Frothers Unite! UK

Adam Smiths left nut wrote:I genuinely agree with Bill on this one.
I don't see any point in him doing anything and I dare say he doesn't need to. Small hobby forums are not the target of this legislation and they are 'opt in' after all.
I think he probably is safe.

You'd be wrong to agree with Bill's claim of compliance, although he is probably further down the queue for being chased for non-compliance and the site may well fall over before they get to him. He sells advertising and membership to people in the EU with '000s of members in his database and states TMP is his full-time job. Even if he was just a hobby site it still applies. A pre-emptive conversation has been had with the ICO regarding my own gaming websites and whilst we were pretty close, I've been updating the wording and making sure there is a link to the privacy policy alongside every contact form and we only have 550 on the database.

The ICO already fine a range of people https://ico.org.uk/action-weve-taken/enforcement/ and whilst the big companies are likely to get tackled first it's a mixed bag that is likely to grow as more people realise they can complain. The big companies are the ones who actually send people on courses so I anticipate examples being made of smaller companies and groups who only read a leaflet. Online harassment is more likely to get flagged up nowadays so if you're sharing emails by ccing people without their explicit consent can be reported. I had to speak with one of our event organisers after he did that despite being told the week before to BCC and the reason for it and the s.

As Michael has pointed out, opt-in should be informed and there is no reference to a privacy policy at the point you hand over your data. For reference, data is 'Any information related to a natural person or ‘Data Subject’, that can be used to directly or indirectly identify the person. It can be anything from a name, a photo, an email address, bank details, posts on social networking websites, medical information, or a computer IP address.' If you can be identified from your postings, then there would be grounds for asking for it to be removed. If you also claimed that it being there was causing you harm or distress it would strengthen the case. Bill's occasional habit of using people's real names when slating the departed and allowing a hostile environment would go even further. I would think (I am not a lawyer, I only spoke to one about this issue) that flat out stating that he *will not* delete data in the FAQ is in direct contravention of the GDPR.

Obviously, the 'real name, real location' brigade who are generally in the US would make Bill's life much more difficult if he listened to their demands.

And that was me...idiot.

Bill prevaricates. Again.

The GDPR website is unclear as to whether the GDPR protects EU citizens or simply EU residents.

Potentially, someone would have to provide proof of citizenship (or residency) before claiming these protections.

It seems ironic that someone would need to give away more of their privacy in order to claim these privacy protections.

http://theminiaturespage.com/boards/msg.mv?id=478756

Makes no difference either way Bill, you're still supposed to be compliant.

Adam Smiths left nut wrote:I genuinely agree with Bill on this one.
I don't see any point in him doing anything and I dare say he doesn't need to. Small hobby forums are not the target of this legislation and they are 'opt in' after all.
I think he probably is safe.

This imposter stuff is getting pretty weak.
There is literally no recorded incident of me ever recording with Bill on anything.

Who's imposturing who?
Since there's no registered user called 'Adam Smiths left nut' then how can anyone be an impostor?

Just Guests, surely?

You don't own the name.
If you don't like it then...well...log in or fuck off.
Until then I'll use the name if I want to, or any other Guest name if it pleases me, and I can make you look a cunt (proving quite effective already!) into the bargain.

Again, log in or fuck off.

First Guest: Is your name not Guest?
Adam Smiths left nut: No, it's Adam Smiths left nut.
Second Guest: That's going to cause a little confusion.
Third Guest: Mind if we call you 'Guest' to keep it clear?

Adam Smiths left nut wrote:Who's imposturing who?
Since there's no registered user called 'Adam Smiths left nut' then how can anyone be an impostor?

Just Guests, surely?

You don't own the name.
If you don't like it then...well...log in or fuck off.
Until then I'll use the name if I want to, or any other Guest name if it pleases me, and I can make you look a cunt (proving quite effective already!) into the bargain.

Again, log in or fuck off.

Ladies and gentlemen, the height of Bill's cunning plans.

Or depth.

Adam Smiths left Nut wrote:

Adam Smiths left nut wrote:Who's imposturing who?
Since there's no registered user called 'Adam Smiths left nut' then how can anyone be an impostor?

Just Guests, surely?

You don't own the name.
If you don't like it then...well...log in or fuck off.
Until then I'll use the name if I want to, or any other Guest name if it pleases me, and I can make you look a cunt (proving quite effective already!) into the bargain.

Again, log in or fuck off.

Ladies and gentlemen, the height of Bill's cunning plans.

Which is why you are all...Bill.

Bill doesn't have to delete accounts, just information such as real names and details such as email addresses or addresses, etc. Messages that have already been posted under a particular name are more a case of 'published work' - by posting, you've already agreed to them being there! It's not the 'public' face that has to be cleaned up, it's the personal information. Not sure about accounts that use your 'real' name as opposed to an alias, but again by posting under that name you've made a concious decision to place your name on a public forum.

I would point out, of course, that that is a personal interpretation rather than an actual legal interpretation!