That is just something that never happens in real life. I wouldn’t shape forum rules around some boilerplate legalese. Let‘s say an inactive account gets hacked are we going to send out lawbros after him? Don‘t tell me each and everyone of us hasn’t got inactive accounts on countless sites that we have forgotten about years ago.
The 14 day thing came up a few weeks ago with another poster who demanded his account be immediately perma’d, but we made him wait 14 days. He came back and got perma’d, but he had asked for it to be perma’d once before that, and that time resumed posting once the 14 days were up.
It also came up with will, who wanted his account immediately deleted, which was the impetuous for this thread, and he could not wait any longer so he posted two donkey porn videos and got banned, but his account was never deleted as the donkey porn did not make me inclined to help him out.
I don’t think it really matters if it’s realistic or not. Inactive/stale accounts are widely considered security risks in organizations. Not likely to be huge for us, but it exists.
But besides that there’s an even stronger argument here. This is what our TOS states, and I’m amazed it didn’t get mentioned in this thread:
To create an account, you must provide some information about yourself. If you create an account, you agree to provide, at a minimum, a valid e-mail address, and to keep that address up-to-date. You may close your account at any time by e-mailing [admin@unstuckpolitics.com](mailto:admin@unstuckpolitics.com).
You agree to be responsible for all action taken using your account, whether authorized by you or not, until you either close your account or notify the company that your account has been compromised. You agree to notify the company immediately if you suspect your account has been compromised. You agree to select a secure password for your account, and keep it secret.
that email address forwards to me. he asked me and micro for a ban. he did what our TOS states he can do. I think not following our own TOS is dumb, since those are like, legally binding.
And I will not sic lawyers on anyone but if anyone attacks this site while I am admin, I will unleash a fury upon them to the absolute maximum of what falls within the law and my capabilities.
1 Like
What kind of porn should I send if I need help from admin?
1 Like
What jmakin and potato said. Mostly just, it’s their account, honor their wish, even if you think it’s silly.
IoT chastity belt porn.
1 Like
pm sent
Alrighty then
Also didn’t we have like, a very real problem on 22 of people with old register dates getting hacked and scamming people out of cash?
Fine. Honor the TOS. I still don‘t think that we should ban based on requests made in this forum that often happen in the heat of the moment. As for the security risk aspect maybe we should close all accounts that haven’t been active for x months but allow them to be reopened upon request.
Honestly, I lean towards honoring people’s wishes. But we can always change the TOS too. I think, once people have calmed down in this subforum, we could put this up for a vote/debate again, if people feel very strongly about it.
I definitely feel strongly about this. I just think philosophically we are a place that gives users ownership of their accounts, something that 22 did not do. I don’t want to be the one to say “nah, it’s ours now, nanananana.”
Not trying to argue or anything, just a strong opinion. I very much think there should be a cooling off period that we should have honored. But at this point it’s already done and changing his perma to a suspension and then back into a perma doesn’t really do anything. I’m happy to do it though, if it makes people feel better.
So the bolded parts both mention “close your account” but in a message upthread goreo says there are two options: delete and anonymize. Does anything in the TOS map “close” to one of those two options, or otherwise define what “close” actually means? That’s one question.
There’s potentially also GDPR implications if we “refuse” (if we insist on sticking to the 14-day cooling off rule) to delete data. I’m not sure about that for a number of reasons but if I were a site owner/admin I’d want to avoid it if possible.
I don’t know the fine details of the law, but am familiar with it.
Don’t think it’s anything to get too worked up about but I honestly dont know
Under GDPR you have one month to respond to a request, so we can get back to someone in 14 days
1 Like
If we’re going to get in to the boiler plate T&Cs that zz and I didn’t touch because we are not lawyers, here’s a good one
governing_law will govern any dispute related to these terms or your use of the forum.
You and the company agree to seek injunctions related to these terms only in state or federal court in city_for_disputes. Neither you nor the company will object to jurisdiction, forum, or venue in those courts.
I think the request should ultimately be honored. Permabans can be undone or worked around. And it creates a perception of bias if mods put more effort into trying to get some posters to change their minds about wanting a ban than they do others.
I’d propose a process of silencing the account for a few days to give them time to do some housekeeping, such as determining if they want any posts deleted and copying any PMs they want to save, before suspending their account permanently.
Establishing a formal process may make it less likely that someone will be a nuisance and try to get thrown out the front door immediately.
Yuv’s comments have me thinking. How much do I need to donate to get wiped like Bryce etc? I’m probably down. The pettiness is unreal.
1 Like
Man, I hope you won’t.
Since we’ve had a couple of people request deletion of all posts and accounts, I thought I’d pop in to mention that it’s an enormous pain in the ass and in most cases literally impossible for moderators to do, so any deletion requests should be directed to an admin.
This is unrelated to the On Improving Moderation or About Moderation threads before anyone jumps to assumptions.
2 Likes