[Closed] Types of forum user

I haven't read the whole thing, sorry.

My view woudl be that as long as personal data is removed (email address and any biography) that any posts 'belong' to stw as the publisher and not the poster anyway.

Maybe we should get together and between us quote all of a certain poster's posts so that the information is retained for posterity...

Good plan. We'll quote everything of value he has contributed over the years, so it's not lost.

Erm....

you start... 😉

Isn't the latest EU Directives and more importantly Member State legislation of more relevance to internet data protection than some stuff from 1981?

finished 😉

I haven't read the whole thing, sorry.

That would be a good tag for a few people but you'd need to change it to

" I haven't read the whole thing, but I'm not going to let that stop me..."

It seems Mark isn't the only one at STW towers to contradict himself within the same thread (though his was in the same post: on the one hand bragging about how traffic was up and there was no evidence that any posters damaged this, then going on to say he had very real proof that some -ve use had caused people to cancel subscriptions etc)

Traffic and subscribers are not the same thing. With that in mind I can't for the life of me see any contradiction.

[i]" I haven't read the whole thing, but I'm not going to let that stop me..." [/i]

I've been the first person to post after the OP and used that approach 😉

[edit] I do think that whilst done with the best of intentions this thread was never going to end well.

Never discuss, never explain. Would be my advice to Mark and the stw staff. Too many people on here want to have a pop.

Never discuss, never explain. Would be my advice to Mark and the stw staff.

[url= http://ncis.wikia.com/wiki/Leroy_Jethro_Gibbs/Rules ]Rule 6[/url] 😉

To help the moderators we are adding various reports and warning signals to identify suspect troublemakers. You won't get to see these

Sorry Tom, I was a bit unclear with what I was asking there.
What I actually meant to ask was what does the first part of this mean [u]to the average forum user[/u]. Looking back to page 3 and the examples as you suggest, I'm not really worried that I'll be mistaken for a spambot selling dresses from Asia or someone who only posts 'hello' in occasional threads. My concerns were more about how the "reports and warning signals" would be applied to normal posters.

PS
I am still interested in the label "[i]crocodile fighter[/i]" if you do go down that route. I noticed that someone else has enquired about it too, but I don't mind sharing.

There are guidelines wwaswas (edit: guidelines on the implementation of the 1981 European Data Protection Convention). My argument if my request were refused would be that as the forum moderators had been selectively editing my posts against my wishes my contributions as seen by STW viewers are distorted in such a way as to "me porter préjudice".

Someone mentioned Facebook earlier and Facebook satisfied the legislators by providing the possibily of deleting one's acccount. When you do this, anything that reamins on Facebook's computers can not be linked to any means of identifying you - nom, adresse électronique, adresse postale, pseudo - note it includes "pseudo". Posts if they remain must be anonymous.

Traffic and subscribers are not the same thing. With that in mind I can't for the life of me see any contradiction.

Semantacally, you are correct. However, you appeared to demonstrate how the business was growing, and how impervious this growth was to the effects of any one or a group of users. But then you seemed to go to great lengths to demonstrate why it was important for business that said users stop. Which I'm sure you'll agree is a tad contradictory...

Edukator - I can't think of any forum, anywhere that removes all of a users posts if their account is closed, for whatever reason? They can't *all* be breaking the law in whatever domains they're hosted?

I can't think of any forum, anywhere that removes all of a users posts if their account is closed, for whatever reason?

IIRC that's what happened on mtb-wales???

There was a spate of bannings - accounts were deleted and all posts by a banned user disappeared. There were a lot of very, very odd threads

I had it done on Bikemagic, wwaswas. I disappeared without trace for six months. I then reappeared during a site upgrade which showed that I'd been hidden rather than deleted. The search function failed on BM at the same time so as non-one could find anything anymore it didn't bother me that my contributions were visible again and I didn't do anything about the reappearance (and things had calmed down so I no longer feared for my life or spouse's job). The only contribution I've made since was a best wishes message to David Arthur when he left the site as he'd been the one to sort out my bozo request.

Couldn't a filter be applied - like on that killfile thingy - so that every post by the contributor in question was changed to "Edukator said something stupid"?

I've got a reasonably good understanding of libel and I don't think he'd have a case against you.

They can't *all* be breaking the law in whatever domains they're hosted?

Posts if they remain must be anonymous.

So sounds like STW can comply with your request by deleting any personal user details (email etc) they have for you and renaming your account to "Anon1"

Would that be enough?

It's nothing to do with libel, chakaping, it's about what people have stored on their computers. The European convention gives you a right to access, modification and deletion of personal data, including a nick name or pseudo.

how the "reports and warning signals" would be applied to normal posters.

As far as I'm concerned I'm not bothered if you've been around a while and made a few dozen posts. We maintain records of posts, IP addresses, warnings sent, and bans, the usual stuff which the moderators already regularly consult. I have previously looked at employing an index to help identify potential traders exploiting the forum against its rules, and I run various checks for problem banned users. I have a particular interest in geolocating the country or regional level as I mainly deal with the real problems like bots and spammers, rather than the more political forum issues, but if you are relatively normal it will be of no importance. You will be marked as 'normal', perhaps.

Again I point to the fact that the forum is full of stuff you have knowingly posted on a popular worldwide forum on the Internet.

That wouldn't be good enough GrahamS. Anon 1, 2, 3 etc would allow a reader to identify posts belonging to one anon and thus work out who the anon was, a bit like how the B samples were linked to Lance.

I'm going to change my username to Anon1 and beat the rush.

Reckon the only 'tag' that i would want to know, is who is posting whilst in 'work'-- just out of interest

So, as long as at least two posters requested removal then STW could apply the login "Unknown" to every thread in which they (plus every subsequent removed member) posted and the removed members would have their publishings saved for posterity but their identities blanked safely.

Thread Hi-jack

Alex! Hi! Yes, it was a long time back. Sorry to hear of your loss at Les Gets, hopefully you've found a new one since?! Bit busy with the Atheists at the mo.... 🙄

Hope you're well chap.

Thread hijack ends. Thank you. 😀

Edukator - it doesn't go that far actually. If you post in the public domain you don't have a right to then go back at some point in the future and demand that what you said be changed to something else or even deleted.

. Traffic and subscribers are not the same thing. With that in mind I can't for the life of me see any contradiction.

Semantacally, you are correct. However, you appeared to demonstrate how the business was growing, and how impervious this growth was to the effects of any one or a group of users. But then you seemed to go to great lengths to demonstrate why it was important for business that said users stop. Which I'm sure you'll agree is a tad contradictory...

Zokes, you seem to be confused here so let me try and help. Traffic increases and subs are cancelled - these are not mutually exclusive happenings and it does happen. Traffic is people coming to our website, which they can for free. Subscriptions can be cancelled by people who don't like what certain elements of the traffic are doing as they quite rationally associate the behaviour of those individuals with the brand they have bought into.

Incidentally, our unique user figures from Google Analytics have increased almost 10% since the beginning of this month. The majority of that traffic is here in the forum. Our forum has become busier in the last 3 weeks than it has ever been in our history. I am aware that this fact will not sit well with the egos of some of the people who have not been able to post in that period but regardless, it is the reality.

By looking at the numbers that we have in front of us it is really quite logical and rational to perhaps assume there is just possibly a link between the moderation actions in the last few weeks and the data we are now seeing. It is early days though, and we do usually expect a bit of a traffic spike at this time of year, so I'm not drawing conclusions just yet. We certainly aren't going backwards in traffic terms though and this forum is not shrinking.

When I look back at the analytics data over the past year and try to pinpoint the exact time any individual was banned I find I simply can't do it.

Alex! Hi! Yes, it was a long time back. Sorry to hear of your loss at Les Gets, hopefully you've found a new one since?!

snoorrfffff!!!

😆

Tom , thanks for the answer.

Well, Tom. Can you completely delete me or can't you?

I don't have the pressure on me of some forum poster threatening to lose my wife her job this time so I'm not going to threaten legal action now but I would like to know.

Having checked the legislation and cases for the BM incident I'm sure you'll find that forum providers now need to provide a Facebook style delete function. I can think of at least four recently banned members who would probably appreciate it as an option here even if they don't feel strongly enough to take legal action.

Edukator - are you asking for your account to be suspended and 'anonimised' (sp?) or just if it's possible?

Thanks mark, that does explain it much more clearly. One more question though: whilst I guess unique page views are on the surface free, such figures presumably help increase advertising? So ultimately what I'm trying to get at is of moderating / banning doesn't seem to make much difference, then perhaps a lighter tough might improve the feeling for all round these parts?

Of course what google analyitics can't tell you is whether the forum is full of interesting discussions, or just lots of people asking what tyres are best for CyB.

our unique user figures from Google Analytics have increased almost 10%

Without wanting to urinate on any potato-based snacks, does Google Analytics know which STW account people are logged into?

Cos I access this forum from my work laptop, my iphone, my ipad, my home laptop and my home PC. So if it doesn't know about STW accounts and is just looking at IP address plus some unique browser cookie, then I'm appearing as, at least, five "unique users".

And if that is the case, any increase in "unique users" [i]could[/i] be down to increasing numbers of people getting smartphones, tablets etc. No?

A pertinent question might be: has the number of [i]registered[/i] users seen an equivalent 10% increase?

A pertinent question might be: has your number of registered users seen an equivalent 10% increase?

Not if you're trying to emphasise increased engagement of existing users in the absence of, shall we say, discouraging elements.

Graham - Unique users is one of the primary metrics that sites can use to sell advertising, your distinction would be irrelevant in that process.

Edukator - I was trying to gently insult you, must try harder obviously.

🙂

Unique users is one of the primary metrics that sites can use to sell advertising, your distinction would be irrelevant in that process.

Yeah I realise that. I'm just pointing out that citing unique users data to say that recent moderation efforts are working [i]may[/i] be slightly misleading as the unique user count [i]may[/i] have been going up anyway and [i]may[/i] have little to do with actual new faces.

Whereas new [i]registered[/i] users would be a lot more compelling.

I reckon you're wrong, Mark. Since January of this year I can ask you to not make public my name, adress, pseudo and other stuff. I can also request that you delete it. You have to comply with my requests.

[url= http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:31995L0046:en:NOT ]Some Euro laws on data protection[/url]

Euro law is always stronger than national law which has to be rewritten to comply with Euro law when Euro law changes.

Thank you Mark, just a thought... Might the increased 'spike' have anything to do with our resounding thumping of the rest of the world in the TdF and Olyimpic cycling?

As opposed to moderation?

it's possibel slackalice - good moderation would encourage those new visitors to return, though?

I'm trying to work out what the STW brand is and all I can find is this.
[url= http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=singletrackworld ]singletrackworld[/url]
[img] [/img]

good moderation would encourage those new visitors to return, though?

I guess so, if that information about whether the visitors are new, returning, dormant etc can be reviewed.

Euro law is always stronger than national law which has to be rewritten to comply with Euro law when Euro law changes.

This overstates the case a directive puts down essentially a framework and timetable for countries to implement legislation, thus countries have some leeway on how they implement it and providing their implementation falls within the ambit of the directive then it can not be challenged. A litigant can try and get direct effect of a directive only if a country is shown not to have implemented it at all or properly. Alternatively the Commission can take out infraction proceedings against the country. Therefore STW simply have to comply with UK law unless it can be shown that this is deficient.

I'm not as well-read on British law but the British 1998 data protection act says " You have the right to have data about you removed." So if I request STW removes my name, address, e-mail and pseudo from its files they have to comply.

But that doesn't include everything you've ever posted.

Not a long as what I've posted becomes entirely anonymous.

I reckon this thread is like that episode of the Simpsons where they get all the losers onto a rocket ship leaving the earth for "safety" but actually their rocket is heading straight for the heart of the sun.

The mods will be deleting the accounts of everyone sad enough to post on this forum-disappears-up-its-own-anus thread, leaving the way clear for the rest of us to.. wait a minute.. oh damn.