GDPR and stupidity

[Dave2002]

Now we are all going to get bombarded with emails about the GDPR. We are supposed to positively agree to have a digital relationship with organisations we want to continue with.

It’s easy for the ones we want to lose - just ignore them. What about the ones which we might want to keep? The emails reminding us about this frequently come with a link to click on - yet clicking on unsolicited links could be hazardous, and we are generally recommended not to do it.

This hasn’t been thought through well.

[greenilex]

Perhaps best to reply in words, and expect the recipient to do the office work...

[ardcarp]

I think it's farcical that even the smallest trader (e.g. self-employed gardener or electrician) is technically supposed, as I understand it, to inform their clients of how their 'data' is stored...probably on the back of an envelope....and give them the option to delete it. And this when Tesco, Amazon, etc, etc. know your shoe-size, holiday preferences and lipstick shade . But they've got big expensive lawyers......

[jean]

I'm worried about the impact that this will have on small concert-giving organisations.

Email lists are a very important way for such groups to inform their potential audience of their activities. People may not realise why they are being asked to confirm that they do still want to belong to a list they signed up to in the first place. They probably just won't get round to replying at all.

[Pulcinella]

I'm worried about the impact that this will have on small concert-giving organisations.

Email lists are a very important way for such groups to inform their potential audience of their activities. People may not realise why they are being asked to confirm that they do still want to belong to a list they signed up to in the first place. They probably just won't get round to replying at all.

Like others, I have received many of these confirmation requests recently; but I haven't had to concoct one (though the committee is concerned about the mailing list we hold for our choir here in York). Do they have to be worded such that a lack of response is taken to mean that the name has to be dropped from the list? I can see the logic in that (and have not responded to some in the hope of being dropped!) but, as jean suggests, the people that signed up to our mailing list at our last concert may wonder why they are being asked if they now (still?) want to stay on the list to hear about our next concert!

[greenilex]

There is an exemption for small not-for-profit outfits.

[jean]

What sort of 'exemption' were you thinking of? No-one I know thinks we don't have to ask our supporters to confirm that they still want to hear from us, even if they only signed up last week.

In any case, I don't think we count as 'not-for-profit '.

We may not make much or even any, but we have to hope to make some, or we can't fund our next concert.

[Serial_Apologist]

Not one that will save us from having to ask people to confirm that they still want to hear from us, even if they only signed up last week.

It probably amounts to a hapless application of the capital depreciation principle - used to value things in money terms - to people: if it (they) hang around for longer than deemed of use they're in the way and of less value.

[jean]

That's not what we think, though. It's the government that's making us behave as if we did.

[ardcarp]

There is an exemption for small not-for-profit outfits.

Can you point to the relevant paragraphs in the legislation, greenilex?

[LMcD]

I'm worried about the impact that this will have on small concert-giving organisations.

Email lists are a very important way for such groups to inform their potential audience of their activities. People may not realise why they are being asked to confirm that they do still want to belong to a list they signed up to in the first place. They probably just won't get round to replying at all.

I'm an active supporter of such an organisation (Music in Felixstowe). Members were informed by email and newsletter. As far as I'm aware, the great majority have replied.

[greenilex]

I think I have been confusing two different questions. The exemption is from data protection registration under the 1998 Act, not the new regs. Sorry for the confusion.

[Dave2002]

What sort of 'exemption' were you thinking of? No-one I know thinks we don't have to ask our supporters to confirm that they still want to hear from us, even if they only signed up last week.

In any case, I don't think we count as 'not-for-profit '.

We may not make much or even any, but we have to hope to make some, or we can't fund our next concert.

I think it's OK to have policies such that new members will be made aware of the policies, so they shouldn't have to reconfirm immediately.

The basics are to state what the data is going to be used for, which might include asking for volunteers for concerts etc., as well as to keep in contact for sales, and also to state what the retention policies are - is the data to be kept for N years from the last agreed contact? Also anyone who wants data deleted needs to know how to do it. Some people may wish to change their relationship with the organisation - for example to have less frequent contacts, and no paper notifications. They need to be given information about the time scales for changes - changes probably don't have to be immediate.

GDPR is probably not going to be so problematic for organisations which make an effort to keep those who work for them, or need information from them, or have information stored by them, well informed and treated "reasonably".

[Dave2002]

Just had an email from (purportedly) the publishers of BBC Music Magazine inviting me to look at web pages and/or click on links. Apparently i MUST click on this.

No way - I'm thoroughly fed up with the GDPR nonsense.

[Anastasius]

It's the same load of pointless codswallop as that EU directive about bloody cookies.