FAO Mods - The UK online safety bill that comes into effect on March 17th

Wally

Smallman1 The chain of thought on the other forum I mentioned is that users with a grudge against the place could post something deliberately litigious then report it to the police to fuck the mods.

I could certainly see Flares doing that.

RichM

Wally but not if we transfer all mod duties to Ed

hugopal

Wally The chain of thought on the other forum I mentioned is that users with a grudge against the place could post something deliberately litigious then report it to the police to fuck the mods.

I could certainly see Flares doing that.

I don’t think that would necessarily result in ramifications for the site or the mods so long as the site has a report function in place allowing such content to be flagged and subsequently deleted. The only thing it may mean is that the mods may wish to be a bit more strict perhaps with what they allow to be posted until it becomes more clear how onerous and likely to be enforced the policy is.

But I think the only risk points for what currently gets typically posted here is making sure that no one posts that they hope another forum member kills themself, even if only in jest. Discussion of illegal substances will also need to be coded and ensured that it is not seen to be offering or pointing to any sales of said produce.

whatever

I think part of this also turns on the extent to which the board is a “service”. There is a checking process to determine whether it would apply to us, which should be the first port of call - unless someone has done it already.

It says: “If your business provides an online service (a service made available over the internet), such as a website or an app, the Act may apply.” That might suggest a way to get around it. I can see why the other forum was scared by the broad scope but I see this as being aimed at sites that have a direct link with the public by virtue of the services it offers. Could be wrong though.

Edit: Plus what Hugo said about risk assessments.

mono-stereo

hugopal this is useful, cheers Hugo.

whatever

hugopal

At a minimum (I assume) there would need to be clear rules/guidelines and users are seen to be directed to those guidelines if infringing and some record made of the decision making process as it pertains to risk etc.

hugopal

whatever Yes, there will need to be a clear terms and conditions alongside the moderation function, which basically just copies and pastes what the supposed illegal risk factors for this site are according to Ofcom’s online risk assessment tool. Maybe each new user will need to tick a box that they’ve read the Ts&Cs on account creation (can’t remember if this is already the case) and then probably make the Ts&Cs a sticky post at the top of the board.

Users should then be encouraged to report anything which may be deemed to be illegal content according to these guidelines.

Smallman1

There’s light at the end of the tunnel lads, we go again!

Mad_Cyril

@hugopal

Nice werk.

Hopefully those who assume everything on the internet is TRUTH, will learn to do a little FACT checking in future.

Like a fucking knitting club

Wally

Mad_Cyril Sounds like MC is volunteering to be the mod and assume all legal responsibilities to me! Good man!

Mad_Cyril

Wally
Not a problem Wal.

You’re BANNED 😂

IndustryStandard

$18mil potential downside…small change for the likes of MC

Mad_Cyril

IndustryStandard
Will pay in Moroccan Ding Dongs, chump change!

ScottBailey

Thanks for volunteering @Mad_Cyril

Stick it to the Twitter SHEEP!

Wally

Mad_Cyril Quite right 👍🏻

alistair

Thank God for the office bonhomie and those cold beverages!

whatever

alistair Thank God for the office bonhomie and those cold beverages!

Steady on, Al. They might start asking serious questions about the amount of Cherry Coke that you’re getting through. If they start replacing them with a cheap Dandelion & Burdock, then where will you be eh?

mono-stereo

So reading through the link Hugo provided for guidance for small organisations such as our own, I think we may be OK (thoughts all?)

https://www.ofcom.org.uk/online-safety/illegal-and-harmful-content/helping-small-services-navigate-the-online-safety-act/

We already have a “flag” function in order for users to bring posts to moderators attention, and we mainly deal with bad shoes and a sub genre of house music that the world forgot about, so nothing in scope content wise.

One thing that will need to be worked on is T&C’s. Do we have any legal eagles amongst us who could help out with this?

hugopal

mono-stereo One thing that will need to be worked on is T&C’s.

The other thing is just make sure you complete the questionnaire/assessment the Ofcom link takes you to, and make note of your assessment reference number, just so you can point to having carried out a suitable risk assessment. I had a dummy run through it before making my post and it doesn’t actually take very long at all to do.

“Using the tool to help you comply”

https://www.ofcom.org.uk/online-safety/illegal-and-harmful-content/check/

https://www.ofcom.org.uk/online-safety/illegal-and-harmful-content/check-how-to-comply-with-the-illegal-content-rules/

benson

Also an exemption for internal business sites. Set ourselves up as JC LLP and off we go.

hugopal

benson Can claim the business as running Grant and IS’s club nights.

hugopal

Once the new Ts & Cs are in place, the mods may wish to discourage Nas from referring to his music again as “weaponised” prog - just so it can’t be interpreted as him planning on committing a terrorist offence (even though his music is in its own right a crime against humanity).

« Previous Page Next Page »