Grant Taylor via Mailman-Users writes:
> What is their working definition of "thread"?
I don't know. I gave what I think is a reasonable definition, and I
would argue that going to parents of that message is not required by
GDPR, even if for some reason you need to remove whole posts.
> I'm
On 05/22/2018 07:33 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
I would imagine that it is the subthread rooted at the first post
containing complainant's PII -- "Personally Identifying Information".
I feel like that's a self referencing definition.
A "thread" is "a subthread rooted at the first post
Grant Taylor via Mailman-Users writes:
> On 05/14/2018 06:33 AM, Andrew Hodgson wrote:
> > Current advice from the GDPR people is we may have to delete the whole
> > thread.
>
> What is their working definition of "thread"?
I would imagine that it is the subthread rooted at the first post
On 05/17/2018 02:56 AM, Bernd Petrovitsch wrote:
FWIW and IMHO, I think we are in violent agreement here.
:-)
In the old-school life: the sender (because s/he said it on her/his free
will) - I hope;-). But the person who overheard it may tell the story
to a third person. And it's
On Mon, 2018-05-14 at 16:54 -0600, Grant Taylor via Mailman-Users
wrote:
[...]
> On 05/14/2018 04:11 PM, Bernd Petrovitsch wrote:
> > Seriously, these folks don't know what they imply.
>
> Nope. Politicians (almost) never fully understand what's going on.
FWIW and IMHO, I think we are in
Following with interest, although my mailmans are on Dreamhost and I don't
have root access only admin.
RBTF concerns aside, I am wondering how to do a renewed opt-in, similar to
what I see Mailchimp currently running. Any ideas?
--
On 05/15/2018 03:08 AM, Andrew Hodgson wrote:
What do I redact or remove in this instance?
- Personal details about the original poster and the event who had not
consented to having their email posted to the mailing list;
I would likely have (presuming sufficient motivation):
1) Get
On 05/15/2018 03:18 AM, Andrew Hodgson wrote:
At the moment the list administrator and moderator account is accessed
via no username and a single password. If that password is shared,
I have no audit trail of who logged into the system.
ACK
I like to run Mailman (et al) administration pages
Bernd Petrovitsch [be...@petrovitsch.priv.at] wrote:
>On Mon, 2018-05-14 at 12:33 +, Andrew Hodgson wrote:
[...]
>> These are just rough notes:
>>
>> - Archive purge requests. We have discussed the same items as on the
>> list to date. I am looking at doing a simple grep for the relevant
>>
Grant Taylor wrote:
On 05/14/2018 06:33 AM, Andrew Hodgson wrote:
[...]
>> - Audit logs for data access. it is not clear who is accessing
>> subscription data for the list as there is just a single owner and
>> moderator account. Unsure if current logging data in either MM2 or MM3 is
>>
On 2018-05-13 at 05:39 +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> It would be a much more annoying matter if they claimed the right to
> be deleted from third party posts that quoted and identified them,
> though. If there is a "right to be forgotten" that impinges on
> mailing list archives, that seems
On 05/14/2018 04:11 PM, Bernd Petrovitsch wrote:
Seriously, these folks don't know what they imply.
Nope. Politicians (almost) never fully understand what's going on.
And to be honest: If person X fullquotes and the email ends in an archive,
who's fault is it?
Obviously the archive's (or
On 05/14/2018 04:02 PM, Ángel wrote:
IMHO they would mostly fail under §18 and GDPR wouldn't apply:
Okay.
What happens if a subsequent data breach (malware / infection) causes
said individual archives to become public information? }:-)
Of course, if a company was using the mailing list to
Hi all!
On Mon, 2018-05-14 at 12:33 +, Andrew Hodgson wrote:
[...]
> These are just rough notes:
>
> - Archive purge requests. We have discussed the same items as on the
> list to date. I am looking at doing a simple grep for the relevant
> person's details and changing that. The main
On 05/14/2018 05:02 PM, Ángel wrote:
> Being nitpicky. What about sysadmins subscribed to this list as part of
> their professional activity ? (but otherwise interacting in the same way
> as a hobbyist)
How do hobbyists interact? Enquiring minds want to know.
--
Dimitri Maziuk
Grant Taylor asked:
> What does GDPR have to say, if anything, about subscribers having
> their own archives, which will not be redacted in any way?
>
IMHO they would mostly fail under §18 and GDPR wouldn't apply:
> This Regulation does not apply to the processing of personal data by a
> natural
Grant Taylor via Mailman-Users wrote:
... lots of good examples ... well done !
I too dont think any complainer should have the right to kill a
thread, just cos he/she wrote something they later wish to retract.
Killing a thread would be gross abuse of all other posters' rights,
& would invite
On 05/14/2018 06:33 AM, Andrew Hodgson wrote:
- Archive purge requests. We have discussed the same items as on the
list to date. I am looking at doing a simple grep for the relevant
person's details and changing that. The main reason for doing this is
that if we just remove the author's
"Stephen J. Turnbull" wrote Sun, 13 May 2018 05:39:27 +0900
> Dimitri Maziuk writes:
> > On 05/11/2018 04:55 PM, Julian H. Stacey wrote:
> > ...
> >
> > I think the basic inconvenient truth is nobody's going to come after you
> > unless you have money to pay the settlement.
>
> I think the
On 05/12/2018 03:35 PM, Bernd Petrovitsch wrote:
Well, it's the very nature of an archive that everything stays there
(similar to a backup).
Yes. But I believe that GDPR has implications on expunging things from
archives / backups too. Not doing so is not within the spirit of
forgetting
Hi all!
On 12/05/18 22:48, Grant Taylor via Mailman-Users wrote:
> On 05/12/2018 02:39 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
>> It would be a much more annoying matter if they claimed the right to
>> be deleted from third party posts that quoted and identified them,
>> though. If there is a "right to be
On 05/12/2018 03:39 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> I think the basic inconvenient truth is that *some*body *will* come
> after *some*body else on the basis that they *might* have enough money
> to pay a settlement, or just to make "the responding party's" life
> hell.
Possibly. Also an
On 05/12/2018 02:39 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
It would be a much more annoying matter if they claimed the right to be
deleted from third party posts that quoted and identified them, though.
If there is a "right to be forgotten" that impinges on mailing list
archives, that seems plausible
Julian H. Stacey writes:
> Best action for least effort, IMO is first someone to agree to
> commit a big default legal disclaimer in the Mailman source
> distribution, as a
This isn't going to happen if I have anything to say about it. (I may
not have all that much to say about it! :-) As
Dimitri Maziuk writes:
> On 05/11/2018 04:55 PM, Julian H. Stacey wrote:
> ...
>
> I think the basic inconvenient truth is nobody's going to come after you
> unless you have money to pay the settlement.
I think the basic inconvenient truth is that *some*body *will* come
after *some*body
Dimitri Maziuk wrote:
> On 05/11/2018 04:55 PM, Julian H. Stacey wrote:
> I think the basic inconvenient truth is nobody's going to come after you
> unless you have money to pay the settlement.
Not `Nobody' but `Very few' & then a major pain best pre-deterred.
Most volunteer unpaid admins not
On 05/11/2018 04:55 PM, Julian H. Stacey wrote:
...
I think the basic inconvenient truth is nobody's going to come after you
unless you have money to pay the settlement. I expect the impact on
"smaller lists run by Unpaid Volunteers" to be about on par with that of
the right to be forgotten. How
Alain D D Williams wrote:
> On Sat, May 12, 2018 at 01:06:15AM +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> > I hate to disagree with everybody, but ...
> >
> > We need to get an articulare European lawyer, or at least find someone
> > who has studied the subject.
If you or employer have money & time
On Sat, May 12, 2018 at 01:06:15AM +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> I hate to disagree with everybody, but ...
>
> We need to get an articulare European lawyer, or at least find someone
> who has studied the subject. I don't know the credentials of anyone
> who has posted on this list, so I
29 matches
Mail list logo
