Changes Coming To GOT

[GrandOldTeam]

Short Version

The UK government is forcing us to remove the Current Affairs forum, and NSFW type threads. Maybe also user to user private messaging.

Google 'Online Safety Act' if interested.

Long Rambling Version;

We're of course, an Everton Forum.

But in our 18+ years (not one of you wished the forum a happy birthday last week ffs), we've become a community beyond Everton.

Since 2017, we've sought to best accomodate 'current affairs' discussion in it's own sub forum - out the way, with a 'enter at own risk'/hands off moderation policy.

It's worked well.

Or as well as it could have done. Online. Politics.

However, the Online Safety Act (OSA) in the UK comes into effect on March 17, 2025. Someone much more articulate than I provides some commentary here. Also some more background info and it's implications here.

The implications of the act has already caused forums in their entirety to close, others have closed the ability to post. Some discussion on here of this act from December.

Moderating a Everton forum is challenging enough - we don't have the resource, ability, diplomacy to moderate politics in a way that would make us compliant with the act. Even if we did, I don't think we'd have the inclination to. Nor be prepared to accept the personal liability to do so.

Sadly then, we need to close the Current Affairs forum from 1st March.

We'll also need to close 'Not Safe For Work' threads, like 'The Fit Birds' thread.

There's a chance we may also need to disable user to user private messaging but I'm awaiting clarification on that.

But fear not. We can still fume about Everton.

 

[trueblue84]

Nonsense. People are in prison for Facebook and twitter posts.

They are as open to legalities as any other digital communications.

Twitter is irrelevant to THIS forum being forced to shut down parts to satisfy this need to control discussions.

THAT is the issue.

There are forums that promote suicide and self-harm, where people can post revenge porn, AI porn etc. They have been able to exist because those sites argue that they can't be held responsible for what their users post as that the try to "moderate" their site and "remove harmful content", when in reality they do nothing.

This law isn't shutting down discussion. It's making those discussions the responsibility of the site owner who is hosting it. I have no problem with that, but do feel for sites like this that haven't got the bandwidth/finances to manage it.

 

[ste d' indica]

Challenge away Ste

In fact, now I know you work in the field of reviewing legislation I might be sending you a near 30 page doc I'm pulling together to review because it's making my eyes bleed;

View attachment 294402

View attachment 294403


From the pretty extensive reading I've done - the various commentators I've consulted with... the lazy AI exchanges;

View attachment 294404

@tsubaki ^ the "harassment/bullying/harmful misinformation etc" is the type of content I referred to earlier.


... I struggle to see a scenario in which we can operate CA, or host page 3 material, and remain compliant.

Very happy to help if I can boss.

 

[Jimishorts]

Challenge away Ste

In fact, now I know you work in the field of reviewing legislation I might be sending you a near 30 page doc I'm pulling together to review because it's making my eyes bleed;

View attachment 294402

View attachment 294403


From the pretty extensive reading I've done - the various commentators I've consulted with... the lazy AI exchanges;

View attachment 294404

@tsubaki ^ the "harassment/bullying/harmful misinformation etc" is the type of content I referred to earlier.


... I struggle to see a scenario in which we can operate CA, or host page 3 material, and remain compliant.

Just throwing it out there but would it help to close the Everton part of the forum as well as the current affairs and just focus on a few core threads, like fridges, what you last ate and Wordle?

Not much hate or harassment in those threads.

 

[TrailerTrash]

There are forums that promote suicide and self-harm, where people can post revenge porn, AI porn etc. They have been able to exist because those sites argue that they can't be held responsible for what their users post as that the try to "moderate" their site and "remove harmful content", when in reality they do nothing.

This law isn't shutting down discussion. It's making those discussions the responsibility of the site owner who is hosting it. I have no problem with that, but do feel for sites like this that haven't got the bandwidth/finances to manage it.

I love how you use extremes to justify the closing en masse of the little people

It's cowardly.

 

[trueblue84]

I love how you use extremes to justify the closing en masse of the little people

It's cowardly.

Because that's exactly who it is targeting. This site isn't being targeted, but the owners just don't know whether it's worth the risk/overhead to manage such things as the CA forum. @GrandOldTeam, please correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[GrandOldTeam]

Because that's exactly who it is targeting. This site isn't being targeted, but the owners just don't know whether it's worth the risk/overhead to manage such things as the CA forum. @GrandOldTeam, please correct me if I'm wrong.

I think both you and @TrailerTrash are correct.

I think the objectives of the act are admirable.

I think the execution though is unnecessarily sledgehammer and nut.

I think the types of platform the act wants to target, will just move around. They'll lash servers abroad and put two fingers up.

We already do everything, and more that the act asks. We just have to formalise/document it.

Well I say everything - aside from unmoderated CA/NSFW threads. And possibly user to user private messaging.

What I think of the act though doesn't really matter. I have to make sure we're compliant.

 

[trueblue84]

I think both you and @TrailerTrash are correct.

I think the objectives of the act are admirable.

I think the execution though is unnecessarily sledgehammer and nut.

I think the types of platform the act wants to target, will just move around. They'll lash servers abroad and put two fingers up.

We already do everything, and more that the act asks. We just have to formalise/document it.

Well I say everything - aside from unmoderated CA/NSFW threads. And possibly user to user private messaging.

What I think of the act though doesn't really matter. I have to make sure we're compliant.

Do you think it'll be like gdpr, where once sites/companies get to grips with it, they'll eventually have a better understanding of what they need to do and have access to tools to support them?

Also, is it something you could manage with donations/premium memberships? I'll happily sign up if it means I can continue to look at boobs.

 

[Spadge Vernacular]

I'd rather keep Current Affairs, it's an active part of the site - from a sample of 3.5m views;

View attachment 294399

... removing it will make more moderation/makes The Ale House become a headache too.

But current Affairs, as it is now - would be an existential threat to the forum. It wouldn't be compliant with UK law.

To comply, we'd need to moderate it more so than we do the rest of the forum and that's just not feasible. It would tie us up in knots and that's before any complaints.



I'm not sure it'll have any real impact on the big'uns mate.

It'll give necessary power to act against a few small loon sites.

It's a good thing, but it's execution has meant more losers than necessary. I've felt they'd change it/make it less sledgehammer to crack a nut but doesn't seem to be happening and we're a month off now. There's a big shift to liability/risk to platforms owners - and evidently, a lot won't accept that.

Eventually you'll have forums have sections I'm currently working on like the below;

OFCOM Online Safety Act (OSA)

www.grandoldteam.com

User Safety

www.grandoldteam.com

... and I have a 30+ page document I'm still working on that demonstrates compliance and complaint procedures. On it, I can't specify we have a forum that we don't moderate, as well as page 3 material without an age gate unfortunately

42868 posts in the CA and most of them @davek in the Ukraine thread complaining about people going shopping.

 

[Gwladys St. Glory]

No comment.

 

[Daveysgingerlovechild]

Online dangers act. All because some idiots can't be trusted not to do pervy and dangerous stuff.

@davek where the hell are you going to post your bad pro-commie stuff now????

 

[GrandOldTeam]

Do you think it'll be like gdpr, where once sites/companies get to grips with it, they'll eventually have a better understanding of what they need to do and have access to tools to support them?

Also, is it something you could manage with donations/premium memberships? I'll happily sign up if it means I can continue to look at boobs.

Yeah, GDPR is what I compared it to at first. Forum owners etc getting in a tizz over very little and misreading scary headlines. I think there's definitely some kneejerk reactions. It's a bit "FFS, you should be moderating a forum anyway. Do the admin and get on with it".

I think eventually it'll be user safety sections similar to what I linked earlier added to websites etc and the world will keep on turning.

I did check if we could paywall current affairs as an age gate but my understanding (and I say that's a someone who runs a forum in spare time) is we'd still need to moderate it. It's not just a case of "we can prove these people are 18+". Moderating Current Affairs is naturally higher risk - misinformation/hateful content alone. Time, resource, risk vs reward - I just don't think we can.

I think people would be genuinely surprised at the type of agitators forums get, particularly football forums. The OSA will definitely be weaponised.

 

[GrandOldTeam]

42868 posts in the CA and most of them @davek in the Ukraine thread complaining about people going shopping.

That's page views mate.

 

[chicoazul]

Hello guys well that’s a shame. Can I recommend a one stop fixes all solution to this problem? An available forum add on that encourages a community approach to moderation?

Neg rep guys. Neg rep. Let us heal together.

 

[chicoazul]

Does this mean if we’ve got anything to get off our chest in the CA forum that now is the time?

 

[Daveysgingerlovechild]

Yeah, GDPR is what I compared it to at first. Forum owners etc getting in a tizz over very little and misreading scary headlines. I think there's definitely some kneejerk reactions. It's a bit "FFS, you should be moderating a forum anyway. Do the admin and get on with it".

I think eventually it'll be user safety sections similar to what I linked earlier added to websites etc and the world will keep on turning.

I did check if we could paywall current affairs as an age gate but my understanding (and I say that's a someone who runs a forum in spare time) is we'd still need to moderate it. It's not just a case of "we can prove these people are 18+". Moderating Current Affairs is naturally higher risk - misinformation/hateful content alone. Time, resource, risk vs reward - I just don't think we can.

I think people would be genuinely surprised at the type of agitators forums get, particularly football forums. The OSA will definitely be weaponised.

Charge premium subs and use them to pay a respectable and responsible community member, say @chicoazul, a full time salary to moderate. It'd be swell.