It's a good point there Bob. There's no compelling reason to clear them unless there's a lack of work to be done. On Sat, 2009-07-25 at 13:53 +0000, Robert 'Bob' Jensen wrote: > ----- "Eric Christensen" <eric@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > They can come back at any time. No one on the list is anyone that > > has > > been active in the Docs Project in some time (that I'm aware of). > > > > I think that when the account goes inactive then their password is > > expired and they wouldn't be able to edit the wiki or access anything > > else that is FAS related until they do a password reset. > > > > I hope you exercise due diligence in this matter. You already have screwed up along these lines in the past. You lost at least one contributor that time, I don't think losing more is a good idea. > > There seems to be a lot of this going on, removing people from groups. Is there a good reason for it? So what if someone is "inactive" maybe they could want to contribute something tomorrow or next month. Why should they have to do anything in order to do what they have been able to do before. Why is having inactive accounts such a big deal? If I was counting numbers I would rather be able to count "125 contributors, 12 are inactive" than "113 contributors" when we all know that a large part of that 113 have not done anything in docs in a long time if ever, they just happened to re-set their password. > > -- Bob > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > | Robert 'Bob' Jensen || Fedora Unity Founder | > | bob@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx || http://fedoraunity.org/ | > | http://bjensen.fedorapeople.org/ | > | http://blogs.fedoraunity.org/bobjensen | > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > -- fedora-docs-list mailing list fedora-docs-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-docs-list
