Garda thread Galway City

Discodog

Can Biko & admin assure us boardies that they were not put under any pressure to lock this thread. The timing seemed odd in that a suggestion had been made that the Garda in question had started to post. If so then surely the thread still had a purpose.

Marcus.Aurelius

Since there is no way of verifying if anyone is who they say they are on Boards.ie I doubt there were any underhanded excuses for closing the thread. More likely it was closed as it had descended into a anti-Garda hissy fit on the part of a minority.

seamus

I can tell you without any doubt that the person who began posting on that thread was not Shane Waldron, just someone who knew him.

The thread was closed because it was descending into nothing but flaming. Since the Garda in question has not been convicted of anything, it's also dodgy legal territory to say or imply that he broke the law, regardless of what you might have read or how well you know anyone involved in the incident.

cornbb

Locking it was the right thing to do IMO. Had the potential to become an awful trainwreck of a thread. I'm sure biko locked it based on his own judgement, I imagine it is highly unlikely that he was pressurised by anyone into doing so

Discodog

I appreciate the comments. Unfortunately the timing of the lock does give a lot of ammunition to the conspiricy theorists.

biko

As seamus and cornbb already stated: it was locked because it was descending rapidly into general Gardai bashing. Making it out that Garda Waldron was posting was just for fun, I don't think anyone seriously believed it was actually him.

However, if Garda Waldron has input to the thread he is welcome to PM. Probably won't change anything but hey.

Boston

House wrote: »

Since there is no way of verifying if anyone is who they say they are on Boards.ie I doubt there were any underhanded excuses for closing the thread. More likely it was closed as it had descended into a anti-Garda hissy fit on the part of a minority.

Nothing necessarily wrong with that, it is a discussion forum after all. Problem is with people trying to make up for a failed justice system.

cornbb

Discodog wrote: »

I appreciate the comments. Unfortunately the timing of the lock does give a lot of ammunition to the conspiricy theorists.

Nah, the thread had all the hallmarks of a thread that was heading for lockage anyway (personal abuse, potentially libellous comments, people just using it to go off on mad unjustified rants). If conspiracy theorists want to imagine things that are not there, we can't stop them either way.

Terry

House wrote: »

Since there is no way of verifying if anyone is who they say they are on Boards.ie I doubt there were any underhanded excuses for closing the thread. More likely it was closed as it had descended into a anti-Garda hissy fit on the part of a minority.

I beg to differ: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=20820

Discodog

Terry wrote: »

I beg to differ: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=20820

Well that thread should be mailed to anyone applying to join boards so that they are aware that Mods can, if the mood takes them, post one's email address. Having read the so called privacy statement I would suggest that the OP in that thread issues a civil law suit.

Can the boss of this site confirm that 1) That Mod has been permanently removed. 2) That our details are kept as private & confidential. 3) That the privacy statement means something !!!!!!!!!

Also who at Boards can access email adresses & IP of posters ?

Thanks I had no idea. Now I suppose I will wait for the Guards to knock on my door !

cornbb

Discodog wrote: »

Can the boss of this site confirm that 1) That Mod has been permanently removed & 2) that our details are kept as private & confidential.

"That Mod" is actually an admin (i.e. he IS the boss of the site). He's still around and is unlikely to be going anywhere anytime soon

I guess any issues concerning privacy should be covered by the site's privacy policy: www.boards.ie/privacy.php:

Where a nuisance poster persists, we reserve the right to use email addresses and IP addresses to identify the user and halt the nuisance. For example, on a very few occasions, we have reported to organisations that it appeared that one of their employees or other users of their computer equipment was repeatedly making nuisance posts on boards.ie and asked them to take steps to stop it.

(while the incident above was pretty funny, it probably wasn't very ethical to publicly publish the guy's school and email address - but the site was very small and "indie" back then. I doubt very much the same thing would happen today).

eVeNtInE

This post has been deleted.

Discodog

Well please advise him that if he ever publishes my info or any other poster's details I will pay all the legal costs in suing his backside off !.

But having set the precedent I am amazed that he is still around. I presume he wrote the privacy statement. So thousands of people are posting here under a total lie & the joke is most of them don't know.

As Terry appears to be the only one with principles he should be in charge.

seamus

Discodog wrote: »

Having read the so called privacy statement I would suggest that the OP in that thread issues a civil law suit.

The privacy statement didn't exist then

2) That our details are kept as private & confidential. 3) That the privacy statement means something !!!!!!!!!

I'm not a boss of the site but I can confirm these, without exception. That incident was 8 years ago (look at the dates) when this site was tiny and barely bigger than a group of mates messing around at a LAN. I wouldn't judge the site today on that incident. It would be the equivalent of judging your literacy skills based on an essay you wrote in 3rd class.

Also who at Boards can access email adresses & IP of posters ?

Admins and Smods, nobody else sees these, under any circumstances. We only use them to verify people or as the policy says, identify problem posters and deal with them.

Discodog

Well seeing as he did publish the email & he is one of the owners I have PM'd him to request some clarity. Data protection is a very serious issue especially given the sensitive nature of some of the posts eg in Personal Issues.

It is a scary thought that someone might read a post & decide to PM the posters IP or email. So lets have some catagoric cast iron assurances that our details will remain totally private unless a Court order directs you otherwise.

seamus

Discodog wrote: »

So lets have some catagoric cast iron assurances that our details will remain totally private unless a Court order directs you otherwise.

You just got your assurance.

Discodog

With respect there is no assurance. Part of the privacy Statement reads as follows:

Where a nuisance poster persists, we reserve the right to use email addresses and IP addresses to identify the user and halt the nuisance. For example, on a very few occasions, we have reported to organisations that it appeared that one of their employees or other users of their computer equipment was repeatedly making nuisance posts on boards.ie and asked them to take steps to stop it.

That clause allows you do as you like because you make the decision regarding nuisance - you probably think that I am one !. It is also pretty unique & probably needs running past the data commissioner as it is such a catch all.

cornbb

Discodog wrote: »

That clause allows you do as you like because you make the decision regarding nuisance - you probably think that I am one !. It is also pretty unique & probably needs running past the data commissioner as it is such a catch all.

With respect, you aint nothin' compared to the real problem posters... these are usually the guys that continuously get banned and re-register, making life a pain in the ass for the staff and mods.

I agree with you that that was an inappropriate thing for DeV to do, but that was back in 2001 and you should understand how much the site has changed between then (a small operation run and populated by a relatively intimate group of people) and now (a relatively mainstream enterprise with paid staff).

seamus

Discodog wrote: »

That clause allows you do as you like because you make the decision regarding nuisance - you probably think that I am one !. It is also pretty unique & probably needs running past the data commissioner as it is such a catch all.

nuisance noun 1 an annoying or troublesome person, thing or circumstance

That's not you

With respect, the policy doesn't allow us to do what we like because policy or no, we are still bound by the data protection act.

We can use the information to stop nuisance posters, but even their personal data is protected and cannot and will not be made public except by court order.

Discodog

"For example, on a very few occasions, we have reported to organisations that it appeared that one of their employees or other users of their computer equipment was repeatedly making nuisance posts on boards.ie and asked them to take steps to stop it."

If you provide that data to a third party ie the employer it could be argued that you have made that personal data public. This "get out" clause is totally unecessary to prevent nuisance posts & should be removed otherwise you will always be open to allegations of abuse. Furthermore it suggests that the owners want to hang on to the right to reveal which damages the reputation of the site.

Boards should amend the PS to make it absolutely clear that personal info will never be used or revealed to any person, under ANY circumstances, including gardai etc without a Court order.

The funny thing is that I accepted the inital assurances re why the post was locked until "that" post appeared.

Esel

Discodog wrote: »

Well please advise him that if he ever publishes my info or any other poster's details I will pay all the legal costs in suing his backside off !.

Cue 'Jaws' music.... :pac:

Red Sleeping Beauty

Terry wrote: »

I beg to differ: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=20820

cornbb wrote: »

(while the incident above was pretty funny, it probably wasn't very ethical to publicly publish the guy's school and email address - but the site was very small and "indie" back then. I doubt very much the same thing would happen today).

They should do it the old school way more often.

biko

Discodog wrote: »

The funny thing is that I accepted the inital assurances re why the post was locked until "that" post appeared.

Listen here, I was not asked to lock that thread. If there would have been any pressure from anyone don't you think I would have deleted it rather than leave it for everyone to see? There is no conspiracy here I'm afraid.

Discodog wrote:

Well please advise him that if he ever publishes my info or any other poster's details I will pay all the legal costs in suing his backside off !

There is one thing we take very seriously though, and that is legal threats. Users have been asked to leave the site forever for threatening legal action. Boards just don't need the hassle.

Overheal

Discodog wrote: »

As Terry appears to be the only one with principles he should be in charge.

And under that reasoning I can be The Pope.

seamus

Discodog wrote: »

If you provide that data to a third party ie the employer it could be argued that you have made that personal data public.

Are you a solicitor with specific qualifications in the area of data protection? Because you'd need to be to argue that one. You could argue that the information belongs to the employer, not the employee, therefore no personal information is being supplied to a 3rd party which that 3rd party doesn't already have access to.
FWIW, the Data Commissioner has approved that privacy policy, so if you disagree with his office, take it up with them.

This "get out" clause is totally unecessary to prevent nuisance posts & should be removed otherwise you will always be open to allegations of abuse. Furthermore it suggests that the owners want to hang on to the right to reveal which damages the reputation of the site.

There is no "right to reveal". The privacy policy is not carte blanch to do what we like with information, the DPA supersedes all privacy policies. In fact, the policy isn't even required by law. It's there because the Data Commissioner recommended that one be added.

No matter what we do, it will always be open to allegations of abuse. Damned if we do and damned if we don't. When there was no privacy policy, people were complaining that we didn't have one so that you didn't know what we were doing with your information. Now that one exists, you're claiming that we're using it to do whatever we like with your information.

Boards should amend the PS to make it absolutely clear that personal info will never be used or revealed to any person, under ANY circumstances, including gardai etc without a Court order.

This is completely and utterly unnecessary, it's a tautology.

Ignore the privacy policy - it's window dressing, lip service for the data commissioner. Here is the fact of the matter:

Excepting the select staff members and moderators who require access (Smods), Boards.ie will never provide your private information to any 3rd party individual, company, state body, ISP or other body except on the direction of an order by an Irish court of law.

And to paraphrase the Simpsons: I'm willing to put that on a certificate that you can frame.

The funny thing is that I accepted the inital assurances re why the post was locked until "that" post appeared.

The funny thing is that I thought you were able to write in English until I read your 3rd class english essay

You don't seem to be listening in the case of that thread:
1. That was a very different time. For all intents and purposes it's a bit like saying that because someone drink-drove once back in 1960 that they can't be trusted to drive sober today. The site was an entirely different beast back then.

2. Its's 100% probable that the data in question was already in the public domain. Before it's current incarnation, boards was running on different software, which as far as I remember (it was a bit before my time), made both IP addresses and email addresses publically readable. So at the time that post was made, the user's email address was already public on boards.ie. I could be wrong though.

3. Even if my assertion in 2. is wrong, a google of anyone's username will very often bring up other sites where that same person has posted and where their email address and IP address is public. This is particularly true. I'm willing to bet that during the above incident, that user's details could very easily have been obtained elsewhere by simply searching for his name. Which means that his "personal data" was already public.

4. Read the entire thread and not just DeV's post. Look at how different everything is - the users' tones, the post layouts, even the language. That's essentially an entirely different site than the one we have now.

Now, I'm not defending what he did. But at the time, he may have had no idea about the DPA. I definitely wouldn't have. At that time, the question of whether the DPA even applied to web sites hadn't even been answered, and indeed massive portions of the DPA hadn't even been put into effect at the time that DeV posted. The DPA was subsequently amended in 2003, which may also be relevant. I don't have time to check.

So by all means, go back and find out what the law in effect was on Data Protection in 2001 and then report back to us and let us know if any wrong was actually committed by that post.

Either way, you've been given a solid assurance now a number of times that boards.ie complies with the law under all circumstances, and if you choose to not accept that, there's nothing else I can do or say to change your mind.

Cabaal

Discodog wrote: »

Well please advise him that if he ever publishes my info or any other poster's details I will pay all the legal costs in suing his backside off !.

I wouldn't recommend that type of language on boards

Terry

Discodog wrote: »

Well please advise him that if he ever publishes my info or any other poster's details I will pay all the legal costs in suing his backside off !.

But having set the precedent I am amazed that he is still around. I presume he wrote the privacy statement. So thousands of people are posting here under a total lie & the joke is most of them don't know.

As Terry appears to be the only one with principles he should be in charge.

As has already been pointed out, this site is a completely different one to what is was when that thread was posted.

I think only about 14 or 15 people on this site can access IP and e-mail addresses.
Those people were asked to do specific tasks for this site and were chosen because they can be trusted.

I only pointed to that link to show that the data is there, it just won't be shown to others (as has already been clearly stated).

Was someone to post, say for instance, your phone number.
That would be deleted immediately and the person who posted it would most likely be banned. This is a different place these days.
There are a lot of freaky people out there who get a kick out of posting pictures of certain sexual acts. Then we have the ones who link to sites which load viruses onto your computer. They are the ones referred to in the privacy statement (from my perspective anyway) and not people who have a genuine complaint about how the site is run.


As for me being in charge; I'm an alcoholic, prescription pill junkie. I'm currently taking a drug to help me stop smoking and it's making me hear voices in my head. I Also have mild sociopathic tendencies.
Probably not the best person to be in charge.

Boston

Lots of things where done in the past that wouldn't be done today. I'm not going to go into.

Btw, do we really need people like Discodog around here?

seamus

Boston wrote: »

Lots of things where done in the past that wouldn't be done today. I'm not going to go into.

Btw, do we really need people like Discodog around here?

People who seem to think that suing everyone is the way to solve problems? No.

Or

People who question the way things are done and check to make sure we're doing the right thing? Yes.

Boston

The first one.

Btw I don't like how you displayed my private user-name. I'll see you in court.

Dudess

I know if I were that idiot Violant Rage, I'd now be most understanding of whoever published my details eight years ago - in fact I'd probably thank them.

Discodog, perhaps lighten up? You can't compare Boards.ie '01 to Boards.ie '09. And you can see on that thread just how MUCH of a tool you'd have to be in order to be eligible for "nuisance poster".

It is taken extremely seriously, as Terry said, whenever someone publishes their own email/phone number, not to mind the publication of someone else's.