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

Deleted User wrote: »

Not suggesting anything..

You might not have but there are those who are flat out doing it.

Jack Chambers FF trying to have a go at Louise O'Reilly and not liking the spotlight turned on his own party's compliance/activity. Sounded very shaky.

Nothing for it but full disclosure by all.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Jack Chambers FF trying to have a go at Louise O'Reilly and not liking the spotlight turned on his own party's compliance/activity. Sounded very shaky.

Nothing for it but full disclosure by all.

If that is as accurate as your portrayal of Prime Time last night, then Jack Chambers cruised that discussion. Perhaps you might share a link of the discussion so we can evaluate?

Deleted User wrote: »

We all know by now that SF took the freely available electoral register, digitised it, and then ‘augmented’ that data with information they gleaned from Facebook scraping and surveys. They haven’t denied that all party activists with access to the system has access to all records - no attempt made to segregate data so it’s only available to those who should have access to it. They also record perceived voting intentions.

What they haven’t answered yet is whether canvassers or other party activists record additional information about members of the electorate - things the person is interested in, number of children based on finding out at the door, best time to call again, dangerous dog in the garden, recently deceased etc.

Was there a way of entering free text info about a person into the system?

if they have permission from the facebook user, they can add that info if they wish.

Who says they added data without permission?

Or are we making stuff up ?

https://twitter.com/Tupp_Ed/status/1385378627722821633

Simon McGarr's non sensational informed and expert view is always worth a read on these matters. This is a succinct explanation of why the journalist was getting 'backfire' memes.

Now, national or local, if a database of voting intentions and opinions is discovered to be illegal to hold, that’s surely going to be one of Irish politics’ more spectacular own goals in forcing to the fore as an issue.

This is why I really think it is a dumb story.

blanch152 wrote: »

If that is as accurate as your portrayal of Prime Time last night, then Jack Chambers cruised that discussion. Perhaps you might share a link of the discussion so we can evaluate?

You know how to use the internet? Go to the RTE Radio site and use the playback function. Clare Byrne Friday weekly round-up slot.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Simon McGarr's non sensational informed and expert view is always worth a read on these matters. This is a succinct explanation of why the journalist was getting 'backfire' memes.

https://twitter.com/Tupp_Ed/status/1385378627722821633

Reading the full thread, it seems that he sees the activity of organisations from outside this jurisdiction (e.g. FOSF, SFNI) on Facebook as being more problematic than the Abu database. That is only prioritising different aspects of illegal behaviour rather than saying it is not an issue.

blanch152 wrote: »

Reading the full thread, it seems that he sees the activity of organisations from outside this jurisdiction (e.g. FOSF, SFNI) on Facebook as being more problematic than the Abu database. That is only prioritising different aspects of illegal behaviour rather than saying it is not an issue.

Typical response...SF SF SF.

padd b1975

[Deleted User] wrote: »

That would make it a criminal matter. All it would take is one mole with access to the Abú system to reveal that. I’m sure there’s at least one planted somewhere.

Indeed.

It wouldn't be a true "republican" organisation without a few informers.

jimmycrackcorm

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Simon McGarr's non sensational informed and expert view is always worth a read on these matters. This is a succinct explanation of why the journalist was getting 'backfire' memes.

Interestingly one of his tweets on the same thread appears to confirm how SF is run like an army from the top down to the local level. No leadership rivals at the top down to no local rivals.

https://twitter.com/Tupp_Ed/status/1385380771041615873?s=20

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

Interestingly one of his tweets on the same thread appears to confirm how SF is run like an army from the top down to the local level. No leadership rivals at the top down to no local rivals.

https://twitter.com/Tupp_Ed/status/1385380771041615873?s=20

A spirited interpretation of that tweet, I'll give you that.

wicklowstevo

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Typical response...SF SF SF.

its a sf thread ,

i feel like that has been covered for your benefit already

wicklowstevo wrote: »

its a sf thread ,

i feel like that has been covered for your benefit already

It was a tweet about politics in general Stevo.

skimpydoo

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Jack Chambers FF trying to have a go at Louise O'Reilly and not liking the spotlight turned on his own party's compliance/activity. Sounded very shaky.

Nothing for it but full disclosure by all.

Surprise surprise https://twitter.com/lukeming/status/1385530749416353794?s=20

[Deleted User]

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Which is all those who insist this is a single party issue want to infer.

Get as many insinuations in as possible make it as 'shinister' as possible. Agendas clear as mountain spring water.

Sure Any Tom Dick or Paddy Cosgrave can do that
It doesn't matter if theres nothing to hide

[Deleted User]

maccored wrote: »

if they have permission from the facebook user, they can add that info if they wish.

Who says they added data without permission?

Or are we making stuff up ?

Not making stuff up. Asking the question about whether SF activists enter additional information about citizens above and beyond what they’ve extracted from the register and social media.

The funniest aspect of the Abu debacle is the arch Republican Sinn Fein party breathlessly declare “Facebook is King”.

Deleted User wrote: »

Not making stuff up. Asking the question about whether SF activists enter additional information about citizens above and beyond what they’ve extracted from the register and social media.

according to sf, they have permission for any info they have. read that somewhere

maccored wrote: »

according to sf, they have permission for any info they have. read that somewhere

“According to Sinn Fein” is a very broad qualification.

SafeSurfer wrote: »

“According to Sinn Fein” is a very broad qualification.

is that republican sinn fein or sinn fein?

maccored wrote: »

is that republican sinn fein or sinn fein?

According to Sinn Fein they were in full compliance with data protection until they admitted they were not.

SafeSurfer wrote: »

According to Sinn Fein they were in full compliance with data protection until they admitted they were not.

not republican sf (RSF) - you really need to learn the difference

EDIT - dont forget to throw us the link to the admission ....

David is hardly a shinner, but does he kinda nail it here?

https://twitter.com/davidcochrane/status/1385549140034215936

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Typical response...SF SF SF.

It is the Sinn Fein thread after all. What other political party should we talk about? The United Socialist Part of Venezuela? Oh wait. Maybe Syriza? I see.

No let's just keep it to Sinn Fein, save further embarrassment for them.

jimmycrackcorm

FrancieBrady wrote: »

A spirited interpretation of that tweet, I'll give you that.

If it quacks like a duck, walks like a duck... it's a spirited interpretation of a chicken?

jimmycrackcorm

FrancieBrady wrote: »

David is hardly a shinner, but does he kinda nail it here?

https://twitter.com/davidcochrane/status/1385549140034215936

Centralised and professional - that's how armies are organized. I wonder how did SF end up that way...

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

Centralised and professional - that's how armies are organized. I wonder how did SF end up that way...

It is not just armies who are organised in that way, the Chinese Communist Party, the Stasi in East Germany, there are many other similar examples to SF.

maccored wrote: »

not republican sf (RSF) - you really need to learn the difference

EDIT - dont forget to throw us the link to the admission ....

If you watch last nights Prime Time on the RTE Player you will see Sinn Fein leader Mary Lou Mc Donald being interviewed by Fran Mc Nulty admitting the party was not in compliance.

She was more equivocal about whether blowing up children on a boat off Mullaghmore was wrong or not.

bobbysands81

blanch152 wrote: »

Saying that no organisation is fully GDPR compliant in defence of Sinn Fein is equivalent to defending a drunken speeding driver who kills a pedestrian by saying that everyone has gone over the speed limit at some point while driving.

Your hatred is making your analogies even more irrational.

A relevant analogy would be every driver had killed someone when drunk but the media only go after one person.

There’s not an organisation in the State that is GDPR compliant, including the DPC, compliance is an aspiration not a possibility.

If Sinn Féin are doing something nefarious with the data then that’s the story but the Indo placing a (so far) ridiculous story about non-compliance when all organisations are in the same boat then forgive me whilst I laugh it off as the Indo just being the Indo.