On 05/12/2018 03:35 PM, Bernd Petrovitsch wrote:
Well, it's the very nature of an archive that everything stays there
(similar to a backup).
Yes. But I believe that GDPR has implications on expunging things from
archives / backups too. Not doing so is not within the spirit of
forgetting
Hi all!
On 12/05/18 22:48, Grant Taylor via Mailman-Users wrote:
> On 05/12/2018 02:39 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
>> It would be a much more annoying matter if they claimed the right to
>> be deleted from third party posts that quoted and identified them,
>> though. If there is a "right to be
On 05/12/2018 03:39 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> I think the basic inconvenient truth is that *some*body *will* come
> after *some*body else on the basis that they *might* have enough money
> to pay a settlement, or just to make "the responding party's" life
> hell.
Possibly. Also an
On 05/12/2018 02:39 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
It would be a much more annoying matter if they claimed the right to be
deleted from third party posts that quoted and identified them, though.
If there is a "right to be forgotten" that impinges on mailing list
archives, that seems plausible
Julian H. Stacey writes:
> Best action for least effort, IMO is first someone to agree to
> commit a big default legal disclaimer in the Mailman source
> distribution, as a
This isn't going to happen if I have anything to say about it. (I may
not have all that much to say about it! :-) As
Dimitri Maziuk writes:
> On 05/11/2018 04:55 PM, Julian H. Stacey wrote:
> ...
>
> I think the basic inconvenient truth is nobody's going to come after you
> unless you have money to pay the settlement.
I think the basic inconvenient truth is that *some*body *will* come
after *some*body
Dimitri Maziuk wrote:
> On 05/11/2018 04:55 PM, Julian H. Stacey wrote:
> I think the basic inconvenient truth is nobody's going to come after you
> unless you have money to pay the settlement.
Not `Nobody' but `Very few' & then a major pain best pre-deterred.
Most volunteer unpaid admins not
