Absolutely outrageous if true

SOUL is actually a very good dancer, with urban street moves a speciality. No need for him to attend any informative meeting on this topic whatsoever

Not his fault there aren’t enough trust members to catch him in the grand finale.

Barry is Barry -- I don't agree with his views but, unless the break the law, he should be able to express them.

The routine he choreographed for BGT certainly proved controversial.

Aye I didn’t think that was physically possible let alone allowed on prime time tv.

On a note of seriousness,

If the trust as an organisation want to withdrawn someone’s membership, and the grounds on which they do so are not against discrimination law, then they can do what they want.

Same goes for mods of websites who may or may not have deleted old posts.

Their house, their rules.

If you don’t like it, get your own house. Don’t sit outside twining that you’re not invited in against their wishes

Looks like raising money has slipped out of fashion

Agree to an extent LBO

Trust: They can withdraw whoever’s membership and agree as long as it’s not discriminatory and broke the terms then that’s fair enough.

The bigger question is whether it’s a good use of the £10 membership fee, pushing diversity causes and running courses (albeit through the club) whether it’s a good use of time lurking through social media on members racist and political opinions. To me no and Laffy is right really all hands on decks trying to get cash.

The message board, again can do what they want but whatever’s happened is odd, just be honest!

Smacks of the long arm of the FSA - is it not driven by them?
Another sets of pointless administrators getting their claws into football.

The diversity is pushed by the FA from memory for all clubs . So if they do it as a shareholder then the club complies . The difficulty is making sure there is equality and not go too far the other way and discriminate against others and overfocus on these groups .
I have heard a couple of gay folk say that the football competition they were organising was exclusive rather than inclusive .
Personally a fan is a fan . Regardless of gender or colour .

I’ve seen Barry’s letter from the trust regarding this, I can’t post because of legal issues but what I can post is....

The trust say they withdrew his membership because of posts on here, with his user name Northernsoul.

The trust say the posts have been deleted.

The trust reported the posts to the police. No action was taken by the police.

To get back on the subject of diversity, I agree Barry’s posts I don’t agree with at all. However the post in question was general and not directed at anyone.

GDPR laws have definitely been broken. Do the trust know all our usernames? Does it mean that we should be anonymous on here in case the trust take legal action?

But more importantly, is this the trusts job to do this?

If the trust have broken the law then sue them. We could have a whip round for your legal fees

My personal opinion is the trust have broken GDPR laws and assuming identity.

I don’t for one minute believe the messageboard mods have provided details to the trust to confirm Barry’s identity, therefore the trust are on dodgy ground.

They may be a case for Barry on two counts the breaking of GDPR laws and assuming identity against the trust.

That’s why you’ve got to be so careful.

Walter, as a trust member is this the sort of stuff and goings on you expect your £10 fee to be used on and time taken?

I can assure you that we don’t reveal usernames to anybody - You may remember CUOSC were uneasy about accepting questions at CUSG from folk they didn’t know? We assured the Groups that nearly every poster is genuine (Some are from before we took over, and in the main dormant) and questions were from decent folk.

The post/thread that you are referring to was openly locked then deleted due to the inclusion of a term that has no place on forums such as these - It was mentioned at the time by some users as disgusting, and also to us via social media. I won’t repeat the word on here for obvious reasons, and any repeat usage of it would get the same treatment instantly.

Some posters, yourself being an example, are happy to let their identity be known, others have openly said who they are through their posts, some prefer the anonymity a forum gives to their voice. Different strokes for different folks and all that...

I second Dan on that,

I'm not a trust member anymore. I left last year after Spamgate.

Obviously the Trust have sod all else to do!!.What exactly is their purpose in life other than blocking any future takeover of the club while being securely in Jenkins' back pocket.
As for calling themselves the "Official Supporters Club " who gave them the right to do that?

Some posters, yourself being an example, are happy to let their identity be known, others have openly said who they are through their posts, some prefer the anonymity a forum gives to their voice. Different strokes for different folks and all that...

Some of us work at the club and would get sacked if the BOD knew who we were. And I am reliably informed they have made quite a few efforts in trying to do that.

They can have my details anytime they want. I wouldn't work for anybody I feared

Hey Kess, I can also assure you there’s no outside interference in the running of this forum. Just to ease your concerns...

Hey Kess, I can also assure you there’s no outside interference in the running of this forum. Just to ease your concerns...

Ok, fair enough so if you haven't banned Barry then have you submitted a support query re the EasyDiscuss software randomly banning users and deleting their posts? I would be asking for my money back. I have a weeks holiday so plenty of time to get to the bottom of this, I will ask them on your behalf if that's ok?

Thanks for the offer but we’re perfectly capable of investigating ourselves!

Mullerz, NS spent his time on here saying he didn't give a shit who knew who he was, everyone did anyways, anyone could come and see him, he ran rings round plod, hardsports for all, and he'd send the lads round to see you if you didn't like it and tough. Why are you crying on his behalf on things he's already said he couldn't give a shit about? Face it, keeping half the stuff he came out with probably put the board in a dodgier legal position than deleting any of it.

In truth this could just be an SQL slip up if the mods have been asked to delete one post off him rather than a conspirasphere cover-up

DELETE * from POSTS where user = "baz" AND post_id = 13333 // yay, just bad post
DELETE * from POSTS where user = "baz" // oops, everfing gone

I built a user management interface once for a database that let people do similar, but there was always one guy who was keen to show off his SQL skillz by doing it straight from the command line, usually with results that weren't noticed till weeks later

I’m a DBA for my own small business, software for chicken farms if anyone’s interested I’ll do a good deal so I know what can go wrong with SQL statements.

The mods will investigate, that’s fine. (I still think something’s odd, but that’s my opinion)

Everyone knows who NS is I completely agree, however the trust have to prove it beyond reasonable doubt and beyond reasonable doubt it was him that posted it. Unless the trust have asked Barry personally if that’s who he is and whether he posted it or the messageboard mods have told the trust who NS is then the trust are in trouble. If the messageboard mods told the trust who NS was and where he posted from they’d be breaking GDPR laws, the messageboard have said this hasn’t happened and I believe them.

From the letter I’ve seen the trust are on dodgy ground, under GDPR rules because the trust have assumed his identity from a system the trust don’t own and haven’t asked NS if it’s definitely him or asked the messageboard to be sure (would also be breaking the law) that’s the issue. I completely agree the posts were out of order but you’ve got to go through things the right way.

All the trust needed to do was to wait until his membership had lapsed and refused renewal.

The bigger picture is what are the trust doing, can they ban me if they don’t like a Facebook post for instance or I like a twitter post from UKIP.

If I call CCU a white honkey on here am I now expecting a letter from the trust asking me to go on a diversity course?

Is it just middle-aged white blokes attending these diversity courses?

George Orwell was definitely well ahead of his time.

The trust are only in trouble if someone’s doing something about it and if that is the case then it’s prob better not to discuss it on public forum whilst a active investigation is underway. If nothings happening then they aren’t in any trouble at all.

It’s being investigated and taken further. Barry is clear what I can and can’t say from advice given by his solicitor.

Email to the trust

Hi

I’d like to echo the trusts thought on posts by Northernsoul on the Carlisle United messageboard. There’s no time for these types of abhorrent messages and as I know Barry I make him know my views on this very clear.

However I’ve seen the letter Barry received from the trust. I’m not sticking up for Barry at all and the trust have the right to ban anyone they deem has broken the rules, pending a proper investigation.

We all know who Northernsoul is on the medssgeboard he’s made it quite clear. However there’s an element of doubt if you don’t run the system yourself. It’s actually against GDPR laws to assume an identity.

If there’s collusion between the trust and the messageboard then there’s GDPR issues here as they are separate entities. The messageboard are quite clear where they stand.

I do understand where the trust are coming from, but you’ve got to make sure things are done in the correct way?

It also begs the question whether this is the correct use of the trusts time? Also do the trust know all their members messageboard usernames? Do they know all their members political and racial beliefs? Do you monitor all members social media activity?

At the last AGM, not the virtual one, I know there was a member there I know had a sexual offences conviction. It might be unspent but surely this should be a reason to stop membership ?

Is it also worth asking all members to fill out a DBS check, ask for social media usernames, and for all members to partake in diversity training.

Am I the only one who thinks diversity training is a load of bollocks.

Am I the only one who thinks diversity training is a load of bollocks.

No one can train me to dance, I’m a lost cause.

It has its purpose, but for joining the “official supporters club” or being a member - no.

Don't forget to check your spam Richard for a response to you're e.mail. ?

Absolutely outrageous if true

SOUL is actually a very good dancer, with urban street moves a speciality. No need for him to attend any informative meeting on this topic whatsoever

Barry is Barry -- I don't agree with his views but, unless the break the law, he should be able to express them.

Technically he did he's made multiple violent threats and also promoted acts of violence against racial and religious groups. By rights the forum moderators could take his reports to the police . Not saying they should be, NS used to talk about his Freedom of speech but was very big and threatening anyone who disagreed with him .

I second Dan on that,

Don't give away his name man!

Thanks for the offer but we’re perfectly capable of investigating ourselves!

I’m a DBA for my own small business, software for chicken farms if anyone’s interested I’ll do a good deal so I know what can go wrong with SQL statements.

The mods will investigate, that’s fine. (I still think something’s odd, but that’s my opinion)

Everyone knows who NS is I completely agree, however the trust have to prove it beyond reasonable doubt and beyond reasonable doubt it was him that posted it. Unless the trust have asked Barry personally if that’s who he is and whether he posted it or the messageboard mods have told the trust who NS is then the trust are in trouble. If the messageboard mods told the trust who NS was and where he posted from they’d be breaking GDPR laws, the messageboard have said this hasn’t happened and I believe them.

From the letter I’ve seen the trust are on dodgy ground, under GDPR rules because the trust have assumed his identity from a system the trust don’t own and haven’t asked NS if it’s definitely him or asked the messageboard to be sure (would also be breaking the law) that’s the issue. I completely agree the posts were out of order but you’ve got to go through things the right way.

All the trust needed to do was to wait until his membership had lapsed and refused renewal.

The bigger picture is what are the trust doing, can they ban me if they don’t like a Facebook post for instance or I like a twitter post from UKIP.

If I call CCU a white honkey on here am I now expecting a letter from the trust asking me to go on a diversity course?

But wouldn't the trust just end up in the same position, in that they would have had to have good reason to ban him from the CUOSG only without offending the GDPR police?
Typical of these times that it appears to some that not complying with something like GDPR is more serious than someone making threatening, racist, homophobic, comments in the first place.

No! And it’s odd but the trust have the power to refuse membership/renewal without recourse because there’s no terms and conditions agreed - unless it’s because of a discriminatory reason.

I do agree with you though top that racist etc etc behaviour is worse and don’t condone it at all. It’s just the trust haven’t done this right and the posts are irrelevant.

Do you feel comfortable, if you’re a trust member, of the trust making an assumption of your username and withdrawing membership because of a comment you made?

Have they replied to your e.mail yet Richard ?

Mullen which part of GDPR do you feel is being broken? I think as long as they aren't discriminating they can revoke membership for any reason. "Beyond reasonable doubt" is the standard of proof for criminal court cases, not revoking membership of a supporters club.

Do you feel comfortable, if you’re a trust member, of the trust making an assumption of your username and withdrawing membership because of a comment you made?

No.
I am not a member of the trust so don't know, but do you not have to supply an email address and password to become a member as is the case for this forum?

No reply yet.

Assuming identity Kessler from a data system not owned by the trust. Because the trust did no investigation to 100% prove it was Barry that posted it (would be illegal anyway) that’s the issue and the route to go down.

I know this sounds crazy but there’s actually harassment and stalking routes he could go down, as again the trust don’t own the messageboard what reason is it of the trust what he posts on it and why were they monitoring also again odd a right to a private life.

To me the trust have acted hastily and without legal advice. This makes me think what else they’ve done without having legal advice.

If IF the messageboRd provided data to the trust or confirm identity the messageboard would break GDPR - they have said they haven’t done this.

If they're reading this thread they'll have their solicitors on speed dial right now

Mullen which part of GDPR do you feel is being broken? I think as long as they aren't discriminating they can revoke membership for any reason. "Beyond reasonable doubt" is the standard of proof for criminal court cases, not revoking membership of a supporters club.

It’s privacy issues.

The trust can withdraw membership for any reason. If they just put in his letter “we are withdrawing your membership to a break in terms and conditions” and left it at that there’s nothing you could do. Less is better!

I can’t describe what’s in the letter as it’ll be evidence but what’s in it leaves the trust open to all sorts, can’t really say much else.

I'm not aware of anything regarding "assuming identity", what's the specific part of the legislation?

I'm not aware of anything regarding "assuming identity", what's the specific part of the legislation?

Nighttime reading Kes

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

Mistaken and assuming identity

I can't see any section about that? I might be missing something but I think there would only be a GDPR issue if the message board had given NS details to the trust, and they say they haven't.

Under mistaken identity

Yep that would be a big no no but the messsgeboard have said no.

First and foremost it’s privacy issues. Again if Barry has done what he done on the trusts Facebook for instance no issue.

Big minefield here though, Barry’s solicitor is taking it on so let them worry about it.

Personal opinion, and I’ve seen the letters contents it’s explains more in there and main bit why I can’t say too much, but he’s got a case.