[NCUC E-team] Question

[Brenden Kuerbis]

On Thu, Nov 6, 2014 at 10:23 AM, Tapani Tarvainen <
ncuc at tapani.tarvainen.info> wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 06, 2014 at 03:54:33PM +0100, William Drake (wjdrake at gmail.com)
> wrote:
>
> > I understand your point here Tapani. Personally, I am a bit
> > uncomfortable taking it upon ourselves to remove someone who made a
> > decision to join once upon a time, even if they’ve gone
> > incommunicado.
>
> My immediate concern here is only if and how we should keep
> the history of verifications in the database (or elsewhere),
> so that at some distant future date it can be taken into
> account if so desired.
>
> For example, it might be decided to make an extra outreach
> effort for people who've been out of touch for X years
> or whatever. As you said:
>
> > That said, it would be good to at least have an updated status
> > report on the size and composition of perennially out of touch
> > contingent so we know what what we’re dealing and can ponder.
>
> It might also be useful just how perennially out of touch they are:
> did they just miss one round of confirmations or have last been heard
> of ten years ago.
>
>
I agree we don't want to remove members from database per Bill reasons.
Maybe the members state should remain 1 (they continue to have verification
emails during annual elections sent to last known email address), and we
(as Tapani suggests) track how many times they have not replied. Could that
be automated by editing verification script to update a new field?




> --
> Tapani Tarvainen
> _______________________________________________
> E-team mailing list
> E-team at lists.ncuc.org
> http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/e-team
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/e-team/attachments/20141106/0718ea1a/attachment-0002.html>