On Tue, 18 Dec 2018, Gaelan Steele wrote:
> I feel like the first one is more of a birthday—the day you first became
> a part of Agora is a lot more momentous than the last time you were>
> involved in some deregistration scam (or even the last time you came back).
> As for unknown birthdays, maybe we could fall back to date of first message
> to a non-Foreign forum? (Is that definition better anyway?)
I agree - I have more attachment (and a specific memory or two) around the
4-Feb-01 date and the rest are a blur. I remember Michael mentioning once
that e can still recall exactly where e was when e sent the message of
Rule 1727.
"First post to forum" would be harder to find than birthday approximation
for anyone before 2003, and for people after 2003 there's no gaps in the
Registrar's record. I'd suggest we ratify w/o objection a birthday choice
of an old-timer's preference - it looks like there's an estimated latest
first registration date for Murphy of < 23 Jan 96, so at least there's
a guesstimate that might be ratified.
> > On Dec 18, 2018, at 4:35 PM, Ørjan Johansen <oer...@nvg.ntnu.no> wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, 16 Dec 2018, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> >
> >> Using the Registrar's monthly report, my Agoran birthdays would be:
> >> 4-Feb-01, 14-Jul-03, 23-Feb-07, 27-Oct-07, 19-Jun-08,
> >> 4-May-09, 29-Oct-09, 18-Oct-11 and 25-Aug-17.
> >> You may want to use "day e most recently registered" or "day e first
> >> registered"? (your preference, but I'd go for "first" personally).
> >
> > I suspect "most recently" is easier to verify. For example, I'm pretty
> > sure my first registration isn't listed. In fact I don't know the exact
> > date myself.
> >
> > Greetings,
> > Ørjan.
>
>
