Dietmar,
Whether or not all 1 million and some members have contributed much, or played a great deal of chess recently, each and every member has helped make chess.com what is now. There have to be some less active members, because otherwise you end up with an astonishingly large group of overachieving people, or a small group of dedicated chess players that frantically post, trying to keep the site alive. No, it is equally important to have players that do NOT post at all and are only here for the occasional game of free chess. If you want to see active members, take a gander at the list of "most active members." There you will find plenty of people who are very active on chess.com, possibly topping your "measly rating." I have a Blitz rating of just over 1000, for the record. Whether or not everyone plays very often, or even does anything with their account is not important to their member status. They have supported the site in a small way just by becoming a member and doing NOTHING. While it would be interesting to see the comparison between active and inactive members, I for one would find it frankly insulting to see an enormous group of people suddenly dropped off the membership list because they weren't active enough.
Thank you,
Leo
On the homepage of Chess.com is the announcement that soon 1 Million members have registered. I am wondering how many of those are actually active. In Blitz chess my measly rating of 1677 is sufficient for the 97 percentile. In Online chess a rating of 1290 put you right around the 50 percentile. I think it would be much more informative to only include members in the percentile rankings that have made a move in the respective category within the last 6 months (or pick your time frame). This would be similar to FIDE rankings where someone will drop off the official list if inactive for a certain period of time.