# This Week's Users includes users with no activity
**URL:** https://meta.discourse.org/t/this-weeks-users-includes-users-with-no-activity/28773
**Category:** Feature
**Created:** [2015年五月13日 16:43 UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/this-weeks-users-includes-users-with-no-activity/28773 "2015-05-13T16:43:40Z")
**Posts on this page:** 9
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@BCHK](https://meta.discourse.org/u/BCHK)
#### Post date: [2015年五月13日 16:43 UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/this-weeks-users-includes-users-with-no-activity/28773/1 "2015-05-13T16:43:41Z")
I was looking through my list of “This Week”'s users - and saw a number of users on the list with nothing but zeros in all the columns. This seems like a bug - because if they were null on all the measures - it doesn’t seem like they should be on the list of this week’s users.
Am I missing something here? (See example below)
[https://www.evernote.com/shard/s106/sh/acca5948-e79f-4a85-8211-2d762017b6ad/57e954fbbddf2e084b9d073e7dfa340c/deep/0/Users%20-%20Schizophrenia%20Forums.png](https://www.evernote.com/shard/s106/sh/acca5948-e79f-4a85-8211-2d762017b6ad/57e954fbbddf2e084b9d073e7dfa340c/deep/0/Users%20-%20Schizophrenia%20Forums.png)
---
### Author:  [@eviltrout](https://meta.discourse.org/u/eviltrout)
#### Post date: [2015年五月13日 20:36 UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/this-weeks-users-includes-users-with-no-activity/28773/2 "2015-05-13T20:36:33Z")
Originally I used to exclude them but some argued that they couldn’t find people and wanted them in there even with no activity.
---
### Author:  [@BCHK](https://meta.discourse.org/u/BCHK)
#### Post date: [2015年五月13日 23:19 UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/this-weeks-users-includes-users-with-no-activity/28773/3 "2015-05-13T23:19:11Z")
Well OK - I guess I’m unclear on why that would be, for “This week’s Users” list.
But - whatever the case - it seems that the zero column users should be grouped at the bottom and not sprinkled throughout the list rather randomly as currently seems to be the case.
---
### Author:  [@tobiaseigen](https://meta.discourse.org/u/tobiaseigen)
#### Post date: [2017年二月25日 21:27 UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/this-weeks-users-includes-users-with-no-activity/28773/4 "2017-02-25T21:27:08Z")
I was just about to report this as a bug but see you appear to have done this intentionally:
> [@eviltrout](#):
>
> Originally I used to exclude them but some argued that they couldn’t find people and wanted them in there even with no activity.
I think this is not correct behavior and breaks what could be a really useful feature to help members and moderators see who participated today or this week etc. This is valuable, actionable information. What’s the rationale here really and would you be willing to reconsider?
---
### Author:  [@codinghorror](https://meta.discourse.org/u/codinghorror)
#### Post date: [2017年二月26日 02:08 UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/this-weeks-users-includes-users-with-no-activity/28773/5 "2017-02-26T02:08:54Z")
Can you clarify something @eviltrout do you mean that users who at least _visited the site_ are shown, even if they have not posted or liked or done anything that was countable?
---
### Author:  [@eviltrout](https://meta.discourse.org/u/eviltrout)
#### Post date: [2017年二月27日 15:30 UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/this-weeks-users-includes-users-with-no-activity/28773/6 "2017-02-27T15:30:28Z")
All user accounts are included. That means they could be included if the account was auto generated (API, import, etc) even if the user never logged in.
---
### Author:  [@codinghorror](https://meta.discourse.org/u/codinghorror)
#### Post date: [2017年二月27日 15:42 UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/this-weeks-users-includes-users-with-no-activity/28773/7 "2017-02-27T15:42:51Z")
Hmm that does seem very odd. Why include users who never visited the site? Was this an old customer requirement from a customer we don’t have any more?
---
### Author:  [@eviltrout](https://meta.discourse.org/u/eviltrout)
#### Post date: [2017年二月27日 16:27 UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/this-weeks-users-includes-users-with-no-activity/28773/8 "2017-02-27T16:27:53Z")
It’s been so long I don’t even remember. I just reviewed the query and the user has to be `active` which means a validated email - that would have to be faked quite explicitly from an import.
I guess the big question is: is a row of zeros desirable or should we exclude them?
---
### Author:  [@chapoi](https://meta.discourse.org/u/chapoi)
#### Post date: [2025年十二月4日 11:35 UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/this-weeks-users-includes-users-with-no-activity/28773/9 "2025-12-04T11:35:55Z")