The wondrous adventures of Sinn Fein (part 3) Mod Notes and Threadbanned List in OP

FrancieBrady

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Absolutely and it is why I said from the get go that there may be GDPR issues here. But perspective is required too.

From handwaving to justifying handwaving

FrancieBrady

Marine Layer wrote: »

From handwaving to justifying handwaving

I think you are desperately trying to make a charge stick when the evidence says otherwise.

Putting things in perspective is 'handwaving' now. Gulp!

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Much more reasonable article in the IT. These seem to be the core issues with this.





https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/sinn-f%C3%A9in-insists-its-voter-database-does-not-breach-data-laws-1.4538735

Yes, a couple of core points in that article:


"but there was far greater potential for misuse than in traditional campaigning, she noted.

“It is also often not transparent by default, like door-knocking or posters are, and parties naturally enough won’t want to give away their trade secrets in an election unless they are compelled to. As it stands, expenditure and activity outside of Ireland doesn’t fall under electoral rules, which isn’t practical in a digital age,”"

"The Irish Times also asked Sinn Féin where exactly in the EU the database is hosted but the party declined to answer."

"It is understood the office is also particularly interested in the issue of user consent and knowledge."

Certainly the SF reps I have slammed the door on never had time to get my consent.

FrancieBrady

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I think you are desperately trying to make a charge stick when the evidence says otherwise.

Putting things in perspective is 'handwaving' now. Gulp!

I know,I forgot,handwaving is ok if it involves excusing Sinn Féin of something fishy but not anyone else of course

Was there any segregation of the database I wonder? Could some ‘community activist’ in Belfast have access to records of people in Cork for example?

I know they said they used a colour coding system to indicate the likelihood you were going to vote for the party of democratic centralism, but it would be also worth asking if the system allowed for additional information to be entered - angry dog in garden, blueshirt, etc.

FrancieBrady

Marine Layer wrote: »

I know,I forgot,handwaving is ok if it involves excusing Sinn Féin of something fishy but not anyone else of course

Inventing terms that are not applicable (I have and do fully accept there may be GDPR issues here for SF and if there are they should pay the penalty, same as many others including institutes of this state have) is a feature of debate here. You just did, now you have to generalise to try to defend it. Stop digging might be good advice at this stage.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Yes, a couple of core points in that article:


"but there was far greater potential for misuse than in traditional campaigning, she noted.

“It is also often not transparent by default, like door-knocking or posters are, and parties naturally enough won’t want to give away their trade secrets in an election unless they are compelled to. As it stands, expenditure and activity outside of Ireland doesn’t fall under electoral rules, which isn’t practical in a digital age,”"

"The Irish Times also asked Sinn Féin where exactly in the EU the database is hosted but the party declined to answer."

"It is understood the office is also particularly interested in the issue of user consent and knowledge."

Certainly the SF reps I have slammed the door on never had time to get my consent.

Do you think it might be timely that all parties reveal their 'trade secrets' as she calls them? Like how do I get, and where did I consent to FG.FF Lab etc sending me personally addressed party bumpf?

ohnonotgmail

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Do you think it might be timely that all parties reveal their 'trade secrets' as she calls them? Like how do I get, and where did I consent to FG.FF Lab etc sending me personally addressed party bumpf?

are they not pulling the names and addresses from the voting register? or are they not allowed to do that any more?

FrancieBrady

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

are they not pulling the names and addresses from the voting register? or are they not allowed to do that any more?

No idea. I know I certainly never consented to mail from any party nor national draws etc.

blanch152

Deleted User wrote: »

Was there a field for additional comments beside each voter? Free text where a party activist could offer his opinions on someone?

Colour-coding was mentioned. That is where the breach of GDPR starts.

There are questions over access, consent, sharing of data, location of data. In some ways it would actually be more worrying if SF have perfected the system and been monitoring people for years like Facebook or the Stasi or a combination of both.

maccored

Deleted User wrote: »

Was there any segregation of the database I wonder? Could some ‘community activist’ in Belfast have access to records of people in Cork for example?

I know they said they used a colour coding system to indicate the likelihood you were going to vote for the party of democratic centralism, but it would be also worth asking if the system allowed for additional information to be entered - angry dog in garden, blueshirt, etc.

as far as I remember, SF werent interested in your political views unless you were likely to vote for them. Much like most other political parties I'd assume.

Mountain being made out of a molehill here - though I do think it highlights grey areas in GDPR. For example, is it ok to judge if someone is a likely voter or is that a breach of GDPR?

FrancieBrady

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Inventing terms that are not applicable (I have and do fully accept there may be GDPR issues here for SF and if there are they should pay the penalty, same as many others including institutes of this state have) is a feature of debate here. You just did, now you have to generalise to try to defend it. Stop digging might be good advice at this stage.

If ever there was a post confirming handwaving is ok for Sinn Féin only,its the above
No escaping it,I'm afraid

maccored

FrancieBrady wrote: »

No idea. I know I certainly never consented to mail from any party nor national draws etc.

all registered parties have access to the electoral register

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Inventing terms that are not applicable (I have and do fully accept there may be GDPR issues here for SF and if there are they should pay the penalty, same as many others including institutes of this state have) is a feature of debate here. You just did, now you have to generalise to try to defend it. Stop digging might be good advice at this stage.

Interesting advice but then......

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Do you think it might be timely that all parties reveal their 'trade secrets' as she calls them? Like how do I get, and where did I consent to FG.FF Lab etc sending me personally addressed party bumpf?

.....classic example of generalising to defend something.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Interesting advice but then......



.....classic example of generalising to defend something.

I love how you wilfully miss things and misrepresent.

Reminder:

I have and do fully accept there may be GDPR issues here for SF and if there are they should pay the penalty,

RandomName2

I think it's important to remember that the Sinn Fein member Murphy will still not name the IRA members he chatted to about the abduction, torture and murder of Paul Quinn.

If SF posters applied the same reasonable behaviour they demand of everyone else

The same proportionality

This thread and all politics threads would be useful

Alas

FrancieBrady

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I love how you wilfully miss things and misrepresent.

Reminder :

I have and do fully accept there may be GDPR issues here for SF and if there are they should pay the penalty,

Yeah but out of the other side of your mouth came the hand waving below

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Neither would breaches of GDPR regs maccored. But I'm sure we'll be told this is a capital offence or if the DPC finds no issue that he/she is corrupt or something.

Of course don't be surprised if this is pointed out to you next time You go off on one accusing someone else of hand waving
It just won't be taken seriously
Sauce for the Goose,Sauce for the Gander etc

With any other party or indeed organisation you’d be happy enough to fire in a request to see what info they hold on you. You’d be hesitant with SF though. Murky.

FrancieBrady

Marine Layer wrote: »

Reminder :

Yeah but out of the other side of your mouth came the hand waving below



Of course don't be surprised if this is pointed out to you next time You go off on one accusing someone else of hand waving
It just won't be taken seriously
Sauce for the Goose,Sauce for the Gander etc

There is not a word of mistruth there ML. So it isn't handwaving.

This will be a breach of regulations, with a fine as penalty. Perspective, it's a good thing to have.

FrancieBrady

FrancieBrady wrote: »

There is not a word of mistruth there ML. So it isn't handwaving.

This will be a breach of regulations, with a fine as penalty. Perspective, it's a good thing to have.

You hand wove it away though
Thats ok
Just note next time you accuse someone else of this,expect a pot kettle reply

FrancieBrady

Marine Layer wrote: »

You hand wove it away though
Thats ok
Just note next time you accuse someone else of this,expect a pot kettle reply

This is ridiculous.

How is accepting that they may have a case to answer and if they do then they should be fined, 'handwaving away' of any description?

Jesus H.

hatrickpatrick

Genuine question here. Leaving GDPR aside for a moment, why exactly would anyone have a problem with this? I'm sure I'm on some FG database as a hardline leftist who will never again give FG a preference, given my regular diatribes against them and neoliberalism generally on social media, as well as my participation in local leftist politics and encounters with FG canvassers in the past.

As far as I'm concerned, a database entry with a red circle next to my name indicating "this guy is not an FG voter and is in fact actively hostile towards our party" means canvassers won't waste either their time or my time knocking on my door when the next election rolls around. They'll see the "FG hater" label in their database query and say "ok, well this particular guy is 100% not going to change his mind and vote for us, let's just skip his gaff and move on to the next one on the street".

I don't see how making such notes on a database which they have legal access to to begin with can be construed as wrong, corrupt, shady, etc? It may be a breach of GDPR, but in my view that's just yet another example of how GDPR is absolutely batsh!t insane, and makes basic things incredibly difficult while utterly failing to achieve what it was originally designed to achieve, namely a reduction in digital tracking using third party cookies.

Essentially, if this is illegal, it's the law which is wrong, not the action. And I apply that equally to all political parties - I hope both FF and FG have me marked down in their database as a hardline leftist who will never against give them even the slightest consideration at election time. I could do without their people bothering me during the next election when I'm chilling out at home, and I'm sure their people could do without getting a bollocking from a leftist who is seething with anger at what they've done to my generation.

Isn't this a win-win for everyone? Blanch, take you, for example - you are a hardcore anti-SF voter. Isn't it plain common sense and a good thing if SF have a little red X next to your name on their voter database, indicating "this person absolutely hates our party and no amount of arguing is ever going to change their mind, let's just not bother knocking on this particular door and instead move on to the next house"? Substitute knocking on the door with sending text messages or emails, paid advertising on social media, etc and it pretty much covers exactly what this would be used for - assuming they have you marked as a hardline anti-SF voter, it means they won't waste their time or money, and by extension your time, trying to reach out to you as a voter.

I for one have no problem with this, from any party. I sincerely hope both FF and FG have noted my die-hard opposition in their own databases, so that our paths need not cross on the campaign trail in a manner which would simply waste all of our time.

blanch152

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

are they not pulling the names and addresses from the voting register? or are they not allowed to do that any more?

This is the thing. You are allowed to use the electoral register to send election material, however, the purpose for which Sinn Fein are using it goes beyond that.

On a separate note, this is quite a valuable database for other organisations to use. For example, an organisation such as Friends of Sinn Fein would find it very useful to write to potential supporters.

hatrickpatrick

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Genuine question here. Leaving GDPR aside for a moment, why exactly would anyone have a problem with this? I'm sure I'm on some FG database as a hardline leftist who will never again give FG a preference, given my regular diatribes against them and neoliberalism generally on social media, as well as my participation in local leftist politics and encounters with FG canvassers in the past.

Nah, you aren’t. Thanks for the mini autobiography btw. Fascinating.

hatrickpatrick

Deleted User wrote: »

Nah, you aren’t. Thanks for the mini autobiography btw. Fascinating.

If not, then why not? We've established that SF and FF both use this technology, FG should be as well. It would save both me and their canvassers time during the next election, they wouldn't bother targeting me and I wouldn't have to listen to their sh!te. Honestly, if I'm not already marked in this manner, I'd happily submit my name and address right here and now for this exact reason.

Why should that be controversial? Are there any particular parties you absolutely despise, and would prefer simply not to be bothered by canvassers for at the next election rather than having your dinner or movie night or whatever interrupted by a knock on the door from a politician you dearly hope loses his or her seat?

blanch152

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Genuine question here. Leaving GDPR aside for a moment, why exactly would anyone have a problem with this? I'm sure I'm on some FG database as a hardline leftist who will never again give FG a preference, given my regular diatribes against them and neoliberalism generally on social media, as well as my participation in local leftist politics and encounters with FG canvassers in the past.

As far as I'm concerned, a database entry with a red circle next to my name indicating "this guy is not an FG voter and is in fact actively hostile towards our party" means canvassers won't waste either their time or my time knocking on my door when the next election rolls around. They'll see the "FG hater" label in their database query and say "ok, well this particular guy is 100% not going to change his mind and vote for us, let's just skip his gaff and move on to the next one on the street".

I don't see how making such notes on a database which they have legal access to to begin with can be construed as wrong, corrupt, shady, etc? It may be a breach of GDPR, but in my view that's just yet another example of how GDPR is absolutely batsh!t insane, and makes basic things incredibly difficult while utterly failing to achieve what it was originally designed to achieve, namely a reduction in digital tracking using third party cookies.

Essentially, if this is illegal, it's the law which is wrong, not the action. And I apply that equally to all political parties - I hope both FF and FG have me marked down in their database as a hardline leftist who will never against give them even the slightest consideration at election time. I could do without their people bothering me during the next election when I'm chilling out at home, and I'm sure their people could do without getting a bollocking from a leftist who is seething with anger at what they've done to my generation.

Isn't this a win-win for everyone? Blanch, take you, for example - you are a hardcore anti-SF voter. Isn't it plain common sense and a good thing if SF have a little red X next to your name on their voter database, indicating "this person absolutely hates our party and no amount of arguing is ever going to change their mind, let's just not bother knocking on this particular door and instead move on to the next house"? Substitute knocking on the door with sending text messages or emails, paid advertising on social media, etc and it pretty much covers exactly what this would be used for - assuming they have you marked as a hardline anti-SF voter, it means they won't waste their time or money, and by extension your time, trying to reach out to you as a voter.

I for one have no problem with this, from any party. I sincerely hope both FF and FG have noted my die-hard opposition in their own databases, so that our paths need not cross on the campaign trail in a manner which would simply waste all of our time.

It is wrong because it breaches the principles of consent.

Facebook does the same, but I waive my consent freely. As do Twitter and every other single website. Sinn Fein did not obtain consent from me to colour-code me or process any information about me. That is illegal, a gross infringement of rights.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

It is wrong because it breaches the principles of consent.

Facebook does the same, but I waive my consent freely. As do Twitter and every other single website. Sinn Fein did not obtain consent from me to colour-code me or process any information about me. That is illegal, a gross infringement of rights.

:D Language usage again.

'Gross'? It will be a fine if they have breached regs here blanch.

hatrickpatrick

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Why should that be controversial? Are there any particular parties you absolutely despise, and would prefer simply not to be bothered by canvassers for at the next election rather than having your dinner or movie night or whatever interrupted by a knock on the door from a politician you dearly hope loses his or her seat?

All of them. Canvassing should be banned and election posters should be banned.

blanch152

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

If not, then why not? We've established that SF and FF both use this technology, FG should be as well. It would save both me and their canvassers time during the next election, they wouldn't bother targeting me and I wouldn't have to listen to their sh!te. Honestly, if I'm not already marked in this manner, I'd happily submit my name and address right here and now for this exact reason.

Why should that be controversial? Are there any particular parties you absolutely despise, and would prefer simply not to be bothered by canvassers for at the next election rather than having your dinner or movie night or whatever interrupted by a knock on the door from a politician you dearly hope loses his or her seat?

Some good advice offered earlier, not to generalise to defend things. Whether FF uses it as well will come out in the wash.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

now you have to generalise to try to defend it. Stop digging might be good advice at this stage.

You have no problem with your personal information being used in this way. That is great, that is fully in accordance with GDPR because you are giving consent to your information being used in that way. However, the other millions of people on the register haven't given that consent, yet Sinn Fein have used their personal information in that way. See the issue now?