FAIR WARNING: LOL/Wow/Wis changes

Heartfeltdawn

stickyfiddle said:

I just want to know who lols when I post a pink paisley Tele...  

I'm more intrigued as to who doesn't lol when you post a pink paisley Tele. 

BigBearKris

digitalscream said:

OK, since plenty of folk keep piping up with "I say just get rid of them" or "Just replace them with 'Like'"...that's not going to happen. There are good reasons, but I've stated them so many times I'm getting really bored of typing it out.

I wasn't one of them but I'll ask another unpopular question  - what about bringing back facepalms (negative fret).

digitalscream

BigBearKris said:

digitalscream said:

OK, since plenty of folk keep piping up with "I say just get rid of them" or "Just replace them with 'Like'"...that's not going to happen. There are good reasons, but I've stated them so many times I'm getting really bored of typing it out.

I wasn't one of them but I'll ask another unpopular question  - what about bringing back facepalms (negative fret).

It's being considered. I figure it's best to make one small change at a time, though, lest heads explode

Hootsmon

tony99 said:

oh shit, it works

lolz

How does one do this shit?

stickyfiddle

Heartfeltdawn said:

stickyfiddle said:

I just want to know who lols when I post a pink paisley Tele...  

I'm more intrigued as to who doesn't lol when you post a pink paisley Tele. 

Cheeky bugger! 

crunchman

stickyfiddle said:

Heartfeltdawn said:

stickyfiddle said:

I just want to know who lols when I post a pink paisley Tele...  

I'm more intrigued as to who doesn't lol when you post a pink paisley Tele. 

Cheeky bugger! 

If he plays one in public, then he must be used to LOLs.

UnclePsychosis

@digitalscream ;

No desperately strong feelings on the frets-being-public thing but can I request that forum changes be announced somewhere thats NOT Off Topic? Lots of people don't ever venture in here, it shouldn't be used for announcements really (IMO). 

digitalscream

UnclePsychosis said:

@digitalscream ;

No desperately strong feelings on the frets-being-public thing but can I request that forum changes be announced somewhere thats NOT Off Topic? Lots of people don't ever venture in here, it shouldn't be used for announcements really (IMO). 

Not sure who you're thinking of, but Off Topic has the highest traffic of any category on the forum, and if you take Guitar and FX out of the equation it's got more traffic than all of the others combined.

UnclePsychosis

digitalscream said:

UnclePsychosis said:

@digitalscream ;

No desperately strong feelings on the frets-being-public thing but can I request that forum changes be announced somewhere thats NOT Off Topic? Lots of people don't ever venture in here, it shouldn't be used for announcements really (IMO). 

Not sure who you're thinking of, but Off Topic has the highest traffic of any category on the forum, and if you take Guitar and FX out of the equation it's got more traffic than all of the others combined.

I'd suggest a sticky in the top of every category for major forum changes. Even just as a pointer to a thread in OT. 

Longtallronnie

I wouldn’t have announced it at all. Just wait for someone to stumble upon it and boom! 

hollywoodrox

S56035 said:

digitalscream said:

S56035 said:

Am I the only one how can't figure out how you see this new feature?

Hover over the reaction count numbers

What about mobile devices? 

Doesn’t seem to do anything on my iPad 

Bridgehouse

UnclePsychosis said:

digitalscream said:

UnclePsychosis said:

@digitalscream ;

No desperately strong feelings on the frets-being-public thing but can I request that forum changes be announced somewhere thats NOT Off Topic? Lots of people don't ever venture in here, it shouldn't be used for announcements really (IMO). 

Not sure who you're thinking of, but Off Topic has the highest traffic of any category on the forum, and if you take Guitar and FX out of the equation it's got more traffic than all of the others combined.

I'd suggest a sticky in the top of every category for major forum changes. Even just as a pointer to a thread in OT. 

That’s a post in every one... which is about 20 sub forums... so 20 posts to do... which is a lot of work

mattdavis

Genuine question, as I am constantly bombarded by information governance issues at work. Are you allowed to retrospectively change the way data is handled without getting the consent of the individual concerned? Genuinely interested as we have to go through gazillions of hoops to make tiny changes to data processing. 

Bridgehouse

mattdavis said:

Genuine question, as I am constantly bombarded by information governance issues at work. Are you allowed to retrospectively change the way data is handled without getting the consent of the individual concerned? Genuinely interested as we have to go through gazillions of hoops to make tiny changes to data processing. 

In this context “data” doesn’t apply as its non-personalised and anonymous and has no material effect on the data we do hold on you which is personal data (which is actually only your email). 

chillidoggy

Nine pages in already. Bet the mods wished they'd never started.

digitalscream

mattdavis said:

Genuine question, as I am constantly bombarded by information governance issues at work. Are you allowed to retrospectively change the way data is handled without getting the consent of the individual concerned? Genuinely interested as we have to go through gazillions of hoops to make tiny changes to data processing. 

There was never any promise or guarantee (or even a vague statement!) made about them being anonymous, or about the purpose for which the data was collected; even more so, I've stated on several occasions (in very public threads) that the storage wasn't anonymous and that I could easily interrogate the database to find out who LOLd what.

Apart from anything, it's not personal data, so the GDPR doesn't apply...and on a site like this, the GDPR is the only law that really matters (even then, it doesn't matter much).

Strangefan

chillidoggy said:

Nine pages in already. Bet the mods wished they'd never started.

Why? There has literally been not one new mod intervention, or clash in this thread? 

octatonic

I don't have the time or inclination to go back through thousands of LOL's and try to judge who might be doing so ironically or nastily.

I've also don't have the time or inclination to worry about what someone might think about any LOL's I've handed out over the last 7 years either.

Let it goooooooooo, let it gooooooooooo.... etc.

mattdavis

digitalscream said:

mattdavis said:

Genuine question, as I am constantly bombarded by information governance issues at work. Are you allowed to retrospectively change the way data is handled without getting the consent of the individual concerned? Genuinely interested as we have to go through gazillions of hoops to make tiny changes to data processing. 

There was never any promise or guarantee (or even a vague statement!) made about them being anonymous, or about the purpose for which the data was collected; even more so, I've stated on several occasions (in very public threads) that the storage wasn't anonymous and that I could easily interrogate the database to find out who LOLd what.

Apart from anything, it's not personal data, so the GDPR doesn't apply...and on a site like this, the GDPR is the only law that really matters (even then, it doesn't matter much).

There’s lots of information in posts that make the data identifiable - people link to websites, use their own names in user names and in the text etc. I’m not trying to be an arsehole (so sorry if you think I’m being an arsehole) and I personally don’t object to the change. I  am just aware that I’ve read things where you’ve, rightly, advised people to be careful in what they post due to possible legal ramifications for the site (mainly to do with possible defamation) and I would not want you falling foul of data protection legislation - you guys do awesome work keeping this place going. I think there is an argument that historical data that could, in some cases, be identified to an individual, is being used in a new way, and that some people could reasonably object to that. 
I will now shut up and get back in my box. 
Cheers

digitalscream

mattdavis said:

digitalscream said:

mattdavis said:

Genuine question, as I am constantly bombarded by information governance issues at work. Are you allowed to retrospectively change the way data is handled without getting the consent of the individual concerned? Genuinely interested as we have to go through gazillions of hoops to make tiny changes to data processing. 

There was never any promise or guarantee (or even a vague statement!) made about them being anonymous, or about the purpose for which the data was collected; even more so, I've stated on several occasions (in very public threads) that the storage wasn't anonymous and that I could easily interrogate the database to find out who LOLd what.

Apart from anything, it's not personal data, so the GDPR doesn't apply...and on a site like this, the GDPR is the only law that really matters (even then, it doesn't matter much).

There’s lots of information in posts that make the data identifiable - people link to websites, use their own names in user names and in the text etc. I’m not trying to be an arsehole (so sorry if you think I’m being an arsehole) and I personally don’t object to the change. I  am just aware that I’ve read things where you’ve, rightly, advised people to be careful in what they post due to possible legal ramifications for the site (mainly to do with possible defamation) and I would not want you falling foul of data protection legislation - you guys do awesome work keeping this place going. I think there is an argument that historical data that could, in some cases, be identified to an individual, is being used in a new way, and that some people could reasonably object to that. 
I will now shut up and get back in my box. 
Cheers

We've had quite extensive analysis done - there is very little identifiable information stored in any structured (and verifiable) way on this site, and none of that data is ever used for a purpose other than that for which it was originally collected (which is a huge part of the GDPR). Even if somebody did try to make that argument...there isn't a single forum or social media site out there which maintains anonymity with likes etc, so there would be no expectation of anonymity in general terms here anyway.

Apart from anything, adding a display function to the reactions couldn't possibly be termed "a change in the way the data is handled", otherwise no interactive website would ever be allowed to make even minor functionality changes without a full GDPR review; that's not the purpose of the GDPR. If that's what your employer is doing, then they're either a) excessively paranoid, or b) completely misunderstanding the body of the GDPR.

This isn't me having a pop, by the way, and I appreciate the thought. I've just been stuck with dealing with GDPR in every job I've had to do since it came into force.