Expose ability to delete own content to end users

[julianlam]

Currently a user when deleting their own account will end up with their content persisting as a guest user.

According to the GDPR a user must be presented with the opportunity to delete both their account and their content, which is something only an admin is able to do at the present time.

[pauljherring]

Does all the content of public posts constitute personal data that must be removed under the auspices of the GDPR?

Which brings into question parts of said posts that have been quoted...

[Dravere]

@pauljherring As far as I understand it, yes. People need to have the option to fully delete their entire data on the site.

I really would like if there would be an option to ask the people to reconsider before deletion is done, since in some cases it will destroy knowledge and disrupt the flow of discussion threads. And obviously provide the soft deletion (anonymising?) as an alternative.

[pauljherring]

But (and I realise this is just another opinion)

http://missinfogeek.net/gdpr-consent/

When it comes to special categories of personal data (formerly known as “sensitive personal data” *), there is another set of legal basis (we’ll call these Damn Good reasons) which must also be met for the processing to be allowed. In fact, GDPR says that unless one of these Damn Good Reasons is applicable, then you’re not allowed to process special categories of personal data at all.

The Damn Good Reasons are:

[...]

When the individual has already and deliberately made the data public
[...]
When the processing is necessary for archiving, historical or scientific research, or statistical analysis

---

* Which public posts arguably aren't to begin with.

---

If this (allowing batch deletion of posts) is going in, is it going to be an admin overridable option?

[Dravere]

So, first and foremost: IANAL (I am not a lawyer) and also not an expert on this. I'm only trying to inform myself about this stuff to hopefully do the right thing.

Public posts are not "sensitive personal data". They are just "personal data". Sensitive personal data are stuff like health issues, ethnic, religion, sex, etc. So you don't need to delete this, if someone has published it via a post in your forum. That is correct. I probably would do it anyway if those people say in which post this data is. But the law won't force me.

But there is the right to erasure (I think article 17 of GDPR). And there are some reasons why you don't necessarily need to conform to every request. But I can't see anything that would allow to deny it in a public forum. At least definitely not in the type of forum I have.

If you know anything else in this regards please provide it. I'm still not quite satisfied with my current knowledge of the GDPR. But since the forum I own is a free time project of mine I also don't have that much time available to inform myself about the GDPR.

[pauljherring]

But I can't see anything that would allow to deny it in a public forum.

Context.

If you have a 100/1000 post thread in which a a vocal member has been posting then leaves, and decided to have all their posts deleted, you lose context.

And (to reiterate a point I made earlier) what do you do about the bits of their posts that were quoted?

[Dravere]

And is there something in the law that says that context is more important than the right to their personal data? I'm aware that context get lost and that is why I'm hoping that people don't delete their content in public discussions.

And your point about quotes is correct. But only because it currently might be technically difficult to fulfill in NodeBB, doesn't mean it is lawfully correct to not delete it.

I would be really happy if you can link me some specific points in the law or even better an explanation of the law by an expert why this data must not be deleted by the owner of forums. Why the right to erasure isn't applicable in this case.

[pauljherring]

Ok, lets start with posts being "personal data"

https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-the-general-data-protection-regulation-gdpr/key-definitions/

Personal data

The GDPR applies to ‘personal data’ meaning any information relating to an identifiable person who can be directly or indirectly identified in particular by reference to an identifier.

This definition provides for a wide range of personal identifiers to constitute personal data, including name, identification number, location data or online identifier, reflecting changes in technology and the way organisations collect information about people.

This does not cover the content of the vast majority of posts on most message boards.

It may apply to data within a particular post, but applying it to any and all posts ever made by a person is overkill and overreach.

[Dravere]

We are not discussing if the law is overkill or overreach, but only what the law actually says and regulates.

Posts are information relating to an identifiable person. And thus are personal data. But I wonder if this actually also mean if the account is deleted then the post isn't relating to an identifiable person anymore? Since it would just be a "guest" and every posts from deleted accounts would fall under that "guest" account. Thus would that be enough to fulfill the law? But the part about the "indirectly identified" makes me wonder if that would hold up in a court room.

[julianlam]

I think in general, the incidence of a long-time user deleting their entire contribution history is a rare one, although it can definitely happen.

You already do see it happen in public forums like Reddit, where the "standard" in deleting your account is to use a script to edit all of your posts with some set text, or just a .. It's annoying as hell, but I get that some users feel particularly strongly about leaving absolutely no trace of their contributions, and so if the GDPR asserts that this is a right, then it is something I am obligated to provide.

https://gdpr-info.eu/art-17-gdpr/

Where the controller has made the personal data public and is obliged pursuant to paragraph 1 to erase the personal data, the controller, taking account of available technology and the cost of implementation, shall take reasonable steps, including technical measures, to inform controllers which are processing the personal data that the data subject has requested the erasure by such controllers of any links to, or copy or replication of, those personal data.

We can likely consider it unreasonable to have to go through and delete all instances of quoted text by a specific person as well. Links to quoted users aren't stored in such a way and would constitute a considerable burden for the forum owner.

[FaizanZahid]

i see, but if a good user decides to leave, they r leaving lot of good quality content with them :(

[julianlam]

Hi all, just an update to this issue. I recently spoke to a lawyer regarding this issue, and in summary, the following is what I have been led to believe:

• Our existing practice of offering user (but not content) deletion is accordant with GDPR. So long as the capability exists to easily allow controllers to delete a user's content (which we do via ACP), then...
• Notifying users to "contact an administrator to delete your account's content in addition to your profile" is acceptable.

With regard to "or copy or replication of", there is leeway in terms of how these must be disposed of as well. Let's say a long time user deletes their account, does that automatically invalidate all backups? Yes, although:

• If your backups are not kept for an unreasonably long time (e.g. years), then you are ok.
• If you maintain a list of deleted users (so their data and content can be automatically scrubbed on backup restoration), that may be okay as well.

[julianlam]

Given that, I'll be adding in additional text to explain the need to contact an admin for profile+content deletion. I am comfortable leaving content deletion in administrators' hands.

[FaizanZahid]

Yes Julian. Even I am also comfortable with that decision. We should leave the content deletion part in admins hands only.. After all users are using a free service atleast we should be able to keep their contributed content for knwoeldge and help for new users.

…

On 30 Apr 2018 8:34 p.m., "Julian Lam" ***@***.***> wrote: Given that, I'll be adding in additional text to explain the need to contact an admin for profile+content deletion. I am comfortable leaving content deletion in administrators' hands. — You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#6437 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AIpxqggNhDxUGTedz0fvc2IIq4A1IXGJks5tt2c1gaJpZM4TKzgE> .

[Dravere]

Thanks for getting clarification about that! Those are great news.