Duplicate Self-delete account by banning

This suggestion has been closed. Votes are no longer accepted.
Like most admins i don't delete accounts and give a ban instead. This way the profile is blocked and no alerts of emails are send. Easy and keeps all the data in place.

When a real name is used or it can track back to personal data i also will change the name. Data in posts is changed or removed when necessary. Email or ip i only do when requested.
 
Last edited:
Like most admins i don't delete accounts and give a ban instead.

When a real name is used or it can track back to personal data i also will change the name. Data in posts is changed or removed when necessary.

Can you cite where you determined that most admins ban the user?

What you are doing is extremely unethical. The user requests their account to be removed and instead of complying or not complying you ban the user.
 
What you are doing is extremely unethical. The user requests their account to be removed and instead of complying or not complying you ban the user.
Indeed.

Besides, when a user is deleted on a XenForo forum, their content isn't deleted. Plus there's an option to not delete the user at all, just rename them, keeping all posts intact and linked to the anonymised user.

1562936773241.webp
 
@dutchbb, there is a great add-on for this. It can delete the account, but also disable it. Although I think that disabling (or banning) is not in compliance with GDPR.


Plus there's an option to not delete the user at all, just rename them, keeping all posts intact and linked to the anonymised user.
The account will be renamed and then deleted.
 
This to me sounds more like a case of 'account de-activation' rather than 'self-ban' , in that the user wishes their data to remain but their account to be dead in effect. Perhaps a bit like having them back in an 'registered but not confirmed the email' link type of thing, so that although they could likely login they could not do/post anything nor view personal messages etc.

They could actually do this "self ban" anyway themselves without any issue by changing their email to a disposable one then changing their password to a random string. The email change is needed so that they only have temp access to it. Then they would not be able to remember said password and would not be able to recover said pass via their email as it would be dead by then. Job done.
 
There is already a suggestion for account self-deletion:

But if you have no intention of offering account deletion then this might be a better fit:

Worth noting that XF already has a "Disabled" user state so currently all a user has to do is request that their account be deactivated, and you would just set this state. This is a similar effect to banning, but clearly more semantically correct as banning should only ever be used for user discipline.

1562937796134.webp
 
Can you cite where you determined that most admins ban the user?

What you are doing is extremely unethical. The user requests their account to be removed and instead of complying or not complying you ban the user.

Most admins i talked with do it that way, not something strange or unknown.

Why? If you tell them what happens when they delete the account there is no problem. This is known and done on our forum and after many years no complaints.

But we do remove emails and ip's when requested and even change names in quotes + remove any personal data in posts.
 
Last edited:
Worth noting that XF already has a "Disabled" user state so currently all a user has to do is request that their account be deactivated, and you would just set this state. This is a similar effect to banning, but clearly more semantically correct as banning should only ever be used for user discipline.

View attachment 206291

Ok, that is even better ;)
 
There is already a suggestion for account self-deletion:

But if you have no intention of offering account deletion then this might be a better fit:

Worth noting that XF already has a "Disabled" user state so currently all a user has to do is request that their account be deactivated, and you would just set this state. This is a similar effect to banning, but clearly more semantically correct as banning should only ever be used for user discipline.

View attachment 206291
Since it is a mandatory legal issue to give this option in the forum, I think it should be included in the kernel and not as a plugin
 
Top Bottom