james
Posts: 2,205
Likes: 955
|
Post by james on Feb 21, 2017 12:10:16 GMT
The caveat mentioned in the long-standing forum rules post you linked to ("unless either the borrower themselves or the P2x platform have already made that information publicly accessible") envisaged occasions where borrowers and/or the platform discussed the loan openly in marketing communications, for example. It should probably be removed as it causes more questions than it solves. It's there so that moderators don't remove things that are publicly available. The current moderators choose ignore this restriction on what they should be doing. The problem isn't the clause, it's the moderators ignoring it. Meanwhile it would be nice if the moderators didn't have a special less restrictive rule for Saving Stream than other platforms. In the rest, giving details that allow a borrower to be identified in a search will normally cause things to be removed. In the Saving Stream section that's ignored in the case of loan IDs even though those typically produce a link to borrower details on the first page of results.
|
|
p2p2p
Member of DD Central
Posts: 123
Likes: 114
|
Post by p2p2p on Feb 24, 2017 19:14:06 GMT
p2pindependentforum.com/thread/35/proposed-forum-rules still says DO NOT post information1 that allows a borrower to be identified unless either the borrower themselves or the P2x platform have already made that information publicly accessible (e.g. on a website not needing a log in or sign up).So I felt entitled to query the ruling. Its no good saying "we've discussed anonymity over and over again on other threads" if you don't update your own rules. If the rule is going to be changed to remove the caveat about public access, you should remove the DFL/PBL xxx identifers from all Saving Stream posts, as currently they are sufficient to identify the borrower, using their public website information You can't have it both ways, as at present the discussions are not anonymous. John
|
|
SteveT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,875 
Likes: 7,924
|
Post by SteveT on Feb 24, 2017 19:30:42 GMT
Acknowledged, but a problem of SavingStream's making, not ours. If references to PBL / DFL numbers were prevented too, how would you suggest that discussion of SS loans be conducted? The forum-wide approach we apply works for all other platforms and so we apply it on the SS board for consistency too. Who knows, tomorrow could be the day SS decide to start withholding borrower details from non-members. Would you then fancy editing the entire SS board?
Ps. You are NOT the first person to raise this conundrum, as a cursory search of the forum would reveal.
|
|
