Sociopath Community

delora... said: 

At least blur my face out in your pictures holy s***

Sure. 

Wait, i didn't approve these changes

Her face can't be on the site. 🤷‍♂️

Some of these are videos she's uploaded herself, and she was going on about how she wanted a 3 or 5 minute video from jim of the stream so she could defend herself. 

Gosh I hate rule changes to appease people that usually post their own shit on here 

Yeah it sucks. 

Whorechata said: 

Gosh I hate rule changes to appease people that usually post their own shit on here

The topic after the related Med drama: 

Good said: 

Since the topic was turned into a circus, I decided to do it myself. Originally I wanted to make a poll and this can still be done, but here is the bare minimum:
The first step to solving the problem is legality and as it turns out, if we want this forum to stay up then any personal information relating to an identifiable person on the forum, can be requested to be removed.
This is according to the GDPR and we have users, such as myself, that force the forum to be compliant to these laws.

Here is a topic on law.stackexchange that specifically target the forum posts issue: https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/28276/are-internet-forum-posts-considered-personal-data-under-gdpr
It is not 100% clear, which is why it will be done on request and I will limit it to the bare minimum to comply with the law.

The bare minimum rule must be like this: "Dox data must be removed if the doxed person requests it and if the specific dox data was not posted by themselves on the site.".
"Dox data" is any data that can be used to uniquely identify a real person. This "real person" is the "doxed person".
"Doxed person" is any individual that has been uniquely identified by some collection of identifiers and the dox data relates to them.

In addition, if doxing is used as a tool to commit a real crime(such as cyberstalking, stalking, harassment, threats, or extortion) and it was not removed on request, it is a possible liability (according to any law).
If the dox data was obtained illegally, it is illegal and must be removed (according to any law).

Any changes to the rule must comply with the law, or someone crazy like med/primal can sue. If you disagree and think that people can't use the law against SC, explain?

The discussion goes further but ultimately ends on "remove on request". 

jim i hope u die painfully.

Haven't found where the Selfie Clause died yet, this appears to just be where it was milled down to being all photos they didn't specifically upload to the website themselves.

Further down the line it became about how they can't remove their own pictures from the website to then retroactively have every photo of them go down after (yay Med), so even their own uploads became down on request rather than how that once whitelisted it principally. 

Whorechata said: 

Some of these are videos she's uploaded herself, and she was going on about how she wanted a 3 or 5 minute video from jim of the stream so she could defend herself. 

Gosh I hate rule changes to appease people that usually post their own shit on here 

 Technically I am not recognizable in that video. It's very dark, and so I don't mind it being on here because no one can see my face. I've never uploaded a vid of myself on this site either. In fact, when you guys showed videos with my face being easy to recognize yesterday, I complained.

Turncoat said: 

Haven't found where the Selfie Clause died yet, this appears to just be where it was milled down to being all photos they didn't specifically upload to the website themselves.

Further down the line it became about how they can't remove their own pictures from the website to then retroactively have every photo of them go down after (yay Med), so even their own uploads became down on request rather than how that once whitelisted it principally. 

 Thank you for being honest about it, I respect that.