Why are people closing/deleting their accounts?

LoLth

When the terms of use came into effect and when they were updated all users were notified with a huge amount of announcements and discussion and threads (were there PMs? I cant remember).

That counts as notification of a change to the terms. Users continuing ot use their accounts have given implicit agreement to the terms and conditions. I'm not a legal type but that would be my interpretation of it (I'm happy to be corrected on this). companies do it quite a bit and Vodafone did it recently with only half the notice to customers and it was all legal and above board - in fact Vodafone's crappy notification is the exact reason I'm moving away from them now.

Mr. Presentable

Beruthiel wrote: »

People have been leaving Boards since I joined.
.

You really shouldn't blame yourself.........:pac:

ozt9vdujny3srf

Darragh wrote: »

Blah Blah Blah, I'm an admin (a.k.a. post was too long to quote)
Darragh

First, thanks for such a good answer. I of course see the reasoning behind wanting to keep the forum archives intact! (Though from the tone of your post I think you knew that).

I am satisfied on the boards.ie position, in that there does exist the possibility of having posts removed. If the company line were "Unless it causes us legal issues, it's staying up" I would personally have a problem with that. If I ever wanted to remove any of my past posts, I would be happy to make an argument. We all say stupid things, and we all make mistakes, and the internet leaves a record of that, but personally I think that's a good thing - nobodies perfect, and being imperfect isn't so bad when you can see that everyone else has the capacity to **** up as well!

So personally, it does not bother me.

From a more principled / broader perspective:
I don't like seeing you compare boards.ie with blogging, Twitter or Facebook. This is because on all of these services you have the option to delete, or limit access to some or all of your posts, indefinitely and at your discretion. I also feel that if I have legal responsibility for what I post on the Internet, if I own it, then regardless of publishing platform, if I really want to I can have it taken down. Making this automated and easy to do is not necessary, but the option should be there.

Really though, we are talking about forums here, and not any other kind of social media. This is because unlike Twitter, Facebook and blogging, the content here is inherently interlinked, and often meaningless if it is missing chunks of data. (Twitter Facebook and blogging is for the most part byte sized chunks of information that makes sense in isolation). In this case I am ignorant - boards is the only large forum I ever use. I'd be interested to hear from folk about how other forums handle the issue.

Finally, it's always good to suggest a solution when you raise an issue! Perhaps a nice compromise would be the ability for posters to flag their comments as being withdrawn. One way to do this would be to make it possible to indefinitely append information on to your post. This information would be clearly dated, and the original post would not be changeable.

Wibbs

I can see this net identity thang getting more and more relevant as time marches on and it impacts more and more on people's real lives. We've already seen the social network so called "suicide" sites pop up. Facebook has been forced by public opinion to step back from it's initial stance against not allowing deleting of ones account, though boy did it make you jump through hoops to do so(though maybe that's changed since I did it with one account?). It also had to change it's copyright conditions on users words, pics and other info. http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/article5757485.ece Originally it claimed the right to use said user stuff in marketing and advertising.

One of the things I really really like about Boards is that it doesn't do that, but how do we know it won't in the future? Now I personally really doubt it will because of the ethos from its founding and founders was and is dead set against that guff. I've met, had dealings with and experience of DeVore and Dav (and indeed Darragh to a lesser degree) and even if I've not necessarily agreed with them at times, quite simply I trust them. End of. No sign here agreement required. Still Boards could if users can't withdraw their content(or better anonymise said content to keep the flow of threads going). As Truckle said twitter allows you to delete your account, as do various blog hosts, as does flicker and even google. Though I'd use the word trust a magnitude less regarding those sites. Google and Facebook in particular. I trust "don't be a dick" far more than I trust "Don't be evil".

Like I say I can see ones net identity will become more and more relevant as time marches on and it impacts more and more on people's real lives. This is a good thing in soooo many ways, but it's also a double edged sword. While - with utmost respect gbee- I don't agree with much of their take, I do see what they're getting at beneath it all. I can certainly say hand on heart I am so glad the interweb wasn't around when I was a teenager. Our screwups while embarrassing at the time were not pickled in aspic. Screwups we can all attest to, unless your name is Mr Christ of 1 Galilee Close.

With whole accounts? I can see why this would be a major disruption of many threads if someone with more than a couple of hundred posts was removed. You'd have to cull all their quoted posts too. It's not very workable. I do like BoS's idea though.

Here's maybe a further tweak FWIW? The "Unknown soldier" Protocol. All deleted accounts are marked down under one username. With the caveat to cover Boards down the line, that if said user does this, deletes their account and all their posts become "Unknown soldier" posts, they waive all rights to said archived content in the future. IE it ceases to be theirs. IMHO that covers all or most of the bases. It allows for a user to be "deleted". Their posts are no longer attributable to them as an entity and it keeps the flow of previous threads going.

Bottle_of_Smoke

Should this thread perhaps be split?

Its gone off topic but a good discussion.

Was gonna close my account this week but wouldn't wanna miss the opportunity to delete the profile if that was to become an option

OutlawPete

Wibbs wrote: »

Here's maybe a further tweak FWIW? The "Unknown soldier" Protocol. All deleted accounts are marked down under one username. With the caveat to cover Boards down the line, that if said user does this, deletes their account and all their posts become "Unknown soldier" posts, they waive all rights to said archived content in the future. IE it ceases to be theirs. IMHO that covers all or most of the bases. It allows for a user to be "deleted". Their posts are no longer attributable to them as an entity and it keeps the flow of previous threads going.

If I'm understanding you correctly, then I don't think that is legally possible nor do I think it even should be. 'Ceases to be theirs' and can 'no longer be attributable them' should never be something that a user can control simply be deleting their account/posts. Users should be held responsible for what they post, no matter if their posts remain or not. It's been published and read, withdrawing the publication does not negate the possibly negative effect that their words may have had.

For instance, say a user posted some defamatory lie that Mr Celeb raped a young girl and that they know it happened as they attended the party where everyone was asked to never mention what had occurred .. and then they delete their account/posts. Why should that not still be attributable to them?

Wolfe Tone

If I have full responsibility for all my posts, and they are mine, should I not have the right to remove them? An idea may be to simply leave the delete/edit option for longer than the 2 days or so it is, so if one was motivated to do so they could delete all their posts.

Dav

We won't be mass deleting posts from people - we may as well just close the site if we start that because there'd be absolutely no point in continuing. Our archive of discussion is of huge impotance in terms of how people find us and why they join us. It's also a living archive of Ireland's people and their thoughts, concerns, reactions to major events etc.

Marking things as "guest" just turns a Boards.ie account into a completely throw-away thing and we happen to think it's something to be valued. The reason why we're here is to give Irish people a place to talk on the Internet. To remove the "people" part of that because someone's revealed too much of themselves and/or made a plank of themselves and wants their own words dis-associated with them completely undermines our idea that "you own your own words" and, whilst this may sound overly callous or unkind, but if you said it, then you need to learn to stand by it. It's a very harsh lesson for some people to have to learn, but this is a whole new means of communication and these are the rules of engagement so to speak. The written digital word is, for the most part, permanent.

There's one more part of the "Mark as guest" arguement:

Wibbs wrote:

The "Unknown soldier" Protocol. All deleted accounts are marked down under one username. With the caveat to cover Boards down the line, that if said user does this, deletes their account and all their posts become "Unknown soldier" posts, they waive all rights to said archived content in the future. IE it ceases to be theirs. IMHO that covers all or most of the bases. It allows for a user to be "deleted". Their posts are no longer attributable to them as an entity and it keeps the flow of previous threads going.

Which makes us the owner and therefore entirely legally responsible for the comments and that's something we're never going to do - we could never afford to take that risk tbh.

We do get requests to delete specific stuff all the time and often after a quick review, we do, especially from places like PI, but as Darragh said, it's a case by case basis. It's not that we're insensitive to people's needs or requests, we're more than willing to help someone out, but a blanket approach to this is not the best way to go about this.

Wolfe Tone

But Dav, if we are the owner and responsible for our posts, why can't we remove them, or have control over them?

Latchy

You mean we can leave this place free .....of our own accord ? :eek:

Maybe we all need to have a Sabbatical .

Interesting topic .

Dudess

The "guest" thing wouldn't eliminate the original poster's name being quoted.

Bottle_of_Smoke

Dav wrote: »

Marking things as "guest" just turns a Boards.ie account into a completely throw-away thing and we happen to think it's something to be valued.

I think the user themselves should have some input on that to be honest. I don't think we're going to see a mass request of users deleting their account. Many won't care whats been said by them or perhaps have posted in a more annonymous fashion so have no need to

The reason why we're here is to give Irish people a place to talk on the Internet. To remove the "people" part of that because someone's revealed too much of themselves and/or made a plank of themselves and wants their own words dis-associated with them completely undermines our idea that "you own your own words" and, whilst this may sound overly callous or unkind, but if you said it, then you need to learn to stand by it.

I don't think you can be so black and white about it though. Certainly there's grey areas such as posters who registered as minors. I was 16 when I opened my account and there's plenty younger.

Also I don't think it is *removing* people, just an identifiable aspect of the people. The post itself was made by a person and it wouldn't be changing.

It's a very harsh lesson for some people to have to learn, but this is a whole new means of communication and these are the rules of engagement so to speak. The written digital word is, for the most part, permanent.

That's the thing, it is very harsh because people change, the internet changes etc over time. No one reads terms and agreements. I recognise boards isn't acting imorally or at fault here, I just think it would be reasonable/decent of them to offer a semi disassociation from things one has said.

Which makes us the owner and therefore entirely legally responsible for the comments and that's something we're never going to do - we could never afford to take that risk tbh.

.

Does it make you the owner? Wouldn't it be just like a comment board on a newspaper website where you don't have to provide your real name?

Dav

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

But Dav, if we are the owner and responsible for our posts, why can't we remove them, or have control over them?

Because when we had a limitless edit/delete time out in place, people abused it - modified conversations after the fact to make themselves look better or to slag-off the people they were talking with - etc. You can probably take a guess as to the sort of thing involved and the sort of reasons for it. This is a site built of conversations and discussions. Allowing people to remove their part in that means we no longer have a reason to be here.

Chris P. Bacon

Dav wrote: »

We won't be mass deleting posts from people - we may as well just close the site if we start that because there'd be absolutely no point in continuing. Our archive of discussion is of huge impotance in terms of how people find us and why they join us. It's also a living archive of Ireland's people and their thoughts, concerns, reactions to major events etc.

What about this thread in the Waterford forum,there was 5 days of posts removed all because someone said something they heard.

Wolfe Tone

Dav wrote: »

Because when we had a limitless edit/delete time out in place, people abused it - modified conversations after the fact to make themselves look better or to slag-off the people they were talking with - etc. You can probably take a guess as to the sort of thing involved and the sort of reasons for it. This is a site built of conversations and discussions. Allowing people to remove their part in that means we no longer have a reason to be here.

You can still do that. How long do you have now, something like 2 days? It doesnt seem to be a major problem.

This is worse than facebook in that I have zero control over what I put up.

I for one want more control over the content I put up here.

Dav

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

I think the user themselves should have some input on that to be honest. I don't think we're going to see a mass request of users deleting their account. Many won't care whats been said by them or perhaps have posted in a more annonymous fashion so have no need to

Actually, since we introduced the option to officially close an account, we get several requests a day and I expect this number to continue to rise. We also did invite comments and opinions from people when we revised our terms and conditions last year and made some changes based on that - that's not something that a lot of companies and organisations do to be fair.

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

I don't think you can be so black and white about it though. Certainly there's grey areas such as posters who registered as minors. I was 16 when I opened my account and there's plenty younger.

Also I don't think it is *removing* people, just an identifiable aspect of the people. The post itself was made by a person and it wouldn't be changing.

We kinda have to be black and white about it though, we don't have the resources to deal with it in any other way (it already eats into a considerable amount of our working week).

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

That's the thing, it is very harsh because people change, the internet changes etc over time. No one reads terms and agreements. I recognise boards isn't acting imorally or at fault here, I just think it would be reasonable/decent of them to offer a semi disassociation from things one has said.

We do in that your not asked to give us your real name to join, all you're asked for is an email address and a username you get to pick yourself. After that, all information supplied to us is entirely voluntary and you have made the choice to give it to us. All comments you make on our site that may "out" you to the world at large is entirely your decision.

Also, if you don't read Terms and Conditions, then that's really not something we can help. You are entering into an agreement with us under these terms. They're freely available to see at any time and if you're not making yourself aware of all they entail before agreeing to them, there's not a whole lot we can do about that. It's not unreasonable to expect people to read things they're saying yes to, but I conceed the reality is most don't (which is why we have to site ban so many people for advertising/spam/cross posting etc)

Since we did the T&C rejig and I saw how monumental a project it was for us and our solicitors, I now make sure I read everything I agree to.

As an aside - who's seen the Human CendiPad episode from season 15 of South Park? It really hammers home the idea that people really need to be careful about what they're agreeing to when saying "I agree" on things.

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

Does it make you the owner? Wouldn't it be just like a comment board on a newspaper website where you don't have to provide your real name?

Unfortunately that's not how the law views it. We're already the comment board you suggest. When we're notified of a potentially problematic or illegal post/comment, we are then legally responsible for it. Saying that you're closing your account and we're taking ownership of it has now made it our legal responsibility.

[edit]

Chris P. Bacon wrote: »

What about this thread in the Waterford forum,there was 5 days of posts removed all because someone said something they heard.

That was a legal issue. We always delete content like that when notified, it's that or be sued

Wibbs

OutlawPete wrote: »

For instance, say a user posted some defamatory lie that Mr Celeb raped a young girl and that they know it happened as they attended the party where everyone was asked to never mention what had occurred .. and then they delete their account/posts. Why should that not still be attributable to them?

Then like I said O that post would be already deleted or the system has failed. Sure, yes if that happened, I agree with you 100%, but any posts like that, any defamatory posts are already excised anyway. They wouldn't be part of the publicly viewable site. I think this is kinda a red herring in the discussion in a way. IMHO anyway. A "what if" that doesn't happen anyway if you know what I mean?

Dav wrote: »

To remove the "people" part of that because someone's revealed too much of themselves and/or made a plank of themselves and wants their own words dis-associated with them completely undermines our idea that "you own your own words" and, whilst this may sound overly callous or unkind, but if you said it, then you need to learn to stand by it.

I see what you're getting at but it can't be both. Either you own your words or you don't. If I own something I can remove it. It is mine. I can choose to place it somewhere, but if there restrictions in removing it, I no longer own it. Or that will be the response(as it has been)

It's a very harsh lesson for some people to have to learn, but this is a whole new means of communication and these are the rules of engagement so to speak.

That's fine and dandy, but a bit NeoGeek for me. The interweb is sooo different and will save us all meme. Bottle_of_Smoke was 16 when he joined up. A minor. How many other minors have joined up and are out there as we speak? Some maybe even younger. There's a juniour cert forum. A great resource too I'm sure. Long after my time Great posters too among the young uns. You can say you own your own words to an adult and have plenty of justification, but to a 16 year old? AFAIK at that age you cant even sign contracts without a parent or guardians permission. I'm not sure they even own their own own words so to speak.

The written digital word is, for the most part, permanent.

Actually it's not. Or at least its not that black and white. Certainly google will have an archive of it and other archives exist, but one can certainly remove ones easily visible internet personality. I've deleted my original Facebook account. Gone, nothing left, no pics linking back to me. Nada(Mainly cos I can't abide facebook or its ethics and it was just irritating). Others have gone "off grid" like neo e hippies. People with bigger web presences. I think it may grow as a movement. I doubt it's going to be a major one, but as more and more people realise the extent to which the average chump consumer is milked and cajoled under the auspices of "providing help for better searches" and shíte like that, more and more will choose to not go along with it.

There's one more part of the "Mark as guest" arguement:Which makes us the owner and therefore entirely legally responsible for the comments and that's something we're never going to do - we could never afford to take that risk tbh.

Yep there is that alright. Which is a worry. Though actually not really if marked as guest they're just another account. They're not Boards' account, nor responsibility. Not beyond current responsibilities to stop clear problems numpties and their ambulance chasers extracting the urine.
If they said anything legally dubious before they were a guest, Boards would be still as responsible as after. Plus the archive would show who they were anyway.

Look very few are gonna want to do any of this and I'd not be encouraging it for most of your good reasons Dav. But I'll lay a bet this day that someone or a couple of someones will someday want to do this and kick up about it and IMHO they'll have some leg to stand on. They'll certainly have examples of other bigger social sites that do allow deletion. I know we're not a social site but do you think some superannuated legal gimp in Ireland will see the diffs? Or the same gimp note that "oh you did tell people they owned their own words". TBH it would be one of my biggest worries about the place D. Like you said it would ruin a lot of it. That's the reason I'm chiming in on it. Trying to offer solutions and listen to others. Forearmed and all that.

Wolfe Tone

Also, if you don't read Terms and Conditions, then that's really not something we can help. You are entering into an agreement with us under these terms. They're freely available to see at any time and if you're not making yourself aware of all they entail before agreeing to them, there's not a whole lot we can do about that. It's not unreasonable to expect people to read things they're saying yes to, but I conceed the reality is most don't (which is why we have to site ban so many people for advertising/spam/cross posting etc)

What if a kid signs up? I doubt they would be binding on him.

Wibbs

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

You can still do that. How long do you have now, something like 2 days? It doesnt seem to be a major problem.

I agree with Dav on this score. I've been on forums where unlimited editing is allowed and it's daft. I mean seriously daft. Troll central.

This is worse than facebook in that I have zero control over what I put up.

No trust me FB is far far far more "evil". With FB you're the web equivalent of a factory hen laying statistic eggs to feed you even more shíte you don't need.

I for one want more control over the content I put up here.

You do. You control the fingers typing the words.

Wibbs

It boils down to this for me anyway;

No complete deletion of a users posts. That's daft

Deletion of sensitive stuff on a case by case basis(already do that)

Now...
A few rare people will want to delete all their content they feel they "own". Really old timers could ask for all stuff previous to the last terms and conditions we all signed up to. Give them the "Unknown soldier" option. IMHO Boards legal responsibilities wouldn't be affected. They'd be the same as before, but it gives an out that covers the bases.

Wolfe Tone

Wibbs wrote: »

I agree with Dav on this score. I've been on forums where unlimited editing is allowed and it's daft. I mean seriously daft. Troll central.

No trust me FB is far far far more "evil". With FB you're the web equivalent of a factory hen laying statistic eggs to feed you even more shíte you don't need.
You do. You control the fingers typing the words.

"Either you own your words or you don't. If I own something I can remove it. It is mine."


If they are my words, I should have more control over them.

(and again, what about kids?)

OutlawPete

Wibbs wrote: »

Then like I said O that post would be already deleted or the system has failed. Sure, yes if that happened, I agree with you 100%, but any posts like that, any defamatory posts are already excised anyway. They wouldn't be part of the publicly viewable site.

I get that those type of posts would be deleted anyway, but you are of the opinion that when they are deleted, a user's posts should "cease to be theirs" and "no longer attributable to them as an entity". This I feel should never be as in would increase the incidents of trolls as they would have nothing to lose by posting defamatory remarks.

Wibbs wrote: »

I think this is kinda a red herring in the discussion in a way. IMHO anyway. A "what if" that doesn't happen anyway if you know what I mean?

Not really Wibbs, especially after recent events were Ex BB stars and Pro Footballers are concerned. As you can see from that example, people that post comments on sites are going to be targeted or at least an attempted to be held accountable for what they have written.

I think the posts that Boards.ie should remove for a member are when abuse is directed at them which they would prefer did not remain and also if if a strong case can be made about posts that a user regrets posting, for a variety of reasons such as: that they have revealed a little too much information that has threatened their privacy or safety.

Dav

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

You can still do that. How long do you have now, something like 2 days? It doesnt seem to be a major problem.

This is worse than facebook in that I have zero control over what I put up.

I for one want more control over the content I put up here.

It's not a major problem now, but it was a concerning problem back when we made that change. The idea that "history could be re-written" is more than a little concerning to me personally and to this site's continued existence.

To suggest that you have zero control over the content you have voluntarily submitted is simply untrue. You have 2 full days from time of post to reconsider it if you acted on the spur of the moment - we all do and we can sometimes let things get the better of us - we're only human after all.

If you no longer agree to these terms and conditions, then I'm afraid to say that maybe this isn't the site for you anymore.

Dav

I have to add that at this stage I have run out of time to spend on this thread - I'm saying this because I have a stack of other work to get done and I'm on my own in the office today.

So I'm not ignoring the additional comments, I just can't repsond to them now and I fully intend to come back to this on Monday.

It's a genuinely interesting discussion to me (personally and professionally ) and it's a very important set of issues, so I'm honestly glad that there are so many of you who're giving it thought and time and I really appreciate that.

So for now, I hope you'll understand why I have to bow out.

Thanks folks.

Wolfe Tone

Dav wrote: »

It's not a major problem now, but it was a concerning problem back when we made that change. The idea that "history could be re-written" is more than a little concerning to me personally and to this site's continued existence.

To suggest that you have zero control over the content you have voluntarily submitted is simply untrue. You have 2 full days from time of post to reconsider it if you acted on the spur of the moment - we all do and we can sometimes let things get the better of us - we're only human after all.

I have much less control on here than I do on other sites, lets take facebook and twitter as an example. They give me more control over the content I post.

If you no longer agree to these terms and conditions, then I'm afraid to say that maybe this isn't the site for you anymore.

I don't think they are right, and what if I was a minor when I signed up?

Anyway, I hardly think its fair to simply say "gtfo" when all I am doing it making suggestions/highlighting problems. Just what rights do I have over what I post? Is it just the right to get in trouble if I post something dodgey? Hardly.

My name is URL

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

I have much less control on here than I do on other sites, lets take facebook and twitter as an example. They give me more control over the content I post.

imo, sites like Twitter & FB can't be likened to that of Boards. Both are designed more for networking than open discussion. You can have hundreds of people discussing a topic here at any one time. I don't think it would be fair on everyone else who has posted in a discussion if one person's contributions were removed. It'd be like going through a photo album and taking out all the pictures you appear in, effectively destroying the overall story which the album told.

Wibbs

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

"Either you own your words or you don't. If I own something I can remove it. It is mine."

Sorry WT reading back I wasn't too clear there. I meant that's what some will say. I personally agree with the no deletion of users content. I'm more grey on how the contradiction(for want of a better word) surrounding ownership of that content once posted can be resolved if it gets to the point where it may need to be dealt with. Hence my guest suggestion.

As it is I think the photography and creative writing forums are dealt with slightly differently in that their copyright content can be removed down the line(not posts). Dont quote me on that though. However I'd see conversation and debate outside of that. It may not be in the future of course, but for the moment it is(thank god) and long may that continue. Even so I'm pretty damn sure that Boards would go down legal routes on your behalf if someone was to take all your posts and put them in a book. Just as they would go down legal routes on your behalf like they did with MCD.

That's impressive WT and damned expensive for them. They as the publisher are in the firing line way more than you or I am. They take the hit if the shít hits the fan. Why? Basically cos ambulance chasers will follow the money.

I have much less control on here than I do on other sites, lets take facebook and twitter as an example. They give me more control over the content I post.

As MNIU said they're a different beast to a site like Boards. While they are content driven and said content can be interlinked, its so much more the case here. The interlinked content is what makes the site what it is. It's apples and oranges. Plus those companies don't have to deal with the vagaries of what can pass for Irish law.

AckwelFoley

Wibbs wrote: »

It boils down to this for me anyway;

No complete deletion of a users posts. That's daft

Deletion of sensitive stuff on a case by case basis(already do that)

Now...
A few rare people will want to delete all their content they feel they "own". Really old timers could ask for all stuff previous to the last terms and conditions we all signed up to. Give them the "Unknown soldier" option. IMHO Boards legal responsibilities wouldn't be affected. They'd be the same as before, but it gives an out that covers the bases.

Cool. Can i have everything i posted from circa July 2006 - The end of 2009 deleted - then im in the clear and my political aspirations can be re-ignited.

Look as said, one is responsible for what they post, however they dont own it, its owned by the site - its a price you pay i suppose.

I would make a few points however.. The internet changes fast and the power of which is growing incredibly fast, social media and forums and their inclusion in normal society is more now than it ever was - when i started posting on the internet over 12 years ago, what you posted has long gone, as has most sites and media that were popular, it was a very niche thing and postings were as far removed from being commented on in mainstream medai as having notes on a board in the canteen in work.

Now those notes in the work canteen and the things said are still there and i think that many at the time were unaware that commentry on social media would be quoted on and used in newspapers and tv.

Do i regret some of my posts from the past - most def - ive changed from been a single guy, feckless and out for laughs - to someone that is getting married in 3 weeks and is a parent - I still like the laugh - but i treat the internet like something that i must be accountable for - if i post it i must be able to be to explain it.

The Left Hand Of God

LoLth wrote: »

When the terms of use came into effect and when they were updated all users were notified with a huge amount of announcements and discussion and threads (were there PMs? I cant remember).

That counts as notification of a change to the terms. Users continuing ot use their accounts have given implicit agreement to the terms and conditions. I'm not a legal type but that would be my interpretation of it (I'm happy to be corrected on this). companies do it quite a bit and Vodafone did it recently with only half the notice to customers and it was all legal and above board - in fact Vodafone's crappy notification is the exact reason I'm moving away from them now.

I can see that and understand that. I actually agree with it.

My missus though has refused to post on the site since the terms were introduced.

One can assume given your argument that she has the legal high ground if she ever wanted her posts deleted? Having not signed in and there for not agreed to new T&C's?

CDfm

Dav wrote: »

I have to add that at this stage I have run out of time to spend on this thread - I'm saying this because I have a stack of other work to get done and I'm on my own in the office today.

So I'm not ignoring the additional comments, I just can't repsond to them now and I fully intend to come back to this on Monday.
.

Its great to see you post Dav and we don't see enough of you. I saw your colleague Susan Daly from the Journal.ie on Vincent Browne last night and I have to point out that she is prettier than you -she was also prettier than the rest of the panel but came accross as having a better grasp of internet media than her co-panelists too.

And its good to see you inteligiently use the boards account close data rather than dismiss it as ragequit etc.

One of my sons friends said this a while back over Airsoft in the "everyone knows category " and these guys are very hardcore users and explained to me what my likes and dislikes of boards are. And they are heartless bastards

And when they showed me what they meant you got this

http://www.tigersairsoft.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=232

My History posting trailed off when Brian slowed off and as I understand it my tastes are more specialist than the current history offering on boards will not be for me.

Ditto with the religion offering where my interests would be in philosophy and ethics and where the boards offering would be little more than sophisticated trolling.

(If I see a comment now like -the C-Mod on Religion is an atheist I would say not the place to go for a moral philosophy/ethics discussion though I had one interesting discussion on Occam's Law and one of the regulars introduced my to Feynmann -they are the exceptions and not the rule. )

So when it comes to my own internet use , I have to broaden my horizons and find more specialist groups that cater for my interests and in that way I would have an interest in who the mod is.

Thats not being snobby cos with newspapers I will pick a redtop over the Irish Times for news/scandal and for economic analysis will go for the FT or the Economist or even the Journal.ie before the IT.

This is where my own internet use is veering towards at the minute and I imagine I am not unique.