XF 2.1 Rejected members still showing on members online

[mjda]

Is this the expected behavior? I wouldn't think anyone would want them showing as online if they'd been rejected. Shouldn't they be treated as banned in this case?

 

[Stuart Wright]

We’re thinking the same.

The problem is that the front end gives us no indication that a member has been rejected because we can’t apply styling to the login name or give a custom title to members based on their user status.
So we also don’t know when users are awaiting email confirmation or are in the bounced state and it’s useful for moderators to instantly see this.
Moderators therefore have to go through several clicks to investigate a suspicious member to eventually discover that they have been rejected.
Might the solution be to ban rejected members? Once banned (in the banned usergroup), they also get a strike through login name and a Banned user title.
Or alternatively have the ability to change a user’s name styling and user title based on member state (and this would be overridden by styling and title if usergroup styling and state change them).
What do you think?

 

[Stuart Wright]

We went with creating a usergroup for Rejected members with line-through css on their name (same as when banned) and a title of Rejected.
Then I added a promotion which adds that usergroup when the user state is Rejected.
And finally I batch updated all the existing Rejected users.

 

[Mendalla]

We went with creating a usergroup for Rejected members with line-through css on their name (same as when banned) and a title of Rejected.
Then I added a promotion which adds that usergroup when the user state is Rejected.
And finally I batch updated all the existing Rejected users.

I like this approach. Wish I had thought of it myself a long time ago. Though in my defense, I don't actually use promotions for anything right now so it's not top of mind.

 

[Stuart Wright]

I like this approach. Wish I had thought of it myself a long time ago. Though in my defense, I don't actually use promotions for anything right now so it's not top of mind.

Unrelated but I would recommend creating more than one usergroup for more active members and reward them with more privileges.
We have Novice, Standard, Active, Well-known and Distinguished members and use promotions based on various criteria (mainly posts and reactions).

 

[Mendalla]

Unrelated but I would recommend creating more than one usergroup for more active members and reward them with more privileges.
We have Novice, Standard, Active, Well-known and Distinguished members and use promotions based on various criteria (mainly posts and reactions).

Not sure what privileges to give at this point. And most of my active users would already be at the top level. Small board and most of us have been with it from the get-go (2014). In fact, I think the idea of a "ladder" was shot down at some point (fairly democratic board so I am expected to consult the membership of stuff like that). We don't even show the reaction points table because people didn't want a "competitive" element.

Is it something that might help bring users in? Perhaps. There doesn't seem to be much taste for "recruiting" though, just keeping things going.

 

[Stuart Wright]

If you don't try to grow your forum, it will die. You should encourage people to engage more by rewarding them.
And never run a forum like a democracy. Think of it as a business. There needs to be a boss who makes decisions. And you can't please everyone, so don't even try.

 

[DigNap15]

And I have found that if you Reject a new members application, they are not deleted from the Members Database.

I think that XF could put a note to that effect on the Reject member box.
And also consider deleting them from the member database!

Is there a reason to keep rejected members in the member database?

 

[mjda]

Is there a reason to keep rejected members in the member database?

My first thought would be so that they can be prevented from registering again, with the same email address.