The Rohrbaugh Forum

Administration => Forum News and Feedback => Topic started by: bamboobob on July 07, 2014, 05:26:44 PM

Title: "Users active in past 15 minutes:" could this be 30 or more?
Post by: bamboobob on July 07, 2014, 05:26:44 PM
I find this very usefull, it leads to many good threads.

30 or more ? ? ?
Title: Re: "Users active in past 15 minutes:" could this be 30 or more?
Post by: DDGator on July 07, 2014, 06:37:13 PM

I don't see any reason to think that would be wrong...
Title: Re: "Users active in past 15 minutes:" could this be 30 or more?
Post by: bamboobob on July 08, 2014, 10:39:49 AM
DD  -  Cool

Maybe I should have asked about "Guests and Users Online" to be more accurate.
I like to see what others are looking at, Members (users) and Guests.
Title: Re: "Users active in past 15 minutes:" could this be 30 or more?
Post by: DDGator on July 09, 2014, 11:02:16 AM

Some of the figures seem misleading.  Like 4.75 registrations per day includes all the spammers that try to register, but get blocked by the forum software and never approved by me.

Title: Re: "Users active in past 15 minutes:" could this be 30 or more?
Post by: bamboobob on July 09, 2014, 11:43:00 AM

Some of the figures seem misleading.  Like 4.75 registrations per day includes all the spammers that try to register, but get blocked by the forum software and never approved by me.

DD -  that makes sense,
I often see -
"Registering for an account on the forum."   but no new names appear.
My interest is seeing what people are looking at and checking that thread(interesting sounding ones or multiple hits )    i.e.   letting others search the forum for me.

http://www.rohrbaughforum.com/index.php?action=who
Title: Re: "Users active in past 15 minutes:" could this be 30 or more?
Post by: DDGator on July 09, 2014, 12:22:22 PM

We still get a ton of spammy registrations.  With the old software, those would go through...

Since we upgraded forum software (best expense ever), the new software identifies and blocks about 99% of the spam registrants.  I also did a purge of the spammy members who got through -- so I think the forum membership numbers are reasonably accurate (and probably understated hisotrically speaking).