AkFubarAdmittedly, A Teksavvy Fan join:2005-02-28 Toronto CAN. 1 edit
1 recommendation |
CRTC Posts Private Data To Public WebsiteMore evidence that the CRTC has become out of date and trails in today's issues that matter most to Canadians. This commission should be fully reviewed with respect to the effectiveness of its present mandate, its operations and its processes (including its respect for the privacy of ordinary Canadians (or lack thereof)). | |
|
| |
Re: CRTC Posts Private Data To Public WebsiteThere is nothing wrong -- in fact, everything right -- about this information being made public. The CRTC "intervention" process is designed to be transparent and public. The whole point is NOT to deliberate entirely behind closed doors but give EVERYONE a chance for a public airing of their views. Entirely consistent with this openness is including in the public documents the submitted details of the submitters. | |
|
| | EdG @eastlink.ca |
EdG
Anon
2009-Apr-23 10:38 pm
Re: CRTC Posts Private Data To Public WebsiteSo, where's the openness from the ISP's then?
| |
|
Mr_Derp join:2004-11-10 Plainfield, ON 1 edit
1 recommendation |
CRTC = FAILwooooohoo! I'm very delighted that info I brought to light has become a news story, now let's see if anything actually happens once this becomes a little more publicized.
On another note, this is shameful behaviour coming from a federal organization.
They aren't posting the personal contact information of the lobbyists that are forcing their opinions onto members of the CRTC, so why when it comes to the regular folk did the gov't decide to name names (and your personal contact info)?
The fact that our government values the privacy of employees of major corps more than its citizens is just appalling.
It's quite clear that the current system is designed to dissuade an open exchange of ideas under threat of sharing your personal info with the whole internet.
Not to mention this system is also setup to discourage sharing of opinions from those who may already work in the telecom field, but don't share their feelings with the CRTC because they could face difficulties at work spreading for dissenting opinions.
The current appointed employees of the CRTC should all be terminated and then the CRTC should be restaffed with elected officials chosen by the voting public. | |
|
| jsb825 Premium Member join:2003-10-08 Exeter, NH 1 edit |
jsb825
Premium Member
2009-Apr-24 7:28 am
Re: CRTC = FAILCRTC / FCC = Control by old people wearing depends and have to use the bathroom allot.
Oh wait. I should not say that.. I might get arrested!! lol | |
|
| | |
Re: CRTC = FAILROFL. Mature LOL | |
|
88615298 (banned) join:2004-07-28 West Tenness |
88615298 (banned)
Member
2009-Apr-23 9:49 am
The real reason for this"It also would seemingly deter comment contribution"
that pretty much sums up why they are doing this. | |
|
|
FYIWell written but there is no Sympatico anymore, it's now Bell Internet. | |
|
shepd join:2004-01-17 Kitchener, ON |
shepd
Member
2009-Apr-23 10:06 am
No thanks.Read the fine print? Uhhh... this is the government, not a leasing agreement.
The government shouldn't have fine print, full stop. They should follow their own damn laws rather than trying to circumvent them. You know, like the ones the Privacy Commissioner made. If the law sucks for the government, too bad.
If you're suggesting the government can make fine print, next thing you'll know your city will make "fine print" on their parking tickets saying they'll repo your car to pay for it. | |
|
funchordsHello MVM join:2001-03-11 Yarmouth Port, MA |
U.S. Federal Communications Commission does the same thing..Letters and comments to the FCC are also posted un-scrubbed.
Personally, I think its good that we know who is saying what to policy-makers. Although, the downside of this practice is that people who value privacy highly have to make a choice as to whether to participate in the public process.
Either way: If someone abuses that published information, then go after the abuser, not the entity that is practicing open government. | |
|
| Mr_Derp join:2004-11-10 Plainfield, ON
1 recommendation |
Mr_Derp
Member
2009-Apr-23 10:13 am
Re: U.S. Federal Communications Commission does the same thing.."Personally, I think its good that we know who is saying what to policy-makers."
It is good to know who's saying what...
Sadly, those that have the most sway (lobbyists) also don't have their home phone number, address and email address posted for public consumption.
The privacy of the rich should not outweigh that of the common man. | |
|
| | FFH5 Premium Member join:2002-03-03 Tavistock NJ |
FFH5
Premium Member
2009-Apr-23 10:35 am
Re: U.S. Federal Communications Commission does the same thing..said by Mr_Derp:Sadly, those that have the most sway (lobbyists) also don't have their home phone number, address and email address posted for public consumption. The public did not have to provide anything other than an email address to comment. And even that email address could be a throw-away address if privacy is a concern. The other info was entirely voluntary. | |
|
| | | diskaceRetired Premium Member join:2002-02-21 1 edit |
diskace
Premium Member
2009-Apr-23 11:03 am
Re: U.S. Federal Communications Commission does the same thing..Unfortunately, this is the result of an email sent to thousands of users who were clearly not informed properly that this is not your average website to submit your comments. Don't get me wrong here, that was a good move but that was done in a rush time and shit happen sometimes...
On another note, CRTC should be more clear on their website instead of putting such important details in the privacy policy. I can understand that the average guy who received the email did not really had the chance/time to check such details.
edit: typo | |
|
| | | | JGROCKY Premium Member join:2005-05-19 Chatham, ON |
JGROCKY
Premium Member
2009-Apr-23 8:58 pm
Re: U.S. Federal Communications Commission does the same thing..said by diskace:Unfortunately, this is the result of an email sent to thousands of users who were clearly not informed properly that this is not your average website to submit your comments. Don't get me wrong here, that was a good move but that was done in a rush time and shit happen sometimes... On another note, CRTC should be more clear on their website instead of putting such important details in the privacy policy. I can understand that the average guy who received the email did not really had the chance/time to check such details. edit: typo Now why did you feel the need to post that?! | |
|
| | | | | El QuintronCancel Culture Ambassador Premium Member join:2008-04-28 Tronna |
Re: U.S. Federal Communications Commission does the same thing..No matter how lousy CRTC privacy policy may be, I don't regret backing you up.
So for all of my gettin' up in arms about this, I don't place any of the blame at your feet.
Only with our impartial regulator. | |
|
| | | | |
to diskace
said by diskace:Unfortunately, this is the result of an email sent to thousands of users who were clearly not informed properly that this is not your average website to submit your comments. Don't get me wrong here, that was a good move but that was done in a rush time and shit happen sometimes... On another note, CRTC should be more clear on their website instead of putting such important details in the privacy policy. I can understand that the average guy who received the email did not really had the chance/time to check such details. edit: typo Yeah that was a unneeded bitch slap. | |
|
| | | | | diskaceRetired Premium Member join:2002-02-21 |
diskace
Premium Member
2009-Apr-24 12:46 am
Re: U.S. Federal Communications Commission does the same thing..Sorry guys, it was not intended to be a bitch slap. I trully hope you understand i am working in the same direction. That being said, you can't deny it was a rush call and rushed things have some downsides...not trying to blame anyone here !
Best regards, DiskACE | |
|
| | | Mr_Derp join:2004-11-10 Plainfield, ON |
to FFH5
Sadly, the fields on the submission form were not marked *optional... If they were, many would not bother to provide extra info. Most people did as such because they assume by giving their real info it will ensure their complaint is marked as valid and actually read. | |
|
| | | | |
Re: U.S. Federal Communications Commission does the same thing..said by Mr_Derp:Sadly, the fields on the submission form were not marked *optional... If they were, many would not bother to provide extra info. Most people did as such because they assume by giving their real info it will ensure their complaint is marked as valid and actually read. I would have not put my real information there anyway even though I should. anyone who puts their real information anywhere on the Internet should not act so surprised if it gets publicly viewed elsewhere... why do you think facebook is a big joke. its a webpage for " hello ! look at who I am and how many people I can add as friends while joining invites for retarded countless things" anyway .. | |
|
| | | | | funchordsHello MVM join:2001-03-11 Yarmouth Port, MA |
Re: U.S. Federal Communications Commission does the same thing..said by DJMASACRE:why do you think facebook is a big joke. its a webpage for " hello ! look at who I am and how many people I can add as friends while joining invites for retarded countless things" I actually like that Facebook uses real names. I don't really like all the applications that I have to opt-out of one-at-a-time, though. | |
|
| | |
to Mr_Derp
Phone number to public - it's overkill... But it's good news for telemarketers | |
|
|
ABC easy 123
Anon
2009-Apr-23 10:47 am
Profile. I know who you areI can go to the CRTC website and gather all public comments made since the throttle of last year and all the comments since then till the present on similar CRTC filing.
I can make a list of names, addresses, phone numbers, City, Prov and I can profile these peoples political beliefs. Many of the same people I can correlate to their DSLr User name in both the Bell forum and the Teksavvy forum.
I can paint a nice picture with all the info the CRTC made available.
Certain info should not be made available to all.
However, I believe they will argue the telco's want to know. But the telco's shouldn't have this right.
I say treat it like a .ca domain under the privacy option. If someone wants to know who I am, they pay 20$ to the CRTC and the CRTC notifies me of who asked to know who I am. | |
|
El QuintronCancel Culture Ambassador Premium Member join:2008-04-28 Tronna
1 recommendation |
Open to abuseThe problem is with the way personally indentifiable information is being treated by the CRTC. There is nothing wrong with somebody investigating a decision, to ask the CRTC if the canadian public actually submitted a request to have the UBB issue looked into. The problem is putting the names, phone numbers, and personal email addresses of responders for all to see, and all the ethical issues that brings up. I'm very happy this got posted as a news item, and thanks to Mr_Derp for getting us all in the loop. | |
|
|
Robrr
Member
2009-Apr-23 1:00 pm
Read The Forum ThreadI would simply suggest that everyone goes and reads the forum thread. A lot of information to be gathered that I think is missing from here. | |
|
SYNACKJust Firewall It Mod join:2001-03-05 Venice, CA |
SYNACK
Mod
2009-Apr-23 1:05 pm
On the flip side ...I am not familiar with their comment submission mechanisms, but are there checks in place to verify authenticity?
For example what prevents someone from commenting under a different persons name/phone number etc.
Just curious. | |
|
| El QuintronCancel Culture Ambassador Premium Member join:2008-04-28 Tronna |
Re: On the flip side ...No there isn't if you check the list there's postings from Anon Anon and such.
But if you gave legit information you're all over the net as of... yesterday. | |
|
davidl join:2008-07-11 Vaudreuil-Dorion, QC |
davidl
Member
2009-Apr-23 1:31 pm
I can't find mine......it only goes up to the letter 'A' in the last names. I worked hard on my scathing comment and I deserve to be published, dammit! | |
|
4 edits |
Can't even follow their own rulesI think the most important thing thats being missed. Is that the CRTC cannot even follow their own rules.
That is the most important part of all this IMHO.
Who would have known, the CRTC should be so quick to not follow their own privacy laws and so freely offer up all this information for all to see, when that isn't required at all.
What some claim, was voluntary fields, were not when the site began and actually mandatory fields.
They enforce their rules as they chose, to what, who and where its applied.
I don't recognize them as having any authority at all. Above all else, the CRTC has lost more public trust. | |
|
| dav_IDHappiness Is What You Make It join:2001-11-22 Toronto |
dav_ID
Member
2009-Apr-24 4:48 am
Re: Can't even follow their own rulesI've been with my ISP for quite a while now, and managed to keep my ehh-mail private and thus get NO SPAM - so If I should start to get any in the near future I'll know its a direct result of the CRTC's action.
I think I'll simply forward all those viagra ads back to the CRTC to show them what they have done to the consumer!
Forcing us to agree to 'their' policy in order to make a submission in regard to something as outrageous as this tariff just amounts to them doing their best to discourage people from complaining while they try to figure out some convoluted logic to allow the UBB tariff that was submitted instead of the Speed Tariff the the CRTC had ordered Bell to submit (for the 3rd time) | |
|
El QuintronCancel Culture Ambassador Premium Member join:2008-04-28 Tronna |
Now on the CBC Webpage | |
|
|
|