Date   

moderated Feature Request: Unmutable Hashtag

Bruce Bowman
 

I have an #admin hashtag that I use occasionally to send announcements on system updates. It applies to things that might be of general interest but are not so important as to justify a Special Notice. For example, the recent addition of direct-mail capability via the subscriber Directory prompted a corresponding message to my members using this hashtag. 

I would like the ability to make this hashtag unmutable. It's not a must-have thing, but at least that way I have some assurance that everybody who is getting regular email deliveries has also received the notice. Perhaps other people would have other uses.

This would be a Moderators-only thing. I don't want subscribers creating their own unmutable hashtags. As such, this option would only pop up once you clicked on the "Use By Mods Only" button at the bottom of the Edit Hashtag screen (i.e.: the same way "Replies by Mods Only" currently does).

Just an idea,
Bruce


locked Re: EU General Data Protection Regulation

 

Hi All,

I'm locking this thread. When I have more information from our lawyers about what we need to do to comply with GDPR, I'll post in beta@.

Thanks,
Mark


locked Re: EU General Data Protection Regulation

William Finn
 

Just add one more thing. I think that to make a point the EU will hit some companies hard and fast from the outset

I think their goal would be to make an example to show the world that they mean business.

I also believe that this would include some foreign entities beyond the EU borders to prove their point that they will find you and they will come after you.

Chances are these will be big fish, large corporations.

What this does not preclude the fact that anyone and everyone that offer it's a business that houses data belong to an EU resident will be required to comply with these regulations.

Some groups on here have mentioned that they collect personal information from its members Beyond email and this plane in which could be the real or fake first name.

I believe groups like this would be highest at risk as they do collect pii.

Beyond what the EU is doing these groups that you collect this type of information have also many other regulations that leads to apply to them and how that did is handled manage stored and disposed off.

For the majority of groups here it'll be a non-issue.

For entities that I just mentioned that to collect personal information they may run into issues and may end up having to defend the challenge of responding to such requests.

Even outside of the EU anyone who is collecting personally identifiable information must comply to FOIA  request also.

My advice is to not collect anything besides first name and email address which is required for log on to the group everything else should be excluded because weather in D you are anywhere in the world most countries have regulations about how to steal that should be managed stored disposed of I made available under the Freedom of Information Act or gdpr.



On Tue, Apr 10, 2018, 2:52 PM William Finn <liam@...> wrote:
I do not believe the ICO would be selective based on the entities size but I do believe that proper expectations need to be set.

Does everybody in the world that houses data belong to an EU resident need to comply the answer is yes

What are the chances of these various smaller groups being hit by this and the answer to that is probably a lot less what still not impossible.

Should every group owner be aware of this and be prepared to respond to such requests for example the right to be forgotten or to be provided all of the information that involves them the answer is yes.

I don't think it is scaremongering I think it is people are unsure how does who really affect them as these regulations have yet to go into effect and it is unknown how the EU will respond to those that breach these requirements especially on a global scale



On Tue, Apr 10, 2018, 2:46 PM Nick Dunmur <info@...> wrote:
On 10 Apr 2018, at 19:38, William Finn <liam@...> wrote:

Please get this notion out of people's heads that they are expecting it to eradicate information stored on people's private email it is not designed for that.

Quite. There is quite a lot of scaremongering and misinformation out there. The ICO are not going to be pursuing small groups that inadvertently have not interpreted things correctly -  one might get a slap on the wrist and some guidance as to how to do things if ‘we’ were taken to task over something, and the GDPR is not that different to laws already in place (Data Protection Act and the Privacy & Electronic Communications Regulations) which have been in place since 1998 and 2003 respectively.

kind regards

Nick
__

dUNMUR | member of the Association of Photographers


locked Re: EU General Data Protection Regulation

William Finn
 

I do not believe the ICO would be selective based on the entities size but I do believe that proper expectations need to be set.

Does everybody in the world that houses data belong to an EU resident need to comply the answer is yes

What are the chances of these various smaller groups being hit by this and the answer to that is probably a lot less what still not impossible.

Should every group owner be aware of this and be prepared to respond to such requests for example the right to be forgotten or to be provided all of the information that involves them the answer is yes.

I don't think it is scaremongering I think it is people are unsure how does who really affect them as these regulations have yet to go into effect and it is unknown how the EU will respond to those that breach these requirements especially on a global scale



On Tue, Apr 10, 2018, 2:46 PM Nick Dunmur <info@...> wrote:
On 10 Apr 2018, at 19:38, William Finn <liam@...> wrote:

Please get this notion out of people's heads that they are expecting it to eradicate information stored on people's private email it is not designed for that.

Quite. There is quite a lot of scaremongering and misinformation out there. The ICO are not going to be pursuing small groups that inadvertently have not interpreted things correctly -  one might get a slap on the wrist and some guidance as to how to do things if ‘we’ were taken to task over something, and the GDPR is not that different to laws already in place (Data Protection Act and the Privacy & Electronic Communications Regulations) which have been in place since 1998 and 2003 respectively.

kind regards

Nick
__

dUNMUR | member of the Association of Photographers


locked Re: EU General Data Protection Regulation

 

On 10 Apr 2018, at 19:38, William Finn <liam@...> wrote:

Please get this notion out of people's heads that they are expecting it to eradicate information stored on people's private email it is not designed for that.

Quite. There is quite a lot of scaremongering and misinformation out there. The ICO are not going to be pursuing small groups that inadvertently have not interpreted things correctly -  one might get a slap on the wrist and some guidance as to how to do things if ‘we’ were taken to task over something, and the GDPR is not that different to laws already in place (Data Protection Act and the Privacy & Electronic Communications Regulations) which have been in place since 1998 and 2003 respectively.

kind regards

Nick
__

dUNMUR | member of the Association of Photographers


locked Re: EU General Data Protection Regulation

William Finn
 

The regulations are not there expecting you to delete content on people's personal email accounts it is at the corporate level to ensure that corporations can Purge personally identifiable information from their systems that is not related to a business activity.

It's not about performing a blind delete on everything as the regulations expect to the business needs to keep some specific information but they need to do so and it justifiable away such as someone's information that appears on a contract.

Please get this notion out of people's heads that they are expecting it to eradicate information stored on people's private email it is not designed for that.



On Tue, Apr 10, 2018, 2:31 PM Ary <udxf@...> wrote:
It isn't that simple. 99,9% of the forwarded mails are sent from home computers and not via the mailing list, so there is no way to delete these. Another "problem" are the mails stored in the mail programs of members. It is absolutely impossible to remove these mails.

It is just another impossible law. Good to protect us from Google, Facebook, e-marketing etc but horrendous for hobby clubs and hobby mailing lists.

Ary


locked Re: EU General Data Protection Regulation

Ary <udxf@...>
 

It isn't that simple. 99,9% of the forwarded mails are sent from home computers and not via the mailing list, so there is no way to delete these. Another "problem" are the mails stored in the mail programs of members. It is absolutely impossible to remove these mails.

It is just another impossible law. Good to protect us from Google, Facebook, e-marketing etc but horrendous for hobby clubs and hobby mailing lists.

Ary


locked Re: EU General Data Protection Regulation

Chris Jones
 

On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 10:05 am, Victoria wrote:
People joining email lists, and having agreed to the relevant terms and conditions, effectively agree to their details and other information being stored within the group. Anything they put in their emails is done voluntary and with the assumption they want it to be public to the group.
This poses the question: have they agreed to the relevant terms and Conditions? 

Please see my post #16448 yesterday: I have no recollection* of agreeing to the Ts & Cs when I first came to Groups.io, or at any time since.  As it happens I have no quibble with them; neither do I have a quibble with the Groups.io Privacy Policy; both seem entirely reasonable to me. However people participating in Groups hosted by Groups.io without having actively "ticked the box" accepting both will have the ***** profession queuing up looking for a fight on the basis that their rights under GDPR or some comparable legislation are not being met.

The Group for which I am a Moderator published a Privacy Policy yesterday; although we do not collect any information beyond Display Names, email addresses and dates of joining we do collect those for a specific purpose, and that is clearly set out in the Policy. (I should know; I wrote it.)

What Dave (G3PVH) wrote is an entirely pragmatic approach, but I don't think that we are entitled to assume that GDPR (or comparable legislation) is something we do not need to concern ourselves about.

* That could, of course, be my recollection at fault.

Chris


Re: Strip Out Embedded images #suggestion

Arno Martens
 

On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 01:06 pm, Bruce Bowman wrote:

The super deluxe version of this is that any
image in a sig line would be stripped...period.
Old eMail conventions used to preface any line of quoted text with a chevron, as seen above.
They also required anything (typically sig lines) to be stripped from a reply that was below a
[dash][dash][space][CR]

Test
--
Arno


locked EU General Data Protection Regulation

 

Dave,

 

I agree to just about everything you write.

 

               I am not sure what the Data Protection Officer or group owner can do about all the copies of emails stored in members computers and web mail all over the world. It is indeed impossible.

 

According to a recent verdict in Germany it is decisive that the subscriber sends his messages voluntarily and in knowledge and agreement of the guidelines of the group or forum. This means, among other things, that he is not entitled to have his contributions deleted at any time. For me as group owner this means that I better put this term into the guidelines among other things such as copyright, behavioural issues and so on....

 

I am not aware of any email groups or clubs and societies who have had issues with data protection and needed to pay fines. I don't expect it will be any different under GDPR.

 

People joining email lists, and having agreed to the relevant terms and conditions, effectively agree to their details and other information being stored within the group. Anything they put in their emails is done voluntary and with the assumption they want it to be public to the group.

 

Exactly. I don´t see this either. In the above cited court case an unsubscribed member of a forum wanted to have all his postings deleted. So these very rare cases can be prevented by drafting the appropriate rule to be accepted before subscribing. And the court saw it the same way.

 

There is a lot of scaremongering going on at the moment, and I expect that will continue. Cut through the scaremongering and nothing really much is changing. Wait to see if one of our email lists is taken to task by Brussels (or the equivalent in the UK after we leave next year). It just won't happen.

 

It´s important that the provider of groups.io takes these new regulations into account and seriously. And they basically concern protection of personal data of group.io members, the commercial use of email adresses and so on. I remember how difficult it was for me four years ago to have my my data, my account and my facebook site deleted by facebook. The new European regulations have a lot to do with these so called social networks. And that´s quite a bit different from mailing lists.

 

Victoria

 


moderated Re: Suggestion - Access to databases be set at the database level

William Finn
 

I don't believe this hides the database and there is no option for customization of roles. At present its users or moderators

How about a situation where you want to grant one user rights to manage a database but not give that user Moderator rights. That granularity is missing


moderated Re: Suggestion - Access to databases be set at the database level

 

On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 9:40 AM, William Finn <liam@...> wrote:
At the Database level, on creation, Specify access profiles that have rights to the database.

The present database rights grants access levels to the tables. But what i'm proposing is to restrict them at the database level so if they don't have any rights the database will be invisible to them

We have that at the table level. You can specify who can view or edit a table, and who can add or edit a row (either members, or only mods/owners). Am I missing something?

Thanks,
Mark 


moderated Re: Suggestion - Access to databases be set at the database level

William Finn
 

At the Database level, on creation, Specify access profiles that have rights to the database.

The present database rights grants access levels to the tables. But what i'm proposing is to restrict them at the database level so if they don't have any rights the database will be invisible to them

Also allowing more custom roles to be created so an owner can specify roles like DBManager, DBEditor and then add users to these roles. Similar like how it is done on a DB like SQL and so on.

It allows more granularity to access 


moderated Re: Suggestion - Access to databases be set at the database level

 

On Fri, Apr 6, 2018 at 1:05 PM, Ford Amateur Astronomy Club <info@...> wrote:
I have a group that has multiple databases and it would be beneficial to allow role based access at the database level so some will be allowed to all members others can be restricted to Moderators or Owners as needed

Can you give me an example that isn't covered by the existing permissions?

Thanks,
Mark 


moderated Re: Allow Different Frequency for Guidelines Notice #suggestion

Sarah k Alawami
 

Ah I get  members who are coming back and new members all the time so monthly is just right and if someone  strays, well? They got the guidelines this month so either straighten up and fly right, or get band. 

On Apr 10, 2018, at 8:44 AM, Nick Schweitzer <nick@...> wrote:

It appears as though there is a feature to send it separately to new members - which I think is great. So for us, it is really just a reminder for long time members of the guidelines. Our group dynamic and culture is such that monthly would probably be seen as excessive, which is why I ask.


moderated Re: Allow Different Frequency for Guidelines Notice #suggestion

 

It appears as though there is a feature to send it separately to new members - which I think is great. So for us, it is really just a reminder for long time members of the guidelines. Our group dynamic and culture is such that monthly would probably be seen as excessive, which is why I ask.


moderated Re: Allow Different Frequency for Guidelines Notice #suggestion

 

I think it would be a great idea to add this flexibility. If anyone believes monthly is "standard," it could be the default. I don't see any problem with providing the option.
--
J

 

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.

I wish I could shut up, but I can't, and I won't. - Desmond Tutu


moderated Re: Allow Different Frequency for Guidelines Notice #suggestion

Sarah k Alawami
 

Good idea, but I believe that monthly is standard. I know people (myself including) who never read the things anyway and mimic, but for the new list members who might come abord monthly is perfect. I would send them out weekly if I could, bu t that would generate complaints so I'm glad the most I can do is a month.

Blessings and happy Tuesday

On Apr 10, 2018, at 8:02 AM, Nick Schweitzer <nick@...> wrote:

Just noticed the feature to send a Notice with Group Guidelines which I think is great. However, it appears that the only option for sending this on a recurring basis is to do so monthly. In our group, that might be considered excessive. It would be nice to be able to adjust this frequency with different options:
- Monthly
- Quarterly
- Annually

Thanks for your consideration.


moderated Allow Different Frequency for Guidelines Notice #suggestion

 

Just noticed the feature to send a Notice with Group Guidelines which I think is great. However, it appears that the only option for sending this on a recurring basis is to do so monthly. In our group, that might be considered excessive. It would be nice to be able to adjust this frequency with different options:
- Monthly
- Quarterly
- Annually

Thanks for your consideration.


locked Re: EU General Data Protection Regulation

Dave Sergeant
 

I am not sure what the Data Protection Officer or group owner can do
about all the copies of emails stored in members computers and web mail
all over the world. It is indeed impossible.

I am not sure that we are getting worked up with a situation that is
unlikely to occur anyway. Remember that in Europe (and elsewhere) we
already have a data protection act that covers storage of personal
information in computers. GDPR is tightening up on some things that may
need addressing but many things are unchanged. It is true that large
companies have to comply, just as they do with the existing rules, and
Mark has confirmed he will be compliant by the start date. Group owners
and their members, as well as the many clubs and societies that run
lists on here are a bit different. I am not aware of any email groups
or clubs and societies who have had issues with data protection and
needed to pay fines. I don't expect it will be any different under
GDPR.

People joining email lists, and having agreed to the relevant terms and
conditions, effectively agree to their details and other information
being stored within the group. Anything they put in their emails is
done voluntary and with the assumption they want it to be public to the
group. Clubs and societies and many other organisations have exemption
under the existing rules that if they only use the information for the
purpose of running the organisation they do not have to actually
register - this is continued under the new rules.

There is a lot of scaremongering going on at the moment, and I expect
that will continue. Cut through the scaremongering and nothing really
much is changing. Wait to see if one of our email lists is taken to
task by Brussels (or the equivalent in the UK after we leave next
year). It just won't happen.

Dave

On 10 Apr 2018 at 14:11, toki wrote:

Messages are often crossposted or forwarded to other persons by mail
or via Facebook, Twitter, or whatever. There is
no way to remove that info.

Those messages will be removed via a "right to be forgotten request"
sent to the Data Protection Officer of the recipient organisation.

http://davesergeant.com

13181 - 13200 of 29701