Data Protection query

[Alex McFarlane]

Having email contacts in the grading progam makes some sense as it allows local area graders to get in touch with a player to query a result if necessary.

There may be an issue with the security under which Chess Scotland keeps this data and also with the use that a local area grader puts it to.

[Gerard Blake]

The e-mail addresses of members is available from the grading programme, just click on the players name and the information is there.

The grading programme can be downloaded by anybody from the website.

That being the case, the data has been collected for a particular purpose and if it is used for another purpose then it is a breach of the Data Protection Act which can result in serious penalties for the perpetrator.

http://www.itgovernance.co.uk/dpa-penalties.aspx

Of particular relevance is the Breaching the DPA paragraph

In November of 2012 the ICO fined Prudential £50,000 for breaching the DPA. The significance of this was that this was the first time the ICO had fined someone for not losing data but using it incorrectly. Complying with the DPA is not just about confidentiality, it is also about the integrity and availability of that information.

[Patrick McGovern]

Phil you truly are deluded;

The first incident Pat refers to is a series of private e mails I exchanged with the chair of the standards committee (copied to CS executive but not to other members of the Standards committee) which referred to the rewritten report of the standards committee to the 2012 agm. In that correspondence I pointed out to Dick Heathwood that the 25 page report mentioned in Standards Committee report appeared to be covered by the Data Protection Act and. My request to see that file was refused. I did not threaten to go legal. I did not publicise the contents of the correspondence event on this notice board.

The second incident referred to by Pat and linked to the first in his most recent posting is the use of private e mail addresses in the election campaign for president. These addresses have been acquired from the grading data programme (not by me) and used to contact CS members base (not by me) presumably with the knowledge of the relevant campaign managers (neither is me).

read my post; i did not refer to any of these incidents; why do you think EVERYTHING here is about you?

[Andrew McHarg]

The e-mail addresses of members is available from the grading programme, just click on the players name and the information is there.

The grading programme can be downloaded by anybody from the website.

That being the case, the data has been collected for a particular purpose and if it is used for another purpose then it is a breach of the Data Protection Act which can result in serious penalties for the perpetrator.

In principal Gerard, but it's very difficult to prove how someone acquired someone else's email address, and therefore very difficult to prove whether correspondence is unsolicited or not. And - for example - if you enter a Congress by email and the organiser then uses your email in subsequent years to invite you to their event again, this wouldn't be considered unsolicited email unless you have already specifically requested them not to contact you in this way. And another example that happens all the time is if you wanted to ask someone at my club something and got their email address from me, I wouldn't be breaking the data protection act by giving you their information, and your email to them would almost never be considered unsolicited. If it were, then sending emails would be far too risky all the time to be worthwhile doing.

The data protection act is more concerned with how organisations store and use sensitive information, such as credit card details, medical records, legal papers etc. Misuse of this type of data by organisations is the only situation really likely to incurr heavy fines.

[Phil Thomas]

Phil you truly are deluded;

The first incident Pat refers to is a series of private e mails I exchanged with the chair of the standards committee (copied to CS executive but not to other members of the Standards committee) which referred to the rewritten report of the standards committee to the 2012 agm. In that correspondence I pointed out to Dick Heathwood that the 25 page report mentioned in Standards Committee report appeared to be covered by the Data Protection Act and. My request to see that file was refused. I did not threaten to go legal. I did not publicise the contents of the correspondence event on this notice board.

The second incident referred to by Pat and linked to the first in his most recent posting is the use of private e mail addresses in the election campaign for president. These addresses have been acquired from the grading data programme (not by me) and used to contact CS members base (not by me) presumably with the knowledge of the relevant campaign managers (neither is me).

read my post; i did not refer to any of these incidents; why do you think EVERYTHING here is about you?

Pat,

Because you continue to attack unnamed people.

Either name them or stop the polemics.

[amuir]

Guys
We need more friendly chats and less confrontation in CS.
Let's go for a beer before the AGM.

[Patrick McGovern]

that's a great idea Andy =) I hope Phil gets his membership and comes along with us

[Alan Jelfs]

Guys
We need more friendly chats and less confrontation in CS.
Let's go for a beer before the AGM.

The AGM starts at 11.00 !
Any-one know any nearby pubs with an early license? Perhaps the Lord Nelson?

[Mike Scott]

I would add to this that while I did object to receiving MH's email and preferred that my email address was not used for such purposes, the email was at least relevant to chess and therefore not an unreasonable for him to have used it provided he did not then re-used it in future after I made it clear that I wanted to be removed from his mailing list. And to date I have not received any more, so no problem!

What was truely objectionable was the message itself and the actions he boasted to have taken that were unprofessional and would have had him on a disrepute charge in any other sport.

[Patrick McGovern]

Hi Mike, was it this message?

As you are probably aware, I have stepped down as a director and not renewed my membership of Chess Scotland. As I work with children in schools I cannot be associated with CS under its present regime. I have stated that I cannot be involved in Chess Scotland while either the current President or Membership Secretary/Chair of Standards Committee remain in post.

There are 2 separate reasons, 1) the disgraceful way Andrew and Linda McCusker were treated when Linda complained about Andrew being assaulted in Slovenia by the head of delegation. The truth is this was a cover up by removing him from the coaches list for 6 months, they have prevented Disclosure Scotland from taking action as they had not removed him permanently from their list.

Linda in her report to council, pointed out 17 points were the standards committee were wrong in what they did, this report was censored and the President has prevented it from being published, even although council agreed and set up a committee headed by Linda to implement these improvements into Standards Committee procedures, it still is not available for members to see.

I was asked to redo my report, to exclude the word corrupt by council, this I did and it still has not been included in the reports or council minutes.

The President has also removed any criticism of him from the noticeboard.

The second reason, is the disgraceful way Jacqui and Phil Thomas were treated by the President and Membership Secretary, by refusing to accept their membership, the week after they had given up the entire weekend to run the Primary Individual for CS, Jacqui was so upset by this that she has walked away from chess, after being involved in junior chess in Scotland and England for the last 22 years. What they did was against the constitution and a total abuse of power, any decent person would have resigned.

The Membership Secretary has publicly admitted that he had personal issues with Phil Thomas when he stated “the Phil Thomas unpleasantness generation machine was started up and aimed at me even before my appointment”

If you read the minutes of the council meeting you will see that the President was heavily criticised for this, after the meeting he arranged to meet Jacqui and Phil the next day at a Hamilton Junior Congress to apologise, but did not turn up without letting anybody know he was not going to turn up.

For Chess Scotland to become a credible organisation again it is necessary to have somebody new at the top, I was glad to see Stephen Hilton was standing against the current President.