MyBB Community Forums

(2019-01-21, 07:51 PM)Serpius Wrote: [ -> ]That's all I am going to say on this subject.

Yes, please.

(2019-01-21, 07:51 PM)Serpius Wrote: [ -> ]

(2019-01-20, 02:30 PM)Michael2014 Wrote: [ -> ]

(2019-01-20, 01:14 PM)Serpius Wrote: [ -> ]

(2019-01-19, 06:19 PM)Michael2014 Wrote: [ -> ]Thx for the feedback. Can anyone name 1 website that does not use cookies?

American websites that don't need to use a cookie warning but still do, need to stop.

Guess what?

If you don't like those American websites, you are free NOT TO USE THEM!

true. that is what I do.. because the cookie warnings are annoying... so why state the obvious. I think you are missing the point, but let me explain, you are an american based website, you have no knowledge and have never studied internet regulations, and you put a cookies warning bar on your site because you think it looks cool.

That is what I don't understand. The point is, all websites use cookies, this info is found in the privacy policy of a website.

I believe the good practice is having this clearly explained in the privacy policy, and not some gawd awful big red bar across the screen stating "THIS WEBSITE USES COOKIES."

So, making a blanket statement about ALL American websites are BAD SITES because they have a bar at the bottom informing users regarding the usage of cookies. A simple click will usually get rid of that cookie message bar. How long did that take you to click on the OK button? 1-2 seconds? 

"you are an American based website, you have no knowledge and have never studied internet regulations". Seriously? Another blanket statement?

You might want to take a peek at this WEBPAGE.

That's all I am going to say on this subject.

Sir Serpius, that is a terms of use policy, and not a privacy policy. But thx for the link. Also, your name and shame clause is illegial, as you cannot post someone's billing info, as that is a breach of privacy, which explains why you don't have a privacy policy if you are threatening to share your user's personal financial credentials if they back out of a payment.
You should change that.

Other than that, I do appreciate you adding your opinion to the thread,but back to the subject, the cookies warning is redundant, but Europe just fined google over 50 mil for not having a clear privacy policy.

(2019-01-22, 06:33 AM)Michael2014 Wrote: [ -> ]

(2019-01-21, 07:51 PM)Serpius Wrote: [ -> ]

(2019-01-20, 02:30 PM)Michael2014 Wrote: [ -> ]

(2019-01-20, 01:14 PM)Serpius Wrote: [ -> ]

(2019-01-19, 06:19 PM)Michael2014 Wrote: [ -> ]Thx for the feedback. Can anyone name 1 website that does not use cookies?

American websites that don't need to use a cookie warning but still do, need to stop.

Guess what?

If you don't like those American websites, you are free NOT TO USE THEM!

true. that is what I do.. because the cookie warnings are annoying... so why state the obvious. I think you are missing the point, but let me explain, you are an american based website, you have no knowledge and have never studied internet regulations, and you put a cookies warning bar on your site because you think it looks cool.

That is what I don't understand. The point is, all websites use cookies, this info is found in the privacy policy of a website.

I believe the good practice is having this clearly explained in the privacy policy, and not some gawd awful big red bar across the screen stating "THIS WEBSITE USES COOKIES."

So, making a blanket statement about ALL American websites are BAD SITES because they have a bar at the bottom informing users regarding the usage of cookies. A simple click will usually get rid of that cookie message bar. How long did that take you to click on the OK button? 1-2 seconds? 

"you are an American based website, you have no knowledge and have never studied internet regulations". Seriously? Another blanket statement?

You might want to take a peek at this WEBPAGE.

That's all I am going to say on this subject.

Sir Serpius, that is a terms of use policy, and not a privacy policy.  But thx for the link. Also, your name and shame clause is illegial, as you cannot post someone's billing info, as that is a breach of privacy, which explains why you don't have a privacy policy if you are threatening to share your user's personal financial credentials if they back out of a payment.
You should change that.

Other than that, I do appreciate you adding your opinion to the thread,but back to the subject, the cookies warning is redundant, but Europe just fined google over 50 mil for not having a clear privacy policy.

Well, the whole premise of the 'Name & Shame' is to PREVENT anyone from either creating multiple accounts and/or stealing other user's accounts and using those accounts for nefarious reasons. 

Backing out of payment is one of the oldest and commonly used tactics by unethical hackers to gain unlawful entry to a website.

There have to be consequences of doing these kinds of acts which in of itself is illegal.

I've seen many websites that have closed due to the abuse of this very nature. 

I'm not allowing my website to go under because people have decided to do illegal acts to obtain illegal entry into my website.

How is that fair to the people who have gained entry to my website by using legal and correct means?

I am leaving my Privacy Policy as is in order to protect my users and my website.

(2019-01-22, 07:14 AM)Serpius Wrote: [ -> ]Well, the whole premise of the 'Name & Shame' is to PREVENT anyone from either creating multiple accounts and/or stealing other user's accounts and using those accounts for nefarious reasons. 

Backing out of payment is one of the oldest and commonly used tactics by unethical hackers to gain unlawful entry to a website.

There have to be consequences of doing these kinds of acts which in of itself is illegal.

I've seen many websites that have closed due to the abuse of this very nature. 

I'm not allowing my website to go under because people have decided to do illegal acts to obtain illegal entry into my website.

How is that fair to the people who have gained entry to my website by using legal and correct means?

I am leaving my Privacy Policy as is in order to protect my users and my website.

Good luck with the "they performed a chargeback so I published their personal details for the world to see" defence in court when someone sues you. Fairly confident the court fees will be higher than a $5 monthly subscription. Also, that clause is grounds for your payment processor to kick you off their platform because you're threatening to expose the personal details of their customers. Not the smartest move.

(2019-01-22, 04:40 PM)Nathan Malcolm Wrote: [ -> ]

(2019-01-22, 07:14 AM)Serpius Wrote: [ -> ]Well, the whole premise of the 'Name & Shame' is to PREVENT anyone from either creating multiple accounts and/or stealing other user's accounts and using those accounts for nefarious reasons. 

Backing out of payment is one of the oldest and commonly used tactics by unethical hackers to gain unlawful entry to a website.

There have to be consequences of doing these kinds of acts which in of itself is illegal.

I've seen many websites that have closed due to the abuse of this very nature. 

I'm not allowing my website to go under because people have decided to do illegal acts to obtain illegal entry into my website.

How is that fair to the people who have gained entry to my website by using legal and correct means?

I am leaving my Privacy Policy as is in order to protect my users and my website.

Good luck with the "they performed a chargeback so I published their personal details for the world to see" defence in court when someone sues you. Fairly confident the court fees will be higher than a $5 monthly subscription. Also, that clause is grounds for your payment processor to kick you off their platform because you're threatening to expose the personal details of their customers. Not the smartest move.

When an unethical hacker is attempting to steal money from a legitimate website by using tactics that are deemed illegal, the courts will see this as clear evidence of 'fraud by deception'. The payment processor will see this the same way as well.

The amount of subscription is not in question, it's the act of the crime.

I would welcome any unethical hacker to sue me in court. 

At the very least, anything that this unethical hacker do in court will become public record.

When that happens, it's not private anymore, isn't it? 

Everyone will know that person's real name, their real address and where they go to school and/or work. 

While I watch him/her being hauled off to jail, I will go back to the comfort of my home and post the unethical hacker's information on my website because now it's public.

So you're justifying Doxxing then?

(2019-01-22, 10:58 PM)Jenna Appleseed Wrote: [ -> ]So you're justifying Doxxing then?

Not sure where you got that from. 

I have never doxxed anyone and never will. 

Make certain you know what you are accusing people of before reviewing all of the facts.

(2019-01-22, 10:11 PM)Serpius Wrote: [ -> ]When an unethical hacker is attempting to steal money from a legitimate website by using tactics that are deemed illegal, the courts will see this as clear evidence of 'fraud by deception'. The payment processor will see this the same way as well.

The amount of subscription is not in question, it's the act of the crime.

I would welcome any unethical hacker to sue me in court. 

At the very least, anything that this unethical hacker do in court will become public record.

When that happens, it's not private anymore, isn't it? 

Everyone will know that person's real name, their real address and where they go to school and/or work. 

While I watch him/her being hauled off to jail, I will go back to the comfort of my home and post the unethical hacker's information on my website because now it's public.

That's not how any of this works. You would have to prove the user had malicious intent. Chargebacks aren't illegal. The court would still force you to remove the user's personal details regardless of why you put them there. Two wrongs don't make a right.

Nobody is going to be "hauled off to jail" for a chargeback.

Additionally, let's say this "unethical hacker" used a stolen PayPal account and reversed the payment. What then? You're going to post the payment details of a victim? The fact is, there's no way for you to know if the account is stolen. So once again you're in the position where your payment processor has grounds to kick you off their platform, because you're breaking their ToS and likely breaking the law. You can bet your ass that if a victim of bank fraud takes you to court (remember, *you* need to prove malicious intent), you're going to lose.

This is real life. Your vigilante-revenge-justice isn't protected by the actual law. You can be smug about what a piece of text on your website says, in practice it's just dumb.

(2019-01-22, 10:58 PM)Jenna Appleseed Wrote: [ -> ]So you're justifying Doxxing then?

Not really, he is skipping the research procedure since he already has the data. He is justifying the threatening to break the privacy of his users by disclosing such information.

(2019-01-22, 10:11 PM)Serpius Wrote: [ -> ]When an unethical hacker is attempting to steal money from a legitimate website by using tactics that are deemed illegal, the courts will see this as clear evidence of 'fraud by deception'. The payment processor will see this the same way as well

Nope. Chargebacks happen for a range of reasons. It does not, and will not necessarily mean that it's an 'unethical hacker', or whatever you choose to call them. The payment provider is just the middle man.

For example (god bless Australia), if you promised me something in your premium membership which was "Not as described", after attempting to contact you, I would initiate a chargeback, with the full expectation that my premium membership is revoked; that's the right thing to do. I am exercising my rights under the Australian Consumer Law, which, as someone providing a service to someone in Australia, you are bound to.

Please continue believing that you know it all, because you're being absolutely thrashed here and I'm having a ball watching it from a distance.