Let us see disabled member's profiles

[Capaldi]

I am currently going through scam reports and I am trying to do some research to help the OP of the scam report against a user but the accused member's profile is disabled and I am unable to browse their profile to see if I can find anything incriminating but I am unable to do so because it says "Error".

It would be beneficial to the community if we were able to do some extra research, one that scam resolvers may not have time to do per scam report.

This will also be beneficial in case we think someone is alting, evading a ban or suspension and want to see if information matches before we try to report them so staff don't have to spend time trying to do their own research as I know I've had reports denied because there was nothing linking them, but being able to see DOB, skype, etc in the information tabbed has helped me re-report the user with sufficient evidence that a staff member has missed.

 

[Ally]

I am currently going through scam reports and I am trying to do some research to help the OP of the scam report against a user but the accused member's profile is disabled and I am unable to browse their profile to see if I can find anything incriminating but I am unable to do so because it says "Error".

It would be beneficial to the community if we were able to do some extra research, one that scam resolvers may not have time to do per scam report.

This will also be beneficial in case we think someone is alting, evading a ban or suspension and want to see if information matches before we try to report them so staff don't have to spend time trying to do their own research as I know I've had reports denied because there was nothing linking them, but being able to see DOB, skype, etc in the information tabbed has helped me re-report the user with sufficient evidence that a staff member has missed.

If this is accepted, people should be unable to post messages on their profile (those who are disabled).

 

[Justis]

Seems like a cool feature.

This wouldn’t be a feature. This would be undoing development time put in specifically to ensure that disabled accounts were able to privatize their profile. It would be the removal of a feature.

If MC-Market wants to deny our users the ability to delete their accounts, we need to offer an alternative providing a comparable level of privacy. This is why disabled accounts are not viewable by the public, and in order to protect users’ privacy rights, it’s something we cannot dispense with. Especially not under the presupposition that scam resolvers are incapable of doing their job thoroughly when it comes to disabled accounts. If that’s the case, then the problem itself needs to be addressed rather than relying on unaffiliated third parties to dig up information for us.

The privatization of disabled accounts was a specifically developed feature necessary for MCM.
I can see no future in which we simply undo it.

 

[Capaldi]

This wouldn’t be a feature. This would be undoing development time put in specifically to ensure that disabled accounts were able to privatize their profile. It would be the removal of a feature.

If MC-Market wants to deny our users the ability to delete their accounts, we need to offer an alternative providing a comparable level of privacy. This is why disabled accounts are not viewable by the public, and in order to protect users’ privacy rights, it’s something we cannot dispense with. Especially not under the presupposition that scam resolvers are incapable of doing their job thoroughly when it comes to disabled accounts. If that’s the case, then the problem itself needs to be addressed rather than relying on unaffiliated third parties to dig up information for us.

The privatization of disabled accounts was a specifically developed feature necessary for MCM.
I can see no future in which we simply undo it.

How is this a privacy issue? If the information was shown beforehand, why should it be hidden simply because they chose to disable their account?

If they wanted the information not on their profile, they can easily remove it themselves. It has nothing to do with privacy, as they publicly put it on here.

And I never once said they are incapable, but because they have other things to handle while on the forums that it may slip their mind. If you consider that "incapable" of doing their job, then I don't know what to tell you.

Plus there are things that SR just simply miss that the community doesn't.

Disabling an account is honestly so useless. If someone really wanted to stop using MC-Market, they'd do it. 99% of the people who disable still browse the forums so why did they disable exactly?

 

[Zyger]

Who's the user?

 

[Ally]

This wouldn’t be a feature. This would be undoing development time put in specifically to ensure that disabled accounts were able to privatize their profile. It would be the removal of a feature.

If MC-Market wants to deny our users the ability to delete their accounts, we need to offer an alternative providing a comparable level of privacy. This is why disabled accounts are not viewable by the public, and in order to protect users’ privacy rights, it’s something we cannot dispense with. Especially not under the presupposition that scam resolvers are incapable of doing their job thoroughly when it comes to disabled accounts. If that’s the case, then the problem itself needs to be addressed rather than relying on unaffiliated third parties to dig up information for us.

The privatization of disabled accounts was a specifically developed feature necessary for MCM.
I can see no future in which we simply undo it.

You removed the choice to privatise profiles yet you add this. It's redundant. Disable the ability to post messages on a disabled member's profile and leave it at that. You're going for an effect originally unintended when disabling the account; the purpose of which is not to have a private profile.

 

[Lotus]

There has to be an alternate provided instead of deleting accounts.

A disabled account is the most direct way to allow that by offering the privacy of a deleted account (should they also request their username to be changed to their member ID and a whole slew of other things we do to comply to the ‘right to be forgotten’ law), without compromising user security (as we need to keep accurate logs of ban evaders for example).

Perhaps making the option of disabling a more unappealing and harder choice be the better approach? Such as increasing the wait length to enable?

 

[Capaldi]

There has to be an alternate provided instead of deleting accounts.

A disabled account is the most direct way to allow that by offering the privacy of a deleted account (should they also request their username to be changed to their member ID and a whole slew of other things we do to comply to the ‘right to be forgotten’ law), without compromising user security (as we need to keep accurate logs of ban evaders for example).

Perhaps making the option of disabling a more unappealing and harder choice be the better approach? Such as increasing the wait length to enable?

I still fail how it's a security or privacy issue if someone were able to view a disabled member's profile. It's literally the same exact thing if the profile was public, people only disable because they "can't" or "won't" stop posting without having their profile disabled. If someone really wanted their information private, they'd change their "privacy" settings.

Back then when people disabled, people could still view their profile and if it was really a security or privacy issue, Mick would have had that fixed a lot sooner rather than later.

Mick is even thinking of allowing banned member's profiles being viewable, so I am unsure why people who choose to disable their account get this special feature with their disabled profile.

See thread here where Mick put the suggestion in pending and saw no reason for the suggestion to not be implemented:
https://www.mc-market.org/threads/214793/#post-2938909

If it's a security/privacy issue for those who volunterily disable their profile, wouldn't it also be a security/privacy issue for thsoe who were banned?

Although the suggestion is pending and Mick said the above in April 2018, I cannot speak if his opinion(s) changed on the suggestion.

 

[User]

This wouldn’t be a feature. This would be undoing development time put in specifically to ensure that disabled accounts were able to privatize their profile. It would be the removal of a feature.

If MC-Market wants to deny our users the ability to delete their accounts, we need to offer an alternative providing a comparable level of privacy. This is why disabled accounts are not viewable by the public, and in order to protect users’ privacy rights, it’s something we cannot dispense with. Especially not under the presupposition that scam resolvers are incapable of doing their job thoroughly when it comes to disabled accounts. If that’s the case, then the problem itself needs to be addressed rather than relying on unaffiliated third parties to dig up information for us.

The privatization of disabled accounts was a specifically developed feature necessary for MCM.
I can see no future in which we simply undo it.

Except, you can find a lot of information about disabled members, since you can search for their posts. Disabling their profile really only hides their profile posts and information section.

 

[Mick]

As others have said, with our compliance with the GDPR the least we can do is allow our users an alternative to deleting their account since we do not allow for accounts to be deleted.

Banned members profiles are visible to our users because it's important that our users are able to see banned members in case they try to evade their ban or do something suspicious, which is not the case with disabled accounts.

Denied, thanks for the suggestion.