4 ms·
> For example, do email addresses on the comments on a blog site fall under that protection? That is not unclear at all. They absolutely do. That doesn't mean
by TheCoelacanth 8y ago
> For example, do email addresses on the comments on a blog site fall under that protection?
That is not unclear at all. They absolutely do.
That doesn't mean you can't have them, but it means you need consent, you need to be clear about how you will use them and you need to let people withdraw consent.
- perl4ever 8y agoYou can't win an argument about whether something is unclear by proving (let alone merely asserting) it is so. This is something a lot of people seem unclear on.
- majewsky 8y agoWhy though? Email addresses are quite obviously "something that identifies a person".
- perl4ever 8y agoI'm not debating what's clear or not to me. My point is that it's subjective and if someone says a thing is unclear, you can not necessarily make it clear to them or force them to admit they are lying about their perception. Arguing with confusion is like debating whether someone is in pain when they act like they are. It could be they are lying. It could be they are not. It could be they are particularly stupid. I want to emphasize - you can be right or wrong about the GDPR, but that's not the same thing as being right or wrong about whether people are confused by it. I think it should be obvious that debating feelings or perceptions or emotions of other people tends to lead to unproductive interpersonal interactions, but perhaps others have not noticed this phenomenon. I can't imagine winning a debate with someone over whether they are trolling or not. Even if it's really obvious, nobody can see inner motivations for sure.
- eitland 8y ago> It could be they are lying. It could be they are not. It could be they are particularly stupid. At the point where one can prove that one part is too (trollish || stupid) I think it is reasonable to limit how much we care about their opinions.
- TheCoelacanth 8y agoThe only people unclear on this point are people who have failed to do even the most basic research into what GDPR says. It is blindingly obvious that an email is information that can be used to identify a person.
- perl4ever 8y agoI'm not arguing with you. If it is clear, then it suggests people saying it is not clear are basically trolls. Surely you can see that telling an apparent troll to admit being a troll is unproductive. You might be right, or you might be wrong, but you can't win that debate because it's about inner motivations and perceptions and not verifiable facts.
- TheCoelacanth 8y agoWhether something is clear or not is not dependent on whether a specific person knows it. A reasonable person who is even minimally informed about GDPR will know that an email address is covered by GDPR, hence it is "clear".