Posts by Paul Green31

Jesse Sanchez4 said:And what about that part where the forum hands my email address over to a third party without even asking me first?

That’s totally actionable. If you can actually prove they did it, you’ve got a solid case for damages.

Just so I can set the record straight on one little detail regarding Vojky.

Look, business email addresses aren't—and never will be—considered private data, no matter how they're formatted. But hey, I'll give you this: I agree we should probably stick to general info here on the forum. Even if an address like manager@exxonmobil.com isn't actually private.

Brenda Cook4 said:Let’s go back to the beginning of this whole mess regarding banned users. If we assume—just for the sake of argument—that she left her actual email address in a post on the bulletin board before it got scrubbed, then the admin did exactly what he was supposed to do. First off, once someone is banned, their ability to communicate on the forum is cut off, leaving them with nothing but the "banned users" corner. Honestly, what else is a moderator supposed to do? You can't let them haunt other threads, you can't let them DM people, and you certainly can't let them keep dragging things out. It's just how it works. There’s zero contact info here. Nothing. Seriously? Imagine if there was actually a profile feature where you could enable a vCard download. I’ll say it one more time just to be crystal clear: even then, the email address wouldn't just be sitting there for everyone to see. It would just be a simple click to download the file, and that's it. Simple enough, right?

Hmm...
Didn't I say that somewhere?

The only thing this forum actually cares about is making sure some user's email address doesn't end up floating around inside the forum's body tags.

What Mr. Trkelja is rambling about is something every single forum has, in one form or another: the option to make your email address public. Is that really news?

But look, that’s all covered under electronic signature laws anyway. When you register on a forum using a specific email address, they send an activation link straight to your inbox. Once you click that link, you're basically proving you actually own the account and have full access to that email. It's pretty straightforward, isn't it?

By letting other users see it, you're basically taking full responsibility for whatever mess follows. You want to play that game? Fine. But don't come crying to us when things go sideways.

Just a heads-up: the email address inside the vCard is the exact one used to log into the forum. Users can't change it, and they can't edit the vCard themselves. So, by letting other users download their vCard, we’re fully compliant with US electronic signature laws and data privacy regulations. Basically, if someone's info gets out there, the legal responsibility falls squarely on the user, not the forum. The liability is covered by an electronic signature. At the end of the day, the user made the choice to waive their privacy and make their email public—they just chose to do it via a downloadable file rather than plain text. Why do it that way? Simple: to protect them from those damn bots that scrape email addresses to build spam databases. You know the drill—one minute you're fine, the next you're being buried under a mountain of spam for penis enlargement creams and psychic readings.

So, this thread of yours doesn't prove anything. All it really shows is that the vBulletin developers know exactly what's broken and they've already cooked up scripts just to bypass the issues.

You can't just drop email addresses in posts anymore. It’s all because of those strict federal electronic signature laws and privacy regulations. Since the site owner is technically the publisher and holds the bag if anything goes wrong, they're legally obligated to scrub them. Isn't that just how it works? They have to clean it up to stay on the right side of the law.

If you’re still struggling to wrap your head around this, I have a simple suggestion: file a formal inquiry with the FTC or reach out to any privacy advocacy group or the Attorney General's office. Once they get back to you, post the response here. Let's see exactly who needs to apologize and why. 😉

Bradley Sanders4 said:Look, I used to be a moderator on this forum, and the closest thing to the contract you're describing was a PM from a former head moderator that explicitly said, "don't give out anyone's IP address." Honestly, I couldn't care less about the lawmakers, but if you actually believe users have legitimate grounds for a lawsuit because of this, well, hey, who am I to tell you you're wrong? 😁

I still remember back in the day when we’d get a Word doc listing our responsibilities, and it would always kick off with:

Moderators are responsible for...

And yeah, that document actually defined how to handle user data too.

But that was ages ago. It's possible someone just stopped sending them out, though that's a pretty stupid move if they did.

Steven Reed said:I get it; seeing email addresses there doesn't sit right with me either. But this whole drama is only happening because of how Medin is acting—insisting this rule applies to every single corner of the site
. I just wanted to hear the part in bold, so thanks for that👍
Honestly, watching people try to force this "universal rule" logic on everyone else was driving my blood pressure through the roof, which is why I spoke up😉

edit: Paul Green31, seriously—and I mean this with the best intentions—your constant "defending" of Sasha and his choices isn't actually helping him at all😉
Sasha is a grown man who doesn't need a legal counsel. He's more than capable of standing his ground without you trying to "protect" him

Thanks for the advice, but I'm also a grown man—legally and otherwise—and I'll decide who to defend and when. Besides, I have that f***ing flaw where I tend to stick up for the underdog, and right now, Sasha is just the little guy getting kicked around by a pack of bullies on the PZK.

shadowpilot8 said:I disagree. I would say the average user is smart enough not to leave their email address—in any format—on a public platform. At least on my PDF.
Those who post their email only to have it deleted usually get the point immediately.
I fail to see the purpose of this thread. Is it just getting too heated?

The point is: let's all take a turn looking for the speck in Sasha's eye.

It feels like this forum is doomed to stay backwards if we let a handful of people vent their hatred and resentment toward the admin every single chance they get—including using threads like this one as an excuse.

And frankly, it looks like they’re trying to paralyze hollowtrucker77 by applying constant passive pressure. He's forced to overthink every single move just to avoid waking up to two new threads dedicated to dragging his name through the mud.

Bottom line? It’s impossible to run things under these conditions. It would be great if the rest of the staff—the mods and especially the supermods—stepped up and took over some of the heavy lifting. If someone else handled the technical side of Sasha's decisions, maybe we could stop these attacks from the forum's "left wing," who clearly can't handle the fact that someone with conservative views is actually keeping this place running.

It’s funny, isn't it? Once again, the leftists and liberals are showing how rigid and dangerous they actually are to democracy, both here and in the real world. If you aren't strictly following "their line," they’ll come for you. This kind of "thread tactic" is just more proof of that.

Alex Cook said:Yeah, I'd be a regular hero. But I can't—or won't, if you prefer—throw my support behind someone I think has completely lost their moral compass.
Less than two years ago, I took two bans in rapid succession straight from Sash. I didn't complain; I deserved it. I was spamming, trolling, going off-topic—the whole nine yards.

But what actually eats at me isn't about my own situation. Honestly, I don't give a damn; the forum isn't going to fall apart just because I'm gone. What really stings is seeing how more and more of those users—the ones who actually made coming here worth it, the ones you could actually read and learn something from—are ending up "on the other side of the fence."

Losing users like that is a direct hit to the community. A forum like this lives on clicks, ads, and sponsored threads. When those people leave, the readers follow. Personally, I can't forgive Sash for what happened with Slavko. As for what's happening now with Lastan and the rest... we'll see how it plays out. It would be a real shame to lose such high-quality contributors, no matter how much of a headache they could be sometimes.

The uproar against the head admin of this forum didn't just come out of nowhere or some delusional fever dream. It was triggered by something. I won't get into that now, though... enough ink has been spilled already.

And besides, we're drifting way too far off-topic. I'm reporting myself.😁

We can talk about all this political nonsense when the time is right.

I just reported myself too. If they actually follow through on my report, I'll be thrilled. 😬

@Nica

Those rules aren't just some American thing; they apply to the entire internet and are pretty much the same everywhere.

Bradley Sanders4 said:Look, the regulation law also has provisions about good faith business practices. Based on that, you can't exactly sue a forum when you're the one who went ahead and posted your own email address right there for everyone to see.

All this nonsense about moderators, rulebooks, and electronic signatures would be hilarious if it wasn't so pathetic. 🤣

Oh, there are other clauses too. And actual laws. When it comes to leaking email addresses, one person is responsible for the other. It seems like you’re having a hard time concentrating on what you’re reading today, but hey, it’s fine—I’ll let it slide.

I won't bother commenting on anything else, because if you think what I'm saying is funny, go complain to the lawmakers.

wanderingbadger44 said:Man, I really love being right. Honestly, nothing beats that feeling of knowing I'm spot on when I'm arguing points on the PŽK.

It feels like the average person posting here would need to be both a high-priced attorney and a computer scientist just to write a single comment without worrying about breaking some rule. ☕

And what exactly are you right about? I mean, maybe you are, but could you explain?

As for needing to be a lawyer... Well, it's the same in real life.

My buddy runs a small auto shop that has a restroom. An inspector came by and hit him with $1667 hygiene violations. There's soap in the restroom, and his wife changes the towels several times a day (it's a small family business). It baffled me, because I know everything there is spotless; even though it's a greasy job, the shop is top-notch.

So he asked for clarification and got it in writing. Apparently, restroom towels have to be paper, and the soap has to be liquid.

The guy left to get more details, basically thinking: why the f***ing hell are you nitpicking over details?

Then he got his answers. For example, if someone with a contagious skin condition washes their hands and dries them on a towel, and that towel isn't paper and the soap isn't liquid, there's a massive chance the next person picks up that infection.

So, not everything written in the law is nonsense (which is what both he and I thought), because some things actually make sense. The fact that we don't know about them is our own problem if someone decides to hold us accountable.

Because the law assumes that if you're on the road, you know the rules of the road. If you run a business with a restroom, you have to know the rules. If you participate in the online world, you have to know the rules. Or rather, you don't *have* to, but the moment someone holds you responsible, "I didn't know the rules" isn't going to help you dodge the consequences of breaking them.

wanderingbadger44 said:So, I guess I see your point now. It’s fine to list an MSN contact via email in my profile settings, but I can't just go out and write "my email address is..." directly in a discussion thread.

Fair enough, I'm learning the ropes here.

But the whole reason I even started this thread was to figure out where the line is drawn regarding posting an email address, so please don't shut down the conversation before we get to the bottom of it.

It's because posting private info is strictly against the rules here, and under the Privacy Act, an email address counts as private data.

Sharing MSN Messenger Handles isn't banned, even if they look like emails, because legally they don't fall under protected private data.

The forum is obligated to prevent anyone from leaking private info, whether it's your own details or someone else's.

Because technically, I could post my own private info right here and then sue the forum for publishing it. 😁
Pretty convenient, right?

Since the moment I hit "send post," the forum owns everything I write and becomes responsible for it.

Alex Cook said:That's it, then. We've officially hit rock bottom, dragging comparisons to fascists and communists into a thread about private data. Lock up the forum, kill the internet, just end it all. 🙏 🙏

Don't even bother trying to play me; I'm not the guy I come across as in 9/10 of my other posts... I've been keeping a close eye on the PŽK over the last few weeks and I know exactly who is doing what, to whom, and why.
And look, while I've definitely been annoyed by hollowtrucker77's rhetoric on this board before—you know, the condescending tone, the personal attacks masked as "forum discussion" and all that—the whole circus surrounding the ŽK was honestly nauseating for a minute there.
But this little defense you're putting up isn't any better. If I’m being blunt, it looks like you're just sucking up to try and score points for "your side" and your buddies... because apparently, it's more important to have the rules on your side than to be the one getting jerked around by the moderator, right? 🙂
Elections coming up soon, you say? 🙂

Man, imagine how much of a coward you'd be if you actually sided with him. You know, it's easy to be part of the mob throwing stones, but it's a hell of a lot harder to stand right between the crowd and the target they're hitting. Especially when you've got your back turned to the guy getting pelted—it makes it pretty easy to get hit yourself.

So, you think it's important to have criteria on your side? Hmm...

I say it's important to have the *right* criteria, but not as a weapon for a side—it's something you carry within yourself. If you actually live by that, then standing between the mob and the victim isn't an issue.

And by the way, I'm sticking up for the guy the mob is targeting, the guy who's going to get crushed if they keep this up. Am I some kind of suck-up? Instead of riding the wave with Bradley Sanders, who's clearly just chasing the scent of new power and "change," I'm siding with the guy who's losing.

Your "logic of interest" is flawed. There's no self-interest at play here. Criteria matter, sure, but they aren't the goal—they're the starting point.

And I've got nothing to gain from any outcome here, except maybe a wasted afternoon. Unlike some people, I don't actually have an agenda.

wanderingbadger44 said:Let me try rephrasing my question to see if I’m following: does this mean you can't type out "My email is ljubicica@neki.com" in a thread, but it's perfectly fine to put a link in your signature to a blog or a personal site where your email is front and center? Or maybe list an MSN contact that functions exactly like an email address, even if it technically isn't one according to the letter of the law?

Man, at this rate, we’ll all need to be lawyers just to post on this forum.
?

Why would the forum even care what you post on your own blog, where you're the one legally responsible?

anything where an email address is clearly displayed

Give me a break. Pretty soon, this forum is going to be exclusively populated by lawyers.
?

Why should the forum give a damn about anything just because an email address is posted there?

The forum only cares if that address is embedded directly within the site's body tags, because that's the only thing they're actually liable for under the Privacy Act.

Anthony Collins4 said:Wherever you feel like. You could even publish your own website if you wanted to.

Well, I suppose you've decided to take the high road and act all saintly about it.

For heaven's sake, please don't go violating my privacy.

Are you absolutely certain there isn't? I mean, I suppose it's possible, but one can never be entirely sure about these things, I guess.
I mean, wouldn't it be more efficient if the moderators were actually sent a single, cohesive document via email—something formatted in Word that clearly outlines all the rules of conduct? It feels like everything regarding this specific issue should already be regulated within those guidelines.
I honestly don't know; I suppose, based on my past experiences with other places, that I might be right.

Yeah, I'm aware they don't have any formal employment or volunteer contracts in place.
I suppose I've also heard the claim that by checking some little box on a forum—you know, the kind you click during registration—you can somehow just wipe your entire existence clean.

Email plays a significant role in this too, particularly under the provisions of the electronic signature laws. That’s why you end up registering everything via email; by confirming that registration through your inbox, you are essentially providing an electronic signature for the terms and conditions. Legally speaking, that action is considered just as binding as if you had signed the document with a pen in your hand. I guess that's just how the legal framework operates these days.

You know, I suppose there are various different categories of emails.
Anything that doesn't include your private details—or information that could be used to figure out someone's identity—doesn't actually qualify as private data. If you want the technical breakdown, the definition of what constitutes private information is right there in the link to the Privacy Act (you can find it on that website you posted earlier).

I suppose sending over a formal code of conduct via email when someone signs their "moderator agreement" should technically cover all the bases regarding behavior. In my view, that process serves as a way to ensure they've been properly briefed on their responsibilities, effectively acting as a verified and legally binding contract. It’s a way to make sure every moderator is officially aware of what's expected of them under the regulation law.

I suppose I should clarify how that works. Under which specific regulation law are the obligations of someone working without a formal contract actually governed? Please, enlighten me.

I suppose, if you really think about it, buying a copy of Story at a newsstand is technically a legally binding contract with clearly defined rights and obligations for both parties. You don't actually need to sign anything for it to be treated as a formal agreement under the law, I guess.

A bit of an off-topic tangent here, but I have to ask—which specific regulation law are you actually referring to, and what kind of obligations are you talking about?

Look, I’m really not in the mood to explain things that have already been explained. Sorry.

The rule is called the regulation law, and it covers absolutely everything, including moderation. If a moderator receives a set of rules via email, they’ve essentially signed a contract with an electronic signature. That carries the exact same weight as signing four physical copies in front of a notary public.

If you don't get that, I feel for you, but I am not dragging myself back to the 90s to teach you how electronic signatures work. And if that doesn't click, then it’s pretty obvious why you think this whole email topic is so "fluid."

Tyler Grant76 said:Well, wherever she wants.🤷 Some people just put them there.

If we’re going to be consistent about this, then you’d have to delete entire threads—like, say, all those Fashion Critique posts meant for the brave ladies here—simply because they’re packed with links to blogs where girls write under their real names and show their faces (even if they stay anonymous on the forum). You could also wipe out tons of threads from the Random stuff or Recreation sections since there are plenty of photos there too. And Weddings. Even the LJES threads.

Look, once again, a blog isn't protected under the Privacy Act. Your full name, home address, email—that's what we're talking about.

The forum is legally obligated to protect private data and prevent it from being leaked, and that's exactly what they do. The forum doesn't allow the posting of private info, and since an email is part of that equation, it's strictly off-limits.

P.S. I already explained the difference between an MSN handle and an email address, so the fact that "many people post them" doesn't change the rules.

wanderingbadger44 said:I never actually said it was allowed; I just phrased it as a question of whether it's possible.

Your comment actually prompted me to go hunting through the classifieds, and I noticed people offering contact via Skype, MSN, Yahoo, and all sorts of other platforms, which I assume requires an email address to get things moving. I hadn't really given it much thought before, so I didn't bother looking, and honestly, I just don't know.

That’s why I’m asking you: if...

And later on, I'll bring you back to the points you seem to be overlooking or dodging: how posting photos of oneself—especially when it involves minors or children—is considered acceptable, and by what logic those images are somehow less private than a simple email address. I also want to know how anyone verifies they are even authentic.

Just because someone uses a weird format that looks like an email doesn't mean it's legally an email address.
As you can see, there’s no actual email listed anywhere.

Instant Messaging
You may enter your registered identity for the instant messaging networks if you would like other visitors to be able to contact you using that medium.

ICQ number
AIM Screen Name

MSN Messenger Handle
Yahoo! Messenger Handle

Skype Name

Look, if someone's MSN is something@hotmail.com, that's legally their MSN Messenger Handle, not an email. If they choose to use it like an email? Hey, not my problem.

And later, I'll remind you again about what you're overlooking, dodging, and refusing to answer: how posting photos of yourself—especially minors and children—is allowed, and why those photos aren't considered any less private than an email address. And how they verify they're authentic.

If you think I'm defending the kind of stuff you're talking about, you're dead wrong. I don't even have a Facebook account (except for the business one I'm forced to use), I don't post photos anywhere, and I certainly don't authorize anyone to post them on forums.

Take Facebook, for example; they got sued over this issue once, and now when you upload a photo, you're signing a disclaimer saying it's yours and that you take full responsibility for it.

Maybe forums will follow suit, but honestly, pretty much everywhere on the internet is going to evolve toward that level eventually.

As for everything else, people have the court system for a reason. Just because nobody around here ever sues anyone over this stuff doesn't mean it isn't f***ing well-regulated by law.

If someone were posting pictures of my kid on a forum, I'd know exactly how to stop them—and how to pay for my kid's first two years of college.

Anthony Collins4 said:

Paul Green31 Asks:
Well, the reason for that is pretty straightforward: posting private information is strictly prohibited on this forum, and under the Privacy Act, an email address is legally classified as private data.

It isn't against the rules here to post MSN Messenger Handles, even if they follow an email address format. As I understand it, those don't actually fall under the definition of private data according to the Privacy Act.

It seems to me that the forum really ought to be doing more to prevent the posting of private information, whether a user is sharing their own sensitive details or someone else's. I suppose there should be some kind of standard in place to stop that sort of thing from happening.

Technically, under the Privacy Act, I could choose to post my own private information right here on the forum, and then subsequently sue the platform for publishing it. It’s a bit of a legal gray area, I suppose, but the theory holds up. 😁
Pretty decent, wouldn't you say?

It seems to me that once I hit that "send" button, the forum essentially becomes the owner of my content, which would imply they also inherit all the liability for whatever I’ve written. I suppose that's just how these digital spaces operate nowadays, though it feels a bit heavy-handed, if you ask me.

Alright, look, I’d appreciate it if you could take a moment to revisit the original post. I’m struggling to see how this specific situation actually connects to my constant rambling about regulation laws. Honestly, there seems to be absolutely no link between the two—none at all, really.

The forum doesn't own my content. I don't know where you got that idea from—maybe it was that little clause next to the checkbox? I guess people tend to overlook those things. 😁

Paul Green31 As specified by:
The point is this: let's go looking for the speck in Sasha's eye.

🤣 Sasha's personal finances.

I suppose you could at least try to read with a bit more comprehension, especially since you seem so driven by this desperate need to defend someone in a position of power. It’s honestly a bit pathetic, if you ask me.
Those conservatives... it’s always the exact same tired narrative. ☕

Look, they don't own the content itself, but they *do* own the posts you published on their site. In other words, the forum is legally the publisher of your posts. But since you clearly can't grasp that, I guess everything in this thread just feels "fluid" to you.

Steven Reed said:It's your call, though your take on Sasha's perspective is slightly off-base.😉
This isn't his first rodeo, nor will it be his last—dealing with this kind of stuff has become almost routine for him.😍
Besides, playing "defender" usually just triggers a backlash. For instance, you actually managed to "force" me to chime in, even though, frankly, I had zero interest in dissecting Sasha's recent decisions.🙂

Oh, sure, I just had to insist on risking being called in as a court expert for hollowtrucker77 and ZgSashovina, just so he could bury me under a mountain of technical jargon.

So, what exactly makes you think your sudden appearance shifted anything toward your "winning" side?

(Sorry if that sounded blunt, but I don't get this whole "counter-effect" theory of yours. I'm here to argue—that's why I'm on this forum. And I love having opponents, especially when I know I'm right. At the end of the day, isn't that the whole point of being online?)

Chris Fowler3 said:I don't want to start yet another thread just to ask this, so I'll just drop it here,

is it actually allowed to post your own email address on this forum,
whether it's in a post or on your profile?

Hell no. Because the second you hit "Send post," you aren't the one publishing that email—the site is. And under the Privacy Act, they can't do that.

Is that really so hard to wrap your head around?

wanderingbadger44 said:This might have been intended as a joke, but honestly, it just feels like a poorly executed attempt at humor.

Since you presented yourself as someone who knows their way around these things, I’ll pose the same question to you: if an email address is considered protected information under the Privacy Act and isn't allowed to be shared, how is it possible that it can be listed right there in a user profile, yet posting it within a thread on this same forum is off-limits?

So, what exactly can she even post on her profile?

Anthony Collins4 said:You're trolling.

Of course they aren't. Moderators fall under the category of forum administrative staff, and as such, they are legally obligated to follow the procedures that apply to anyone performing those types of roles.
They can absolutely be held accountable for lapses in that area, even if many people aren't aware of it.

Roles? Does anyone there actually have an employment contract or are they just volunteering?

Well, by all means, go find yourself a lawyer who can interpret those laws mentioned above. Sue the forum for handing over your private data to third parties, and once you win your settlement, give me a call so we can grab a drink. We could even invite hollowtrucker77 along. 🙂

I don't have any intention of doing that, but thanks for the suggestion. And hollowtrucker77 thanks you as well.

Oh, so you've gone and become all holy and sanctimonious now, have you?

Jobs? Does anyone here actually have a real employment contract or even just a volunteer gig?

Are you absolutely certain there isn't?
Don't they just email the mods a Word doc containing all the code of conduct? You know, the stuff that actually lays out the rules for this kind of thing under the regulation law...
I don't know, honestly. But based on my experience dealing with other places, I'm pretty sure I'm right.

Email is part of it too, especially under the digital signature laws. That’s why you register everything with an email address—by clicking that confirmation link, you’re basically digitally signing the terms and conditions. Legally speaking, that carries the exact same weight as your actual handwritten signature. You really think they aren't watching?

By emailing over a formal code of conduct when someone signs their "moderator agreement," you’ve effectively covered your bases. It's basically a verified, legally binding contract at that point. The moderator can't claim ignorance—they've been officially notified of exactly what they're responsible for. Simple as that.

Look, buying a copy of Story at a newsstand is still a legally binding contract with clearly defined rights and obligations. You don't need to sign anything for it to be treated as a contract under the law. Simple as that.

Anthony Collins4 said:Yeah, it's bullshit, though really it's just having access to full names and being able to comment on the private data of various forum users and such.
But I suppose that isn't my concern; I'm not really trying to make a point about the illegality of it all, rather I'm thinking of Paul Green31. 😉

This is exactly the point I make every single time I get into an argument with people like you. Every time you post something like this, it proves my point. 🤣

feralpilot6 said:Some of us use a single email address for everything (like me), and obviously, I used that same one to sign up for this forum. Naturally, my full legal name is attached to it. And of course, any of you creeps can see it. So when a moderator reaches out via PM and addresses me as an actual person using my real name, what’s the deal? Who is actually protecting my privacy then? 🤷
There is a massive difference between voluntarily posting a photo or an email address and the other, shady stuff you guys have agreed to. If I decide to post pictures of my tits on this forum, that's my choice. Right?

It’s just like being in the military. You know that type of commander? The one who suddenly starts calling you by your first name instead of your last? That’s when you know they're trying to act way too close for comfort. 😁

Then there’s that religious take: "Only God calls you by your name!"

But that only applies to you if Anderlon sent you a PM. 🤣

Anthony Collins4 said:Wait a second, let me wrap my head around this. So, according to you, I can post a recipe for a bomb in my profile, but in some random thread, I cannot. 😁
Okay, I think I see what's happening here.

Regarding the moderators—on a forum where there are 100 moderators who aren't bound by any formal contract to protect my privacy, you're claiming that their access to my email address isn't actually a violation of the law (though you haven't cited the specific statute, which you really should if you're going to lean on it).

I wonder if you truly grasp the essence of my question? 🤷

Just so you're aware, a significant amount of users' private data sits on the moderator panel. It’s visible not just to active moderators, but also to former ones, and even to anyone who happens to know the passwords of past or present staff.

If you actually caught onto all that, I guess I have to give you some credit for paying attention. But honestly? You’re still missing the bigger picture. You've got the gist, sure, but you need to dig a little deeper if you want to truly get it. Do your homework.

Look, when it comes to the moderators—we're talking about a forum with a hundred of them who aren't even bound by any contract to protect my privacy—you're seriously claiming that them snooping at my email address isn't a violation of the Privacy Act? You didn't even bother to cite the actual law, which you really should be doing if you're going to throw it around like that.

Are you actually kidding me right now? Do you seriously not get what I'm asking? 🤷

Of course they aren't. Moderators fall right under the category of administrative staff, and because of that, they’re legally bound to follow the exact same procedures as anyone else working those types of roles. Isn't that just how it works?
And they can absolutely be held responsible for any screw-ups in that department, though I bet most people don't even realize it.

Just so you know, a ton of users' private info is sitting right there on the moderator side. It’s not just the current mods who can see it, either—it's former mods too, plus anyone who happens to know the passwords for the current or past moderation staff. Pretty wild, right?

Well, good luck finding a lawyer who can actually make sense of those regulations for you. Why don't you just sue the forum for handing over your private info to third parties? Once you land that massive settlement, give me a call and we'll grab a drink. We could even bring hollowtrucker77 along. 🙂

Anthony Collins4 said:

Paul Green31 As specified by:
Everything you need to know is right there in the link I sent you. Honestly, I think your best bet would be to find a decent lawyer who can sit down and actually walk you through the legalities of it all. Maybe they can make sense of it for you. 🙂

I’m more interested in the current vibe here on the forum, rather than any legalistic nonsense. 😉
What exactly have you gotten yourself worked up about?

Let’s say the topic was "why isn't it allowed to post recipes for making bombs out of kitchen supplies."

So you care about the vibe of the forum rather than the legalities, right? Well, guess what? You're still stuck with the law. 🙂

The forum has to "operate" according to the law, and that law says it's a bad idea to go around sharing private data. So yeah, you're technically right, but if you want exact definitions, you're going to have to dig through links and hire a lawyer.

By the way, if a moderator hands your email address over to a third party, that’s a violation of the Privacy Act and you could sue over it. If it were proven, the forum would be legally liable.