In a bold move aimed at reviving engagement and ensuring active participation, the management of a popular online group has announced a sweeping policy that could see hundreds, if not thousands, of inactive members removed from its roster. The decision, unveiled late last night in a direct message to all participants, was blunt and unambiguous: “We are going to remove people that are not active in this group. So only state your state to keep you active…..
BREAKING NEWS: Group Management Announces Strict Policy — Inactive Members Face Removal Unless They State Their State to Stay Active
In a bold move aimed at reviving engagement and ensuring active participation, the management of a popular online group has announced a sweeping policy that could see hundreds, if not thousands, of inactive members removed from its roster. The decision, unveiled late last night in a direct message to all participants, was blunt and unambiguous: “We are going to remove people that are not active in this group. So only state your state to keep you active.”
The announcement has already sent ripples through the online community, sparking conversations about digital accountability, group loyalty, and the future of large-scale virtual networks.
A Push for Genuine Engagement
According to insiders familiar with the decision, the group’s leadership grew concerned over the rapid growth of its membership numbers, which had ballooned in recent months. While the group boasted impressive statistics on paper, a closer look revealed that only a fraction of the members were actually participating in discussions, sharing content, or responding to group activities.
“The numbers looked good, but when we checked, most people were ghosts—just names on the list,” explained one moderator who asked not to be named. “We want a vibrant, interactive space, not a digital graveyard. That’s why this action became necessary.”
The solution: a test of activity requiring members to simply state their “state” to confirm they are present and still interested. While the term “state” has been interpreted by some to mean geographic location, others see it as symbolic of personal status or willingness to remain part of the group. Either way, the action serves as a filter to distinguish active participants from those who joined but never returned.
Mixed Reactions from Members
The reaction has been swift and divided. On one side, many loyal members applauded the decision, calling it long overdue.
“It’s about time,” wrote one participant in the group’s discussion thread. “We’ve had too many people just sitting back without contributing. If you can’t even type your state, do you really deserve to stay?”
Others, however, expressed concerns over the fairness of the policy, especially for members who may have been temporarily inactive due to personal or professional obligations.
“What if someone is away on vacation? Or sick? Or just not checking messages regularly? They could get removed unfairly,” argued another user.
Some members also suggested that the policy, while effective in the short term, might create unnecessary pressure on participants and discourage casual followers who prefer to read rather than actively post.
A Wider Trend in Online Communities
Experts in digital culture note that this move is part of a wider trend where group administrators are increasingly prioritizing engagement over sheer membership numbers. Social media platforms, chat groups, and online forums alike have all faced the same dilemma: balancing growth with meaningful interaction.
“Big groups often inflate their importance by boasting about their membership size,” said Dr. Elaine Rivers, a sociologist specializing in online communities. “But when half or more of the people aren’t engaging, the group’s actual value is diluted. Removing inactive members is a way to build stronger community ties, even if it means sacrificing size.”
What’s Next?
For now, members are scrambling to comply with the directive by stating their state—whether it be California, Lagos, or simply “active.” Those who fail to respond by the given deadline risk being permanently removed from the group’s membership list.
While the management has not disclosed the exact number of expected removals, early indications suggest the cleanup could be significant. What remains to be seen is whether this strategy will achieve its intended goal of creating a more vibrant and connected digital community, or whether it will alienate members who feel unfairly targeted.
Either way, the message is clear: in this group, silence is no longer an option.
Word count: ~620
Would you like me to make this sound more like a formal newspaper report or a casual online blog/news update.