R
RogueHanger
Interesting point that cajar, BT and Norcon, et al inadvertently raised:
Does DIYnot operate in accordance with Data Protection requirements?
I did previously have a username of RedHerring, under which I was banned for criticising abusive posters.
Now, as soon as you are banned, you no longer have access to your profile. Thus you can't delete any personal information which you supplied in good faith.
Additionally, you can't access any of your posts to remove any personal infomation, which again you provided in good faith.
I appreciate that it could be argued that in signing on to DIYnot, a contract has been agreed to, but in banning a poster, that contract has been nullified, by DIYnot.
Moreover, DIYnot admin are legendary in their lack of response to communications, especially to banned users.
So, during subsequent use of other usernames, I have been careful to avoid disclosing any personal information for the very reason that I could not access that information once I have been banned.
Now that some posters have accessed my previous profile, they have enjoyed being abusive and resorting to profligate fantasties about my past and current private life. That doesn't bother me because I can handle such cowardly abusive attacks.
However, what is more worrying is the role that DIYnot has in facilitating this abuse by keeping my personal information, making it publicly available, etc, etc.
I summarise the requirements of the DPA below regarding personal data:
used fairly and lawfully
used for limited, specifically stated purposes
used in a way that is adequate, relevant and not excessive
accurate
kept for no longer than is absolutely necessary
handled according to people’s data protection rights
kept safe and secure
not transferred outside the UK without adequate protection
Moreover, in banning me previously, thereby denying me access to delete my data, and failing to abide by the DPA requirements, I suspect that DIYnot are woefully failing in their duty as far as personal data is concerned. This failing has been exploited by abusive posters.
I have made records of the potential infringements, for futher later advice.
Does DIYnot operate in accordance with Data Protection requirements?
I did previously have a username of RedHerring, under which I was banned for criticising abusive posters.
Now, as soon as you are banned, you no longer have access to your profile. Thus you can't delete any personal information which you supplied in good faith.
Additionally, you can't access any of your posts to remove any personal infomation, which again you provided in good faith.
I appreciate that it could be argued that in signing on to DIYnot, a contract has been agreed to, but in banning a poster, that contract has been nullified, by DIYnot.
Moreover, DIYnot admin are legendary in their lack of response to communications, especially to banned users.
So, during subsequent use of other usernames, I have been careful to avoid disclosing any personal information for the very reason that I could not access that information once I have been banned.
Now that some posters have accessed my previous profile, they have enjoyed being abusive and resorting to profligate fantasties about my past and current private life. That doesn't bother me because I can handle such cowardly abusive attacks.
However, what is more worrying is the role that DIYnot has in facilitating this abuse by keeping my personal information, making it publicly available, etc, etc.
I summarise the requirements of the DPA below regarding personal data:
used fairly and lawfully
used for limited, specifically stated purposes
used in a way that is adequate, relevant and not excessive
accurate
kept for no longer than is absolutely necessary
handled according to people’s data protection rights
kept safe and secure
not transferred outside the UK without adequate protection
Moreover, in banning me previously, thereby denying me access to delete my data, and failing to abide by the DPA requirements, I suspect that DIYnot are woefully failing in their duty as far as personal data is concerned. This failing has been exploited by abusive posters.
I have made records of the potential infringements, for futher later advice.