Just flagging…

[The Original OTIB]

7 hours ago, fgrsimon said:

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.

 

 

 

 

Thank you for your experience of this. However, what you set forth would equally allow banned users to invoke GDPR, erase their misdemeanours and start again, would it not? Just to reiterate, once again, this is not personal. I'm exploring the reality of data and the management thereof as it relates to this forum. Theoretically, we could all invoke a clean break, if so inclined. 

[Silvio Dante]

1 hour ago, The Original OTIB said:

Thank you for your experience of this. However, what you set forth would equally allow banned users to invoke GDPR, erase their misdemeanours and start again, would it not? Just to reiterate, once again, this is not personal. I'm exploring the reality of data and the management thereof as it relates to this forum. Theoretically, we could all invoke a clean break, if so inclined. 

The theory is right - you can invoke “the right to be forgotten” and then start again under GDPR (in effect arguing that as you’re not partaking the data is no longer relevant - before then partaking!)

The thing for me is that if you choose to “re-partake” in the forum then your data/posts prior do become relevant - not as a stick to beat you with, but because by “re-engaging” you are in effect re-giving consent.

So, we really end up in two places (and noting again I don’t think forum posts would have to be deleted under GDPR but people who ask are effectively putting mods/volunteers in a really bad position)

- If you choose to leave under GDPR then you’re gone for good, and if you create another account, if in the mods opinion that is the same user, that also gets banned

- The alternate is that if you rejoin all your prior posts are reinstated. However I see that as a technical nightmare and open to abuse, so I err on “1”

I have been thinking on this over the last day or so, and I think what we have with the alleged “duplication” here is a relatively unique scenario and isn’t necessarily down to wilful misuse.

IIRC, the user “Ralph Milnes left foot” was trans (I can’t recall if they transitioned fully or not). Trans people, when they do transition, refer to their prior name as “deadnaming” and consider that the person they were pre transition isn’t the same person as they are post transition. This would naturally follow to wanting any prior posts under the initial ID removed, and then denying they were ever that user (as they don’t consider themself to be the same user).
 

So, I kind of “get it” on this case and I can see a valid reason for exception to the above.

[42nite]

 

Or maybe just talk about football?

 

[johnheadbcfc]

I hate international breaks 

[Lorenzos Only Goal]

25 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

The theory is right - you can invoke “the right to be forgotten” and then start again under GDPR (in effect arguing that as you’re not partaking the data is no longer relevant - before then partaking!)

The thing for me is that if you choose to “re-partake” in the forum then your data/posts prior do become relevant - not as a stick to beat you with, but because by “re-engaging” you are in effect re-giving consent.

So, we really end up in two places (and noting again I don’t think forum posts would have to be deleted under GDPR but people who ask are effectively putting mods/volunteers in a really bad position)

- If you choose to leave under GDPR then you’re gone for good, and if you create another account, if in the mods opinion that is the same user, that also gets banned

- The alternate is that if you rejoin all your prior posts are reinstated. However I see that as a technical nightmare and open to abuse, so I err on “1”

I have been thinking on this over the last day or so, and I think what we have with the alleged “duplication” here is a relatively unique scenario and isn’t necessarily down to wilful misuse.

IIRC, the user “Ralph Milnes left foot” was trans (I can’t recall if they transitioned fully or not). Trans people, when they do transition, refer to their prior name as “deadnaming” and consider that the person they were pre transition isn’t the same person as they are post transition. This would naturally follow to wanting any prior posts under the initial ID removed, and then denying they were ever that user (as they don’t consider themself to be the same user).
 

So, I kind of “get it” on this case and I can see a valid reason for exception to the above.

GDPR what a lawyer's paradise and the ICO what a flacid waste of time.

[The Original OTIB]

36 minutes ago, 42nite said:

 

Or maybe just talk about football?

 

Why not politely request that it be moved to General Chat if it irks so much?

[johnwilkinson]

1 hour ago, Silvio Dante said:

 

- If you choose to leave under GDPR then you’re gone for good, and if you create another account, if in the mods opinion that is the same user, that also gets banned

 

I wish to fully support this view as a practical solution to the problem of those who seek to deceive fellow members of the forum who come here to discuss football with like minded supporters

[AJgEEZa]

On 12/11/2023 at 11:02, RedorDead BCFC said:

Phew I thought I started in 2015 and thought I might be on the naughty list. But I checked its 2011. 
 

 

I had a little flap too but I actually joined in 2010! Not even made 500 posts yet either. And just for the record, I have said some dumb stuff and owned it

[fgrsimon]

16 hours ago, The Original OTIB said:

Thank you for your experience of this. However, what you set forth would equally allow banned users to invoke GDPR, erase their misdemeanours and start again, would it not? Just to reiterate, once again, this is not personal. I'm exploring the reality of data and the management thereof as it relates to this forum. Theoretically, we could all invoke a clean break, if so inclined. 

I would say 'misdemeanours' is a forum issue not a GDPR thing. GDPR doesn't care if the person is 'good' or 'bad' just whether the data held can be used to identify them and whether the person wants their information to be kept on file. A banned user trying to come back under a new user is not allowed under the OTIB forum rules and GDPR doesn't come into it. Equally details of misdemeanours is not a GDPR thing as it's not something that could be used to identify an individual.

But as I said the whole thing is quite woolly (probably by design) and as a Data Controller it's best to err on the side of caution.

[Marina's Rolls Royce]

ZUNY TUNES

  

 

[The Original OTIB]

6 hours ago, fgrsimon said:

I would say 'misdemeanours' is a forum issue not a GDPR thing. GDPR doesn't care if the person is 'good' or 'bad' just whether the data held can be used to identify them and whether the person wants their information to be kept on file. A banned user trying to come back under a new user is not allowed under the OTIB forum rules and GDPR doesn't come into it. Equally details of misdemeanours is not a GDPR thing as it's not something that could be used to identify an individual.

But as I said the whole thing is quite woolly (probably by design) and as a Data Controller it's best to err on the side of caution.

I did not for one minute say that it was. Nor did I suggest any qualitative assessment of good or bad, as you put it. I merely pointed out that as thing stand it seems feasible for any banned user to use GDPR (invoke) and start again with impunity. Likewise, any of the rest of us could erase our past comments should we so choose and come back with no history of our prior comments/positions, etc.

As things stand, these appear to be the facts, without a specific policy being stated to address such things. I'll leave it there for now, unless a moderator wishes to chip in with any actual policy position or update. I do feel that whatever the wider issues, it really is not in the spirit of a forum to erase one's past. Just my opinion, for what it is worth. 

[The Original OTIB]

Perhaps the moderators might also move this to General Chat as it seems to raise ire and vexation in some, for reasons unbeknownst. 

[42nite]

43 minutes ago, The Original OTIB said:

Perhaps the moderators might also move this to General Chat as it seems to raise ire and vexation in some, for reasons unbeknownst. 

Because it's not Football Chat?

[The Original OTIB]

15 minutes ago, 42nite said:

Because it's not Football Chat?

Then request it be moved, as I have pointed out before, and have now done so, or else, option 2, ignore the thread. Up to the moderators, as indeed is the substance of what is set forth herein.

[The Original OTIB]

Thank you moderators, will there be an official comment on GDPR policy at any point, as it pertains to OTIB, or will you review the same and revert? 

[The Original OTIB]

1 hour ago, The Original OTIB said:

Then request it be moved, as I have pointed out before, and have now done so, or else, option 2, ignore the thread. Up to the moderators, as indeed is the substance of what is set forth herein.

?

[phantom]

On 12/11/2023 at 17:35, 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?

Apologies for jumping into this late, I have been away all weekend and only briefly looked at the forum over the past few days

The easy answer is we would never discuss anyone's personal details openly on this forum and I am not sure why it would be of anyone else's business

BUT, I take your point that people "could" ask for their account to be deleted and then start again.

Without naming names I can only think of this happening twice in the years I have been a mod / admin on here

I personally find it odd that someone would want all the previous posting history removed and then decide to start up from scratch again,

 

As I am sure everyone can appreciate this is such a rare thing, like I said probably only two people out of 18k so it is not something that will occur very often again if at all - though I can add the admin / mods are currently discussing how we treat these requests going forward

Obviously those deleted in the past have gone and nothing can be done about

On 13/11/2023 at 02:33, fgrsimon said:

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.

I agree with the above and this reply is as close as to an answer we can ultimately give

1 hour ago, The Original OTIB said:

Thank you moderators, will there be an official comment on GDPR policy at any point, as it pertains to OTIB, or will you review the same and revert? 

There won't be an official comment from us, but if you are still looking for something I would suggest that you contact the SC&T in writing with your request etc and then they can reply to you, and if you wish to can update OTIB accordingly

 

Ultimately this thread has gone in many directions since the original post, so not sure that anything else needs to be added

[The Original OTIB]

48 minutes ago, phantom said:

Apologies for jumping into this late, I have been away all weekend and only briefly looked at the forum over the past few days

The easy answer is we would never discuss anyone's personal details openly on this forum and I am not sure why it would be of anyone else's business

BUT, I take your point that people "could" ask for their account to be deleted and then start again.

Without naming names I can only think of this happening twice in the years I have been a mod / admin on here

I personally find it odd that someone would want all the previous posting history removed and then decide to start up from scratch again,

 

As I am sure everyone can appreciate this is such a rare thing, like I said probably only two people out of 18k so it is not something that will occur very often again if at all - though I can add the admin / mods are currently discussing how we treat these requests going forward

Obviously those deleted in the past have gone and nothing can be done about

I agree with the above and this reply is as close as to an answer we can ultimately give

There won't be an official comment from us, but if you are still looking for something I would suggest that you contact the SC&T in writing with your request etc and then they can reply to you, and if you wish to can update OTIB accordingly

 

Ultimately this thread has gone in many directions since the original post, so not sure that anything else needs to be added

Thanks, but I have never asked for anyone's personal details, nor would I do so. I don't think anyone else has either, save for (theirs, not mine) reference to a user name (and a prior user name). My question was/is about the overall policy (should there be one), how it is implemented, and what might be done to improve matters. I'll leave it there, for now, thank you kindly for the additional information.

[phantom]

46 minutes ago, The Original OTIB said:

Thanks, but I have never asked for anyone's personal details, nor would I do so. I don't think anyone else has either, save for (theirs, not mine) reference to a user name (and a prior user name). My question was/is about the overall policy (should there be one), how it is implemented, and what might be done to improve matters. I'll leave it there, for now, thank you kindly for the additional information.

Apologies, I didn't you specifically.

It has certainly made us (admin) address an issue though

[42nite]

6 minutes ago, phantom said:

Apologies, I didn't you specifically.

It has certainly made us (admin) address an issue though

You admin guys do a great job, well done!

But perhaps if everybody paid just £5 a year (less than 10p a week) to become OTIB Supporters, we could afford to pay a solicitor to deal with the legal side of things when they arise.