Just flagging…

[Northern Red]

39 minutes ago, Kingswood Robin said:

If it stops people in privileged positions trying to manipulate the situation, maybe there could be something like a 2 week bar on posting after signing up.

I'm sure that until very recently any new poster had to have their first few posts approved by an admin.

[The Original OTIB]

39 minutes ago, The Original OTIB said:

Out of genuine interest, is it permissible to have one's OTIB history erased and then return in a new guise, as inferred herein? I can't really see how that is in the spirit of that which transpires here, if true.

If it is true, then any prior history should be reinstated and the former guise made known (at the very least if law prohibits the former). Either you want in and consent or you do not. 

[Davefevs]

48 minutes ago, The Original OTIB said:

Awaiting official response.

DM one of the mods

[The Original OTIB]

3 minutes ago, Spreadsheet Boy said:

DM one of the mods

Why? Should be an answer open to all.

[Davefevs]

3 minutes ago, The Original OTIB said:

Why? Should be an answer open to all.

Good point.  No arguments from me.

[Ian M]

1 hour ago, The Original OTIB said:

Out of genuine interest, is it permissible to have one's OTIB history erased and then return in a new guise, as inferred herein? I can't really see how that is in the spirit of that which transpires here, if true.

I can't remember anything in the rules about a poster deciding to leave and then changing their mind later and returning. In the past we have managed to merge accounts for users when they have returned.

There is a rule that banned users can't just make a new account to circumvent their ban though, hence my action when I confirm these.

[The Original OTIB]

Just now, Ian M said:

I can't remember anything in the rules about a poster deciding to leave and then changing their mind later and returning. In the past we have managed to merge accounts for users when they have returned.

There is a rule that banned users can't just make a new account to circumvent their ban though, hence my action when I confirm these.

Thank you Ian, but to the specifics, It is suggested that a certain poster put in a GDPR request to have data removed then came back under a new guise. Is that not true then?

[Ian M]

1 minute ago, The Original OTIB said:

Thank you Ian, but to the specifics, It is suggested that a certain poster put in a GDPR request to have data removed then came back under a new guise. Is that not true then?

I genuinely don't know and equally don't know if GDPR would allow me to reveal that if I did know. 

[The Original OTIB]

Just now, Ian M said:

I genuinely don't know and equally don't know if GDPR would allow me to reveal that if I did know. 

I don't find this particularly amusing. Who can confirm this please?

[Ian M]

2 minutes ago, The Original OTIB said:

I don't find this particularly amusing. Who can confirm this please?

I apologise to you profusely for not being legally trained, nor being around at the time you are talking of. 

[The Original OTIB]

3 minutes ago, Ian M said:

I apologise to you profusely for not being legally trained, nor being around at the time you are talking of. 

Dear Ian, I'm not sure why you take umbrage by the subsequent questions posed. I do think this is a serious subject and I did politely ask who might be able to confirm as you have outlined the reasons why you can't do so. I don't think that unreasonable nor impolitely posed.

[Ian M]

Just now, The Original OTIB said:

Dear Ian, I'm not sure why you take umbrage by the subsequent questions posed. I do think this is a serious subject and I did politely ask who might be able to confirm as you have outlined the reasons why you can't do so. I don't think that unreasonable nor impolitely posed.

I will leave this discussion for someone who does know then. As I should have done several replies ago.

[Silvio Dante]

I have some recollection about what happened at the time. 
 

There was a user, Ralph Milnes Left Foot, who requested their account be removed and all posts deleted under GDPR (ie the right to be forgotten). Data principles state that data should be, amongst other things, obtained with consent, relevant and only held for as long as necessary. The user robustly asked for their data to be removed (effectively withdrawing consent), and TomF couldn’t be sure that legally, not removing old posts could be classed as a GDPR breach.

(Side note: it’s likely not to be as by the nature of what was posted, it’s public domain when posted - like on Twitter - but OTIB didn’t have the time or resources to have that legal decision made).

So Tom deleted all of the old posts. I’d like to say it made threads unintelligible but based on the content of the poster, it pretty much improved all threads.

Shortly after, a new user joined with a name that referenced Ralph’s. When pressed, they said that they admired Ralph’s posts/posting style and used the name as a tribute. All totally plausible, of course.

Moving to @The Original OTIBs question, I would be of the mind that anyone who asked to leave and have their posts removed under GDPR should be considered permanently banned - they created work needlessly for the mods. I see no reason to treat posters of this ilk different from those who have been banned for other misuse. Deactivated/Reactivated accounts when people have a break and no ask for removal of data is fine.

The Mods do a good job of finding accounts such as Waconda who try and circumnavigate bans. I’m sure they could add “self banned” users to the list.

[Phileas Fogg]

17 hours ago, Tafkarmlf said:

I've a playbook now?

How exciting

The effort people go to stop discussing football on a football forum is absolutely astonishing

 

I know you haven’t had the easiest time over the last few years by the sounds of things - but I am unsure whether being so active on this forum in such a combative way is the best idea.

It seems like you could start an argument in a phone box, and constantly drag decent albeit lively debate into ad hominem insults and accusations. 

I know you won’t like this, but it feels like you’ve made a decision that you are a victim in every aspect of life and can’t see the between a difference of opinion and a personal attack. 

I don’t know your personal circumstances, so I’m commenting in isolation on your forum presence. And to be honest, I don’t think it’s a particularly positive addition. A bit of self reflection is needed I think.

[Superjack]

38 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

I have some recollection about what happened at the time. 
 

There was a user, Ralph Milnes Left Foot, who requested their account be removed and all posts deleted under GDPR (ie the right to be forgotten). Data principles state that data should be, amongst other things, obtained with consent, relevant and only held for as long as necessary. The user robustly asked for their data to be removed (effectively withdrawing consent), and TomF couldn’t be sure that legally, not removing old posts could be classed as a GDPR breach.

(Side note: it’s likely not to be as by the nature of what was posted, it’s public domain when posted - like on Twitter - but OTIB didn’t have the time or resources to have that legal decision made).

So Tom deleted all of the old posts. I’d like to say it made threads unintelligible but based on the content of the poster, it pretty much improved all threads.

Shortly after, a new user joined with a name that referenced Ralph’s. When pressed, they said that they admired Ralph’s posts/posting style and used the name as a tribute. All totally plausible, of course.

Moving to @The Original OTIBs question, I would be of the mind that anyone who asked to leave and have their posts removed under GDPR should be considered permanently banned - they created work needlessly for the mods. I see no reason to treat posters of this ilk different from those who have been banned for other misuse. Deactivated/Reactivated accounts when people have a break and no ask for removal of data is fine.

The Mods do a good job of finding accounts such as Waconda who try and circumnavigate bans. I’m sure they could add “self banned” users to the list.

[The Original OTIB]

49 minutes ago, Ian M said:

I will leave this discussion for someone who does know then. As I should have done several replies ago.

Thank you Ian, apologies if I came over a little blunt in my response. No malice intended.

[Ian M]

2 minutes ago, The Original OTIB said:

Thank you Ian, apologies if I came over a little blunt in my response. No malice intended.

Thank you.

[The Original OTIB]

50 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

I have some recollection about what happened at the time. 
 

There was a user, Ralph Milnes Left Foot, who requested their account be removed and all posts deleted under GDPR (ie the right to be forgotten). Data principles state that data should be, amongst other things, obtained with consent, relevant and only held for as long as necessary. The user robustly asked for their data to be removed (effectively withdrawing consent), and TomF couldn’t be sure that legally, not removing old posts could be classed as a GDPR breach.

(Side note: it’s likely not to be as by the nature of what was posted, it’s public domain when posted - like on Twitter - but OTIB didn’t have the time or resources to have that legal decision made).

So Tom deleted all of the old posts. I’d like to say it made threads unintelligible but based on the content of the poster, it pretty much improved all threads.

Shortly after, a new user joined with a name that referenced Ralph’s. When pressed, they said that they admired Ralph’s posts/posting style and used the name as a tribute. All totally plausible, of course.

Moving to @The Original OTIBs question, I would be of the mind that anyone who asked to leave and have their posts removed under GDPR should be considered permanently banned - they created work needlessly for the mods. I see no reason to treat posters of this ilk different from those who have been banned for other misuse. Deactivated/Reactivated accounts when people have a break and no ask for removal of data is fine.

The Mods do a good job of finding accounts such as Waconda who try and circumnavigate bans. I’m sure they could add “self banned” users to the list.

Agreed if someone requests removal of their data. Whether we disagree with each other or not, I do think it is in the spirit of a forum to own your opinions and defend them. Change them even, if so inclined. Be respectful as much as possible. Apologise and mean it if you cross a line. Whatever the circumstance, do not abuse the privilege.

Edited November 12, 2023 by The Original OTIB

[Phileas Fogg]

2 minutes ago, Tafkarmlf said:

Absolutely had the self reflection and the choice to be assertive.

Sadly some see that as aggressive because it's coming from someone who's done the hard yards in recovery from multiple life changing events both physically and mentally.

It's that I don't hold an accepted view I'm awaiting diagnosis for ASD and ADHD as well so things can come across to others as blunt or out there.

Without football I wouldn't be alive and I'm saddened that people are far more concerned with trying out, wrongly others and then using that to further agendas for internet point scoring.

Thus far I've tried 7 times to unalive because of being raped this year.

In the current brouhaha following Niges dismissal I've been accused of making up being raped and now have posters trying to dox and break privacy because it suits them to try and break the law and boundaries.

That's on the posters here, and is quite frankly disgusting given there's a sticky thread promoting mental health and wellbeing 

I'm here to discuss football, not anything else for anything or anyone else .

I could have chosen any other user name and perhaps that's on me, because rmlf seems to derive derision.

The rest I couldn't give a **** about.

Take a break, nah ya good.

Not suffer abusive aholes most definitely

Hopefully that answers your question 

Kind of.. I think you’d get a bit more respect if you just admitted you’re the same poster. It’s obvious you are, denying it is just odd.

[Barrs Court Red]

I think this thread should probably be locked at this point. 

[The Original OTIB]

3 minutes ago, Barrs Court Red said:

I think this thread should probably be locked at this point. 

Depends what slant you take. Mine is not personal, just a request for clarity. Whether specific accusations and denials have validity is another matter. The issue itself is certainly worthy of discussion and clarification. 

[lenred]

7 minutes ago, Barrs Court Red said:

I think this thread should probably be locked at this point. 

There’s no point.  It’ll just happen on another thread. And then another one. And then another one…… Because the person who is constantly instigating these issues will continue to do so as night follows day.   

[bcfc01]

Now on ignore anyway.

But it really should be locked, its gone far enough imo, not sure why people place so much store on who people are or are not. People have their own reasons for anonymity or not, their choice, and people should respect that.

[bearded_red]

3 minutes ago, lenred said:

There’s no point.  It’ll just happen on another thread. And then another one. And then another one…… Because the person who is constantly instigating these issues will continue to do so as night follows day.   

Correct. Should be ignored.

[Simon bristol]

9 minutes ago, bcfc01 said:

Now on ignore anyway.

But it really should be locked, its gone far enough imo, not sure why people place so much store on who people are or are not. People have their own reasons for anonymity or not, their choice, and people should respect that.

Agreed, this place can be pretty miserable,,,  my 14 year old lad loves city and is starting to browse on here,, im trying to encourage him not to join so he doesnt have to deal with the “must be the school holidays” type comments, or worse when he makes a reply that certain people dont agree with… this thread is full of petty b.s,, we might be city fans, but people going through the posting history of other posters to find something to rub their nose in from 5 years ago is embarrassing, and this being held responsible for their comments under a previous username, theres a big world out there, people have all sorts of personal opinions and situations in life which might influence their thoughts at a particular time,,, having to “own” their comments made 10 years ago on a bristol city fans forum is a pathetic comment to be making.

[IAmNick]

35 minutes ago, Tafkarmlf said:

Absolutely had the self reflection and the choice to be assertive.

Sadly some see that as aggressive because it's coming from someone who's done the hard yards in recovery from multiple life changing events both physically and mentally.

It's that I don't hold an accepted view I'm awaiting diagnosis for ASD and ADHD as well so things can come across to others as blunt or out there.

Without football I wouldn't be alive and I'm saddened that people are far more concerned with trying out, wrongly others and then using that to further agendas for internet point scoring.

Thus far I've tried 7 times to unalive because of being raped this year.

In the current brouhaha following Niges dismissal I've been accused of making up being raped and now have posters trying to dox and break privacy because it suits them to try and break the law and boundaries.

That's on the posters here, and is quite frankly disgusting given there's a sticky thread promoting mental health and wellbeing 

I'm here to discuss football, not anything else for anything or anyone else .

I could have chosen any other user name and perhaps that's on me, because rmlf seems to derive derision.

The rest I couldn't give a **** about.

Take a break, nah ya good.

Not suffer abusive aholes most definitely

Hopefully that answers your question 

Nobody is trying to dox you. Even if you were RMLF, there is nothing personally identifiable there. As far as I know all their posts have been deleted anyway.

Linking someone with a potential old username is not doxing or breaking privacy. It also doesn't break the law in any way.

I do have sympathy but every thread you participate in currently ends up in an argument with you at the centre and it's getting extremely tiring - I think it's your manner rather than your opinions in that it always becomes aggressive and personal very quickly.

To be blunt there are about 3 potentially interesting threads on the first page at the moment which are just you trading blows with anyone who comes near and it's getting very tiring.

[PHILINFRANCE]

On 11/11/2023 at 22:29, Tafkarmlf said:

The paranoia here is absolutely running rife.

One poster has already made the assumption that I made up being raped 

That was the utter final straw in this utter madness and I'll be damned if aholes are going to let this place go to the dogs.

Honestly and genuinely, please can some people give their heads a wobble before going on the next crazy aside 

 

 

On 11/11/2023 at 22:32, Cristored said:

Who cares ffs.

Precisely.

This is essentially and predominantly a football (based) forum.

Might I suggest (respectfully) that the state of your previous/current sex and/or gender has no place on such a forum.

Re. your claim that you have been raped, whether as a man or a woman, I have never heard/read about this, but I have no reason to doubt you.

Nevertheless, apart from empathy and, of course, aside from an obvious and no doubt shared abhorrence at such a heinous crime, I can only repeat that this subject should be redirected elsewhere.

Finally, in so far as it concerns ‘this place going to the dogs’ perhaps you might consider shortening your lead a little.

Good Night and God Bless.

Edited November 13, 2023 by PHILINFRANCE

[fgrsimon]

8 hours ago, Ian M said:

I will leave this discussion for someone who does know then. As I should have done several replies ago.

I was a GDPR Data Steward as part of my job until recently and the whole thing is a bit woolly but as a 'Data Controller' which OTIB would be, it's best to err on the side of caution. So it would be advisable NOT to to disclose whether a new poster is actually an old poster returning under a different name, especially if the previous person has asked for their personal data to be removed.

Basically the principle is that does the data held allow a person to be identified? So things like name, email address, dob, postal address would definitely come under GDPR. I think that an individual's posts would not come under GDPR unless they'd unwisely disclosed their own personal information in their posts. If someone has disclosed another person's personal information then that should be deleted immediately as per basic forum etiquette, never mind GDPR.

That said, if someone's playing around and pretending they're someone that they're not or whatever, they wouldn't be looked on favourably by the FCA but as I said above, it's best to play on the safe side.

 

 

 

 

Edited November 13, 2023 by fgrsimon
Spelling

[jj77]

I think the real giveaway though is when they reset their password the link is sent to a Bristol Sport email address.

[Iron Acton Red]

12 hours ago, Barrs Court Red said:

I think this thread should probably be locked at this point. 

Bravo, can’t believe it’s had so many replies