The Arcive of Official vBulletin Modifications Site.It is not a VB3 engine, just a parsed copy! |
|
|
#31
06-07-2003, 09:28 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
 ).[Boldrick mode]I have a cunning plan[/Boldrick mode] Okay using the Bird Club as an example (was going to go with trainspotting but then it would get plain silly), what about the situation where the Bird Club randomly joined people up from a list they got from the local Chess Club, and posted their membership in a national paper to indicate how well they were going. Not sure about the Chess guys, but l would imagine a number of people would get upset with that sort of action. *Sits back with arms folded waiting for Talisman's reply Hey Ikonboard just got busted for using pirated software, and the software in question was like $20. Trying to get a link for that bit of gossip. - From the weird, who runs some of these companies file. 
|
|
#32
06-07-2003, 09:57 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
/me does a double-take
What about IkonBoard!? edit: Since we're obviously just using a purely hypothetical situation that couldn't possibly relate to anything in reality (because in which case this thread is completely inappropriate), how about this? The forums change focus by restructuring the forums themselves (i.e., adding forums related to the new content and deleting or locking forums related to old content), changing the moderation team, and overhauling the appearance. However, no user data is actually imported, but is completely untouched in the process. Some users request their accounts be deleted so there's no trace of their existance, which is denied by the administrator for eight clearly defined reasons (and of course, as the administrator pays the bills for the site along with donors, has the final say in how the forum is run, this is acceptable). Some users do not just accept the fact that the administrator has the final say. Instead of removing all information from their profiles and removing all contact options, they choose to flood the board with junk messages, harassments, threads, or grossly inappropriate content. By doing so, they destroy time from other members of the community who merely are there to seek assistance for their technical problems (say, for example, the site is web design related, so they're trying to get help for their web design problems; of course this is 100% theoretical, right?). Now, how should the administrator react in the situation? Given in to the metaphorical terrorism (delete accounts or we'll continue), or firmly stick by the already published rules?
|
|
#33
06-07-2003, 11:12 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
I've got a sailing forum, not a debate team. But we usually wander off topic more than we're on. (You know, the usual -- movie quotes, song lyrics, despicable things people do with sheep. :squareeyed: It's quite wide open.) You're more than welcome, of course ..... but after seeing this thread, you'd better bring along a few helpers. (Ha!)  Alright, back to this..... Quote:
All that stuff about some group switching people over without their knowledge... and without their consent. Or changing the direction of a forum from what it used to be..... Sorry, Jethro, but those are all side issues. All you're doing with that is cluttering up the very simple question you asked us at the top of Page 1, which was whether or not we're obligated to delete everything we've got in our private files (upon request) when members depart our fine company. Havesting email addresses, publishing the personal data of your members without their consent, and slamming them into clubs they don't want to be in is totally wrong.... regardless of whether or not you get complaints ..... or whether people stay members or quit your group. But that's got nothing to do with your original question. (And you can see from my comments, that I stayed right with the main premise you gave us.... not getting sidelined by all this other stuff.) Mind you...... our sweet, faithful society for bird lovers would never dream of imposing on those weird strategy freaks you hang out with in the chess club. :knockedout: At least not without first sending an engraved invitation to said weirdos in advance, inviting them to stop by next Sunday afternoon for cupcakes and punch at a social gathering (within view of their most popular neighborhood birdbaths). So now, I guess that leaves us with you still trying to refute the workplace analogy (that's a point for me) .... and also having since missed your chance to counter our dear, sweet association for those who adore all creatures feathered. [high]* Talisman takes Jethro's bishop (with regret) and moves rook to queen's pawn.[/high]
|
|
#34
06-08-2003, 01:57 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
BTW, I asked my host this very question and after a lengthy discussion, we agreed that the administrator would not be required to remove accounts because it was not in violation of the TOS/AUP and that the core of the matter was "misrepresentation" which could simply be resolved by removing profile information.
|
|
#35
06-08-2003, 02:25 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
If someone wants to be deleted and you remove him/her from every visible place where members would show up ...... how would anyone else even know if you have some "dead file" somewhere that serves as an archive of old, former members? As far as anyone else can tell..... the person was deleted (in a literal sense). And, if you're not claiming this person is still a member and you're not sharing their private data with anybody, then what's being misrepresented?
|
|
#36
06-09-2003, 07:14 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I don't really want to get dragged into this debate (which seems to have a political backdrop) - but I did want to raise another point which seems to have been missed.
Surely the creator of the posts - the user - owns copyright over the content, and if they ask for an account to be deleted they are in effect removing permission for you to 'publish' or 'hold' the copyright material - thus putting a legal obligation on us forum administrators to remove it from our systems. Comments?
|
|
#37
06-09-2003, 08:03 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Nice point Martin. Probably Talisman has an answer to that one
Filburt, still trying to find the link to the Ikonboard story, ran across it on some forum l visit occasionally. One of their members scored a screen shot of the action. Some good arguements for not deleting accounts btw
|
|
#38
06-09-2003, 08:55 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Oh sure, Jethro. I can usually come up with something..... haha.
Martin is right about copyright issues. All content posted in our forums remains the property of the author. And if they ask us to remove all their messages, we have no choice. We must delete them all. And pretty darn fast, too. Same thing goes for any photos they've uploaded in our galleries. As long as they actually own those to begin with. Even so.... that's not the issue at question. Someone who posts a message is publishing a creative piece..... it's their own ideas, feelings, intellectual property.... etc. etc. But that's not the case when they provide (very non-creative) data as they fill out a registration form to join our forums. There's no pride of authorship in effect when they're hammering out a username, email address, birthday, and location. What do you think? The member profiles are given voluntarily as a matter of public record. And I would think that data would be the property of the site administrator. That's who those files belong to.
|
|
#39
06-09-2003, 09:31 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
As a data gatherer you are also required to have a policy detailing what you do with the data, how it is used and what measures you take to ensure its accuracy and security. Anybody who gathers data from residents of the United Kingdom is required to comply with this Law - The Data Protection Act (1984). How this is enforced when the gatherer is outside the UK I am not sure about. One thing I am also not certain about is rights concerning total removal of data - which I think is more pertinent to this conversation - I will approach the DPA and see what they have to say on the matter.
|
|
#40
06-09-2003, 10:12 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I have checked back over some material I have regarding the "Data Protection Act 1998" (enforcable since March 2000).
The act establishes a legal framework for a data subject to withdraw permission to hold, and process data, by a data processor. It firmly states that a subject can request removal of data, and the processor has to comply with the request in a 'reasonable' timeframe. The act does not state what a reasonable timeframe is, but the data protection agency suggests 28 days. The act states that if a processor refuses then the subject can claim compensation via the courts. There is provision for the processor to reject the request but this is only if the removal of data would 'create a life threatening situation' - this is really to cover Medical records. The act goes on to specify that refusal on the basis that it would degrade the processors overall quality or marketablity of data is not a valid reason to decline. The act covers any processor operating within the european union - how it effects those outside is beyond my ability to fathom - but I thought the above might be useful for those who do have forums that are in the union.Food for though methinks. :smoke:
|
 |
«
Previous Thread
|
Next Thread
»
Linear Mode
|
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 03:42 PM.