[Archived] Brsit Spam Emails

[Paul]

I do not recall them saying that they had become a company. Today is the first I have heard about it.

You must have missed this because it was announced by BRSIT at the time.

My problem is the only group which I feel currently represents me is the FF and they remain in a quandary regarding their direction.

I don't feel able to support BRAG for a variety of reasons not least the roots from which it grew.

BRSIT is looking for significant sums of money without offering a clear understanding of who will manage this money in the event of purchasing the club.

I therefore hope BRST is successful in its launch. I've had some small involvement and know the objectives to be excellent and are ones I would support.

Just to be clear my involvement had been very limited, I attended a steering group meeting perhaps 18 months or more ago. I attended the Blakeys meeting and voted for the formation of the trust. Finally I spent a little time working with the steering group before health and work issues meant I had to drop out.

[PAFELL]

Pafell - I fully accept you have a view for your own reasons but it's got to the stage where I think you are being detrimental to the point you are arguing.

What I mean is it's become predictable that you will enter any discussion about BRSIT or brfc action group and take the opposite side no matter the discussion.

Sometimes it's best just to take a back seat is all

Kendal - I saw that on twitter and I must say mr wild came accross very bad by keep asking for someone's personal details, I don't see why it matters

I cannot accept that, I asked a question - and received the answer. My position is, I am willing to listen all sides. There are things I have agreed with the action group and things I haven't. So will enter discussions on the subjects - but if I agree about something they have said or done, there is nothing to discuss.

Look on the recently started thread as an example - about the supporters trust. Mark1875 and myself had a friendly discussion about all the groups. Nothing detrementle in that, I believe we were both reasonable in our debate. I ask questions of each group and will do the same once the trust is fully set up.

With regards me not giving my personal details to wayne wild on twitter. The man was an idiot for asking on a public site in the first place. This was not the first time he has done this. I considered that approach by him as extremely unprofessional. Even more so from somebody who want a say in the ownership of the club.

You must have missed this because it was announced by BRSIT at the time.

My problem is the only group which I feel currently represents me is the FF and they remain in a quandary regarding their direction.

I don't feel able to support BRAG for a variety of reasons not least the roots from which it grew.

BRSIT is looking for significant sums of money without offering a clear understanding of who will manage this money in the event of purchasing the club.

I therefore hope BRST is successful in its launch. I've had some small involvement and know the objectives to be excellent and are ones I would support.

Just to be clear my involvement had been very limited, I attended a steering group meeting perhaps 18 months or more ago. I attended the Blakeys meeting and voted for the formation of the trust. Finally I spent a little time working with the steering group before health and work issues meant I had to drop out.

Yep, that appears to be the case.

[Tom]

Thats fine mate it wasn't a dig it just seems often the same folk can get dragged into the same discussions on some topics

[Fife Rover]

I am very confused:

-this is BRFCS

-99% of supporters are against Keano and Venkys

-ergo Supporters must be anxious for action and a sale of the Club?

-BRSIT is the only transparent option

-somehow the mailing list of Venkys Rovers key customers fall into their hands

- and they decide to use it

AND then true supporters(and well known posters) on BRFCS object to this direct method. WOW!

And post at 0527 in the morning.

This thread says more about the posters than it does about the pro-active measures taken by BRSIT to save the Club.

I quite agree with all this mhead.....it most certainly does not bother me one bit that i have been approached this way, and I just wish I was in a position to pledge my support in cash when the right time comes. I just can't see what all the fuss is about and why some people are re-acting as they are. Still if that's how they feel, then so be it; it is their business not mine.

[ChrisyG]

Chances are the person how received it has consented to it, somewhere, at some point.

It sounds like BRSIT are trying to drum up more pledges in the scheme, which I don't see a problem with. After all it's in Rovers best interests.

[Ste B]

Chances are the person how received it has consented to it, somewhere, at some point.

It sounds like BRSIT are trying to drum up more pledges in the scheme, which I don't see a problem with. After all it's in Rovers best interests.

Thats the point, I NEVER consent to it, and many who i've spoken to also haven't consented.

Just because BRSIT are a worthy cause doesnt excuse another organisation being sloppy with how they protect your personal data. How would people feel if it was say a well known football agent who was emailing you instead ?

[Roversider]

If you refer to the Information Commissioners site you will be able to see the underlying 8 Principles of the Data Protection Act.

http://www.ico.gov.uk/for_organisations/data_protection/the_guide/the_principles.aspx

1.Personal data shall be processed fairly and lawfully and, in particular, shall not be processed unless –

(a at least one of the conditions in Schedule 2 is met, and

(b in the case of sensitive personal data, at least one of the conditions in Schedule 3 is also met.

2.Personal data shall be obtained only for one or more specified and lawful purposes, and shall not be further processed in any manner incompatible with that purpose or those purposes.

3.Personal data shall be adequate, relevant and not excessive in relation to the purpose or purposes for which they are processed.

4.Personal data shall be accurate and, where necessary, kept up to date.

5.Personal data processed for any purpose or purposes shall not be kept for longer than is necessary for that purpose or those purposes.

6.Personal data shall be processed in accordance with the rights of data subjects under this Act.

7.Appropriate technical and organisational measures shall be taken against unauthorised or unlawful processing of personal data and against accidental loss or destruction of, or damage to, personal data.

8.Personal data shall not be transferred to a country or territory outside the European Economic Area unless that country or territory ensures an adequate level of protection for the rights and freedoms of data subjects in relation to the processing of personal data.

If you consider Principle 1 I suggest that an e-mail address is not a sensitive piece of personal data as it is in the public domain. It could become sensitive if it was clearly linked to a personal identity in the form of a name. It would be hard to prove that BRSIT was acting illegally under Principle 2 as sending an e-mail is not an illegal act.

The DPA exists to protect individuals from illegal activity and not their sensitivity.

If you have a problem with BRSIT contacting you then consign it to the spam box in the same way as anything else.

If you wish to quote the DPA I suggest that you take a look at the Act in more detail, it isn't too strong when it comes to unsolicited e-mails.

I know there are a number on this Board who don't like Wayne Wild or BRSIT, don't let it colour your views to the extent that you misunderstand the legal implications of receiving an e-mail.

[Ste B]

If you consider Principle 1 I suggest that an e-mail address is not a sensitive piece of personal data as it is in the public domain. It could become sensitive if it was clearly linked to a personal identity in the form of a name. It would be hard to prove that BRSIT was acting illegally under Principle 2 as sending an e-mail is not an illegal act.

It is, as myself and Beta Ray Bill already have said - the unsubscribe list takes you to a page where your full name is quoted - hence they have stored more than just a simple set of email addresses.

[Roversider]

It is, as myself and Beta Ray Bill already have said - the unsubscribe list takes you to a page where your full name is quoted - hence they have stored more than just a simple set of email addresses.

It could be considered sensitive, if you have an issue then you can consider raising a complaint and the ICO may be able to help, refer to their site.

Do we really wnat to make a big issue of this though? I agree it was unproductive for BRSIT to email individuals who are clearly in opposition to BRSIT. However, I suspect that a significantly higher proportion went to people who were more receptive.

As to where the email addresses came from you will have to ask BRSIT directly, my email is with them because I registered an interest and a commitment. It could also have come from a number of other sources, as has been suggested.

Is anyone suggesting this is a serious criminal matter?

[ChrisyG]

I have just had a spam email from Ayesha Gaddafi, the fifth child of former Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi. She wants to give me 40% of 6.5 million USD.

I am absolutely furious.

[glen9mullan]

I have just had a spam email from Ayesha Gaddafi, the fifth child of former Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi. She wants to give me 40% of 6.5 million USD.

I am absolutely furious.

Lol i actually get quite a few daily when someone deliberatly used my email address to sign me up to all sorts, they changed my surname to something which rhymes with HUNT,

Went through my spam before, had PPI stuff, Viagra, Dating sites, betting sites, TSB telling me account had been suspended (dont bank with them), shares in a property in Kenya, a canadian pharmacy, and a uk test drive.

Moving on another step, even had people taking pictures of me and tweeting them, but hey whatever turns them on? perhaps I will give them my spam mail, im sure they could sign up to a few of these :-)

[Tom]

I have just had a spam email from Ayesha Gaddafi, the fifth child of former Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi. She wants to give me 40% of 6.5 million USD.

I am absolutely furious.

Wow this guy is a funny guy

Shame the comparison doesn't really work

[ChrisyG]

It's a shame you're quite dull.

[rhodie]

images (1)

[Pedro]

I am very confused:

-this is BRFCS

-99% of supporters are against Keano and Venkys

-ergo Supporters must be anxious for action and a sale of the Club?

-BRSIT is the only transparent option

-somehow the mailing list of Venkys Rovers key customers fall into their hands

- and they decide to use it

AND then true supporters(and well known posters) on BRFCS object to this direct method. WOW!

And post at 0527 in the morning.

This thread says more about the posters than it does about the pro-active measures taken by BRSIT to save the Club.

People might support Rovers and dislike Venkys - but that doesn't mean they support the methods of BRSIT. I always click the don't contact me with your advertising ######...because I don't want ANYONE to contact me with their advertising/propaganda ######.

[Glenn]

I've been trying to keep out of this because as a few of you know, I've held two positions that have involved me sending large amounts of targeted promotional email (one whiter than white, the other less so) and frankly screw ups happen. BRSIT probable sourced the list in good faith and the worse they'll face is mailchimp banning them for using a (seemingly) none-opt-in list. However, my wife just put a terrible idea in my head, assuming part of the data that ended up on the mailing list did come Rovers database (which BRIST deny, but anecdotal evidence suggest may be possible) then it seems (from the unsub page) that your full name was disclosed, but what if the Rovers account number was too?

Why is this so bad? Well, from there you only need your post code (which a quick search will disclose for so many people) and you can gain access to their onerovers account online ..... And how many of you have your credit card stored there?

I'm not saying this IS the case, more highlighting to the 'pffft, what's it matter, I get spam all the time' people why data leakage IS a serious problem.

[Kendalrover]

I've been trying to keep out of this because as a few of you know, I've held two positions that have involved me sending large amounts of targeted promotional email (one whiter than white, the other less so) and frankly screw ups happen. BRSIT probable sourced the list in good faith and the worse they'll face is mailchimp banning them for using a (seemingly) none-opt-in list. However, my wife just put a terrible idea in my head, assuming part of the data that ended up on the mailing list did come Rovers database (which BRIST deny, but anecdotal evidence suggest may be possible) then it seems (from the unsub page) that your full name was disclosed, but what if the Rovers account number was too?

Why is this so bad? Well, from there you only need your post code (which a quick search will disclose for so many people) and you can gain access to their onerovers account online ..... And how many of you have your credit card stored there?

I'm not saying this IS the case, more highlighting to the 'pffft, what's it matter, I get spam all the time' people why data leakage IS a serious problem.

This is true about every account that is internet based. It is true about every spam email. It is not just a BRSIT issue. So why the conspiracy theory.

[Glenn]

This is true about every account that is internet based. It is true about every spam email. It is not just a BRSIT issue. So why the conspiracy theory.

Well, generally I only normally trust my cc details to companies that abide by their own privacy policies and opt-out settings, but the 'login with nothing more than a post code' has always annoyed me at rovers, hence me always removing my cc details after use.

Also, you'll notice (ok, you didn't, but it's pretty clear) I'm actually being supportive of BRSIT here, everyone buys a duff list now and again and you have to trust the list vendor as to it's providence. However my beef will certainly be club if it later transpires they've gone against the marketing prefences and passed on those details (obviously not directly, as BRSIT state that isn't the case).

.

[jim mk2]

Many folk getting their knickers in a twist not because of "data leakage" but because they apparently have a problem with BRIST and other protest groups. And some folk concerned that what they thought was confidential information is apparently being shared by various organisations should remember they were happy to put in the public domain the content of personal messages when they moderators on this board. I've received e-mails from BRIST and I have to say they do not concern me. Spam e-mail goes the same way as junk post - straight in the bin.

[Ste B]

John. As soon as anybody breaches your privacy you @#/? and moan.

[Glenn]

Many folk getting their knickers in a twist not because of "data leakage" but because they apparently have a problem with BRIST and other protest groups. And some folk concerned that what they thought was confidential information is apparently being shared by various organisations should remember they were happy to put in the public domain the content of personal messages when they moderators on this board. I've received e-mails from BRIST and I have to say they do not concern me. Spam e-mail goes the same way as junk post - straight in the bin.

I have no problem with BRIST having my details, or even emailing me (I had to wait for my wife to check she'd received the email as I figured I was already on their mailing list).

It's a permission issue. If somebody says 'we need your email address and we reserve the right to sell it', then fair enough. I still have a choice wether to use the service. If I'm given the option of not passing my details to third parties, then I think it's pretty reasonable to expect that to be honoured. I possibly didn't make that choice, but I've now got first hand accounts from those who definitely did.

Also, our moderators (or community managers as we now have to call them, to avoid the notion we pre-moderate) do NOT have access to either your PMs or your email addresses. Only the admins do (and then in the case of PMs there are both ethical and technical reasons why we don't.

[Glenn]

John. As soon as anybody breaches your privacy you @#/? and moan.

..... And to be fair, that case was people deducing it based on info Jim gave out himself, not a 3rd party leak.

it does lead to an interested tangent though. There is (hopefully) soon to be legislation passed which pretty much absolves the site of responsibility for users posts IF we disclose, when asked, any personal info we hold about the user (so the lawyers come after you, not us).

Now, how would people feel if we make the email you give us public, in return for much more open dialogue?

(not saying we are doing that, just that once the law comes in, it's an option)

[Paul]

It's 3.40am and I've had my five hours sleep so off we go again!

Glenn I'm interested in what you say and I can accept this could be a duff list. However there are other issues which are overlooked by those who argue this is simply spam.

The evidence suggests the email was carefully targetted indicating BRSIT does know the original data source is onerovers

There are disgruntled employees at Ewood, multiple leaks prove this, meaning it's not unreasonable to ask if the source is at Ewood. This raises concerns over the general security of the onerovers data

I could go on but won't except for this, it's just another indicator of the club's position, SNAFU. BRSIT has received from sources unknown the season ticket holders list, that bothers me.

[AllRoverAsia]

The moral of this running sore, until proven otherwise, appears to be - do not shop online at onerovers and if you do caveat emptor.

[gumboots]

The moral of this running sore, until proven otherwise, appears to be - do not shop online at onerovers and if you do caveat emptor.

The only thing I've ever done online is renew my season ticket. Never touch the account otherwise.