, if you just start shutting down accounts and someone comes back and finds their's missing, there might be a flood of angry messages to Ian. I would say getting rid of the accounts that have been inactive for the last three years would be a good idea, though, because it's unlikely those people will be back on.

newlife • 5 May 2014 at 11:54 PM

@narvix
I'm a bit torn about this.
There are some account names I've wanted but inactive people have them. However, I have an old account I don't use anymore but I just let it sit there for memories, and I don't want to see it deleted.

I think what Vampire said would be good. About three years of inactivity would be auto delete. Even by then, there's a low chance that any creatures from that cove would be alive if they're from before the immortal system was implemented.

narvix • 5 May 2014 at 11:56 PM

That sounds reasonable. Say, a certain length of inactivity gets the account deleted automatically while the rest can choose to delete theirs. I think it might also be a good idea then to set a password protection or something for the option just incase someone accidentally hits delete when they didn't mean to. Prevents accounts being deleted when that wasn't the intent.
@vampire666
@newlife

purrclan • 6 May 2014 at 12:07 AM

@narvix
You can always send in a ticket asking for your account to be deleted. It's not that hard, we don't need to add a delete button. 😋
But I like the auto-delete-after-inactivity part 😊

vampire666 • 6 May 2014 at 12:10 AM

@purrclan - I thought you could send a ticket about this. 😋

narvix • 6 May 2014 at 12:11 AM

@purrclan
I didn't know about the ticket. Now I do.

purrclan • 6 May 2014 at 9:26 AM

@vampire666
Yep 😋

@narvix
Sometimes you find older threads and some of the accounts have been deleted. It has to happen SOMEhow...
I miss @bluegirl08 ☹️

Deleted • 17 May 2014 at 7:05 AM

@purrclan
Tracked BlueGirl's Onny to @ Cafe. xD
Idk after that. Where did she go? >.<

But still.. when accounts get deleted:
Like eg. @peace, @love etc. and others like @balrog etc.

But there are exceptions where @cprather and @rileyup have living and immortal rares.
So.. most probable will be only deleting off the accounts which have no alive creature and have been inactive for 2-3 years.

purrclan • 17 May 2014 at 1:27 PM

@frosted
She quit because of real-life reasons. ☹️

Deleted • 17 May 2014 at 10:26 PM

@purrclan
☹️

lucid • 17 May 2014 at 11:34 PM

@narvix
Here's a suggestion:
How bout sending a warning email, like a month before the account gets deleted?

Also, we have tons of those account where the person just signs up, gets their account activated, posts a new thread and never comes back, those need to be cleaned out. Like people inactive with under 10 posts should get deleted.

mollyokami • 18 May 2014 at 5:20 PM

=== @vampire666 ======================
"I think it would be a good idea to give people to option to delete accounts (such as if they want a new name or if they're leaving permanently), however, if you just start shutting down accounts and someone comes back and finds their's missing, there might be a flood of angry messages to Ian. I would say getting rid of the accounts that have been inactive for the last three years would be a good idea, though, because it's unlikely those people will be back on."
===================================
I also have to agree with this idea. Especially since some creatures cost real money. This is also why I think that we should be able to re-use egg names.

=== @lucid ===========================
"Also, we have tons of those account where the person just signs up, gets their account activated, posts a new thread and never comes back, those need to be cleaned out. Like people inactive with under 10 posts should get deleted."
===================================
I have to disagree with this idea just because people like me don't post a lot. In fact, this will only be my 8th post. I usually don't hang out in forums unless I have a question or something that needs to be said.

Maybe what you could do is delete accounts that have been inactive for 1-3+ years where there are no more living creatures. An e-mail would be sent to the user a month prior…just in the SLIGHTEST case that they want to keep it. I would also send an automated e-mail to let them know that such a system will be enacted.

vampire666 • 18 May 2014 at 5:25 PM

@mollyokami - A warning is a great idea, so if someone does indeed wish to keep their account, they can do so.

lodestar • 18 May 2014 at 6:23 PM

@narvix I have something to add. While I agree with everything else, I believe that the creatures remaining on the account should be transferred to the AC. 😊

narvix • 18 May 2014 at 7:28 PM

The Adoption Center would be a good idea for creatures on inactive accounts @lodestar

A lot of these ideas sound great and plausible. I don't think it's really convenient to send tickets just for account deletion when tickets are generally used for more pressing things. At least, that's the feeling I get with sending tickets. I might be wrong.

liza200aa • 24 May 2014 at 7:55 AM

@narvix
Accounts should only be deleted if they have no alive creatures remaining.

takochu • 24 May 2014 at 1:52 PM

@narvix

I like all the ideas.

Deleted • 1 June 2014 at 2:39 AM

@narvix
Support ! Provided no alive creatures, like liza200aa says. And eggcave could even add a warning somewhere, like "Inactive accounts with no creature remaining will be deleted after a year of no use." Or something.

horses4ever9147 • 1 June 2014 at 2:35 PM

@marvobubbo
I agree, hypocritical as it is of me.
Perhaps an automated email at that point with a month or so to become active again would be even more of a safeguard though?

wolphire • 3 June 2014 at 12:21 AM

Sorry for the lack of pings, but I agree with the accounts with no creatures being deleted.

As for the rest, I don't think accounts with creatures should be deleted, regardless. What if someone wanted to keep their account but changed their email address without updating it on EC?

metaphor • 11 June 2014 at 4:42 AM

I can acknowledge that account clearings would be much harder on a site like this, where people collect creatures and sometimes leave once their creatures become immortal, only checking in from time to time. However, I don't see harm in account clearings generally. They work on other sites. Here, I just think they would be hard to manage because of the site's concept. It's not just adopt pets, feed them, and give them pretty profiles like other sites. It's more about collecting as many as possible and immortalizing.

Here's a compromise of sorts. Subeta does this:

Instead of deleting accounts, they make it so that after about a year of inactivity (here, I think 18 months to 2 years may be better), an account's UN and pet names go up for grabs to active users. The catch, though, is that nothing gets deleted. The names are just changed to letter/number combinations. Nothing else changes, and the person may come back to all their immortals. If their username gets taken, they can get it changed for free. Sure, this isn't a perfect system either. People might complain that their names are being taken or whatever, but it's really not much different than mortal creatures dying and their names becoming available to anyone once that happens. That's happened to me more times than I can count, and I know shake my fists every time I see an immortal creature with a name I got lazy with, but that's just how the system works. 😋 In any case, I'm sure there would still be objections to this, but it would be a little less extreme than just deleting a cove with 5 Onnies, 2 Tines, and about 50 other rare creatures that a person still wants. After all, at least with the resurrection stone, you can get back a rare creature even if you can't get its original name. If an account is permanently deleted, that probably won't be an option.