Do New Users who are awaiting Approval of their account not have to confirm their e-mail?


Active member

We noticed that when a new user has their account automatically moderated by the Stop Forum Spam feature upon registration, their User State shows as "Awaiting Approval", but as soon as they are approved, their User State changes to "Valid" instead of "Awaiting email confirmation" for them to confirm their e-mail.

So do new users who are awaiting Approval of their account and then have their account Approved (because they were a false-positive) not have to confirm their e-mail?

Please confirm. Thank you.
This is correct. It's mostly done this way for technical reasons.
Thanks for confirming. This is a serious flaw because the Stop Forum Spam often catches false-positives and those users are becoming valid users without confirming their e-mails, which means (among other things) if they made any typos during registration, then they won't receive any of our e-mails.

How can this be fixed? A User waiting approval that gets approved should have their User State changed to "Awaiting email confirmation" and only after they confirm their e-mail should their User State change to "Valid". This seems obvious since we Admins have no way of confirming whether their e-mail address is valid when approving those false-positives.

On the technical side, it seems quite simple. Whatever you do when a user not caught by the Stop Forum Spam filter registers, you have to do when a user caught by the filter is "Approved". For example, setting their User State to "Awaiting email confirmation" and sending them the Confirmation E-mail.

Please advise. Thank you.
That a user once had a valid email is no indication that it's still a valid (or working) email. Even with email confirmation, you need to be able to deal with now-invalid emails. This is where the bounce processing system can be used (which will put the user into a state where they can change their email and go through the confirmation process).

Anything beyond that is going to require custom development. It's simply not something we support. I can't say it's a problem we've run into significantly here (and if it does happen, the bounce processing pushes it back into an "expected" state).
Top Bottom