Managing Users Who Ask To Leave

[Divvens]

Facebook has closer communities than a forum

Well once again, depends on the type of forum and type of members. It is not the same across every forum to generalize that. It is exactly the opposite in my community.

Facebook is different and forums are different. Just because FB allows account deactivation its not a must for us either. By law only if we host our servers in EU we are bound to delete user data on request. Doesn't apply if you host outside EU, and lets be honest a load of the rules EU enforces is utter nonsense.

It's not our position to say: "you're making a mistake" - you might come across as arrogant saying that.

No one needs to say that if you have a no-delete policy. I'd rather have a very very small minority who ask to have their account deleted answered "no" rather than have a Facebook like situation where some people deactivate and activate their account over whims and dramas.

 

[Robust]

Facebook is different and forums are different. Just because FB allows account deactivation its not a must for us either. By law only if we host our servers in EU we are bound to delete user data on request. Doesn't apply if you host outside EU, and lets be honest a load of the rules EU enforces is utter nonsense.

Laws are laws. I personally think the way taxes are spent is utter nonsense too, but I have to pay them.

Outside of the EU you still have a privacy policy. If a user then disagrees with the privacy policy, or you adjust either your terms or your privacy policy, a user has a full right to request their data to be removed from your servers in coordination with policy changes. To my knowledge, you'd be required by law to ensure all user data was removed such a scenario, but I'm no lawyer so I can't be 100% sure on this.

I don't think someone would go to court for a forum though, but you never know.

 

[Anthony Parsons]

If a user then disagrees with the privacy policy, or you adjust either your terms or your privacy policy, a user has a full right to request their data to be removed from your servers in coordination with policy changes.

Nope, providing you have one of your terms contain that you agree that changes may be made in the future and is not reliant on the users consent. This is pretty much standard in all legal and privacy policies.

 

[Steve Freides]

I generally honor deletion requests. I do not, however, delete posts.

I have yet to figure out what a user gains if, since I'm not deleting their posts, I delete their account - how is this any different than making it private (as discussed earlier) and just leaving it there? This seems like, "if a tree falls in the forest and no one hears it, does it make a sound?" kind of things. I don't mean to be critical here but am asking - what's the difference between deleting an account and the user just not using it?

If they want their account deleted, they want it deleted.

But they have given up the right to have their account deleted when they joined the forum, no?

-S-

 

[Robust]

Nope, providing you have one of your terms contain that you agree that changes may be made in the future and is not reliant on the users consent. This is pretty much standard in all legal and privacy policies.

That never works. In cases of Sony vs [a name here] and another case that @Adam H linked me on another site a while ago, both cases were lost because they contained statements like that. It's also the reason why Google and PayPal inform users of all policy changes, and PayPal explicitly asks users to agree to the policy changes. Other large companies do the same. I'm 99% sure that kinda BS doesn't work in any terms. You don't just say we can add anything in here and you must agree to it.

"Uhh, yh mate. You must pay £1000 billable to Robust every day as a non refundable charge." - new terms of the service
thank yous for using robust forums. enjoy your stay.

 

[Robust]

But they have given up the right to have their account deleted when they joined the forum, no?

Not really. If I store my card information with a company and disagree with their privacy policy amendments (e.g. they change their privacy policy to share my personal details like my address to foreign ad companies) I can disagree with this change and request account closure, as well as none of my information released. I didn't consent to that. You can't just make amends to privacy policies without explicit user agreement like that. You guys would really be screwed in court this way. For example, I surrender a lot of privacy rights to Google by using their services, and explicitly agreeing to their terms. That data is supposedly used by their ad stuff and whatnot. If I registered before their privacy policy said that, I'm pretty sure they'd require me to explicitly agree to those changes. They have made policy changes before and waited a long time before implementing them, giving a lot of notice on their site about the changes to guests and a thing saying "Agree to changes" "Review later" to account holders.

Again, I'm no lawyer, but that stuff doesn't work to my knowledge. I know cases in the US have been lost by statements like that, and EU regulations are tighter on stuff like that, so while I'm not aware of any such cases, I'm pretty sure EU member states have similar regulations. Consult a lawyer for something more accurate.

 

[Anthony Parsons]

You should inform your users of changes, but you can legally change things without them consenting to them again. I think you may find the larger companies you reference, made changes of significant impact...

There are always going to be cases won and lost, that does not negate the legal context of such.

 

[Mr Lucky]

perpetual, royalty-free, irrevocable, non-exclusive right and license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, disclose, post, remove and/or distribute such materials

The word distribute in this context is worrying, as it could imply the forum is being granted the right to sell people's music or videos. Perhaps the wording distribute non-commercially (edited) would solve this.

 

[Anthony Parsons]

When you write a legal policy, the advice given to me was to be as broad as possible, none of which means you will do nasty stuff, but more it covers you in case you do something harmful, intentionally or unintentionally.

 

[Mr Lucky]

When you write a legal policy, the advice given to me was to be as broad as possible, none of which means you will do nasty stuff, but more it covers you in case you do something harmful, intentionally or unintentionally.

When you write a legal policy, the advice given to me was to be as broad as possible, none of which means you will do nasty stuff, but more it covers you in case you do something harmful, intentionally or unintentionally.

Yes, I totally agree with you - however I tried using that wording and there was a query from a member about this, because theoretically that clause could give me the right to do nasty stuff.

I do appreciate it's not easy to word something in one paragraph that ideally should be a 20 page contract.

I realise I should have said distribute NON commercially.

 

[n00bsaibot]

An agreement that can be modified at whim by one party, will not be enforced on the opposing party. Terms of service are effective because people are lazy. But if some trollish over-achiever took you to court it could be unenforceable. Ironically, it's best not to find out.

I also have wording to prevent deletion. But if people push back I'd work something out over taking a hard line stance.

 

[Anthony Parsons]

I agree that people are lazy...

But if some trollish over-achiever took you to court it could be unenforceable.

Though I have been at lawyer stages before with such people, and it became a stalemate, as the opposing lawyer knew they couldn't win in a court of law, because agreed terms are legally binding providing they do not step outside of privacy and such laws, which mine do not. Whilst every case is individual, if any court allowed deletion of content just because the person changed their mind, then the entire web would be in trouble... it would set precedence for every person to begin demanding and forcing their content be removed from databases globally, even though you provided that content willingly, in agreeance to a legally binding contract. It would make a mockery of contract law.

This is also another reason to why my site owns the copyright of everything posted, because that single law itself puts ownership to myself, which makes nearly every claim against useless, because the member does not own the content, I do. It makes life much easier from a legal stance, as copyright law is quite fixed.

You should always seek legal advice for your terms, again, having them in your country alone is what catches people out, when you're allowing access from select or the world, access.

 

[Peace]

We soft-delete all posts and de-activate accounts by request (the accounts and posts still exist in the backend in case of legal issues, but 100% invisible to members/guests). We have a plugin that does it in one click.

Our forum is for abuse survivors, so member safety is more important than thread continuity. Additionally, a lot of our newcomers are traumatized or depressed when they first join, and sometimes they say things or share details they might later regret (even years later) once they're in a healthier state of mind. We don't want anyone to feel bound by their past. Everyone deserves a do-over

 

[n00bsaibot]

It would make a mockery of contract law.

It's not the deletion specifically. In the USA, the legality of upholding a contract with unilateral modifications is dubious. If the terms change at a later date you may be able to break the contract. This is regardless of having a statement allowing a change in terms.

Now if getting out of contract = account deletion; that is beyond me. I would never pursue enough to find out.

A real world example, ToS modifications can get you out of a 2 year cell contract.

 

[DieselMinded]

I remove there email address, then move them to a user group thats stripped of everything

 

[Anthony Parsons]

A real world example, ToS modifications can get you out of a 2 year cell contract.

Yes, but this is not to do with writing on a website. Completely different.

 

[Steve Freides]

I remove there email address, then move them to a user group thats stripped of everything

What I don't understand is what this does for the user? It won't, e.g., make their posts not show up in a Google search on a topic they've written on, and it won't make their posts not show up on a search of their username.

The only thing I can think of that's accomplished is that their account, if hacked, couldn't be used to post new messages, and perhaps that's important.

-S-

 

[DieselMinded]

you dont own your content when you post it, if you wish not to be a member than removing your email will stop you from getting emails from the site, and moving you to a stripped down version of the site via user group allows you to be reinstated if you so wish

 

[Forcycle]

you dont own your content when you post it, if you wish not to be a member than removing your email will stop you from getting emails from the site, and moving you to a stripped down version of the site via user group allows you to be reinstated if you so wish

What would happen if a user then wanted to return to the community? I know lots of communities have things against multiple accounts etc so say one user wanted to return after a year but couldn't because you changed their email address?

Couldn't you just have them disable all of the alert options in the preferences page? They can log out and never log in if they don't want to. If they do, they can do so without any hassle.

 

[Anthony Parsons]

if you wish not to be a member than removing your email will stop you from getting emails from the site

That is just silly. You can uncheck receive site mail, though yes, that would not stop them receiving mail for alerts by email they have checked (their doing), but, you can just set their account to not validated, and that stops everything until they validate their account.