Also pretty sure in the UK gdpr technically doesn't exist we have dpa 18 and the obligations on privacy are on the platform provider
Chris, I am the regional secretary of another organisation and I can assure you that GDPR exists - very much so - I spent hours writing on this topic to the 400 odd folks who are on my list. Anyone who posts anonymously on this message board whether under one, two or twenty two names has the absolute right for that privacy to be respected by the Admin under the terms of the law.
Posting under 2 names isn't a crime - maybe it should be. But having 2 accounts so you can big up your own argument is just bizarre. I mean, what kind of person feels the need to do that? So it's a credibility issue for me.
Legally that may be correct-but duplicity is a conman's game.If you cannot be yourself-who are you-a sheep that follows the crowd?.I am referring to posting on the message board-not GDPR as I understand the legal aspects regarding that.
Just a couple of points in relation to the General Data Protection Regulation.
No individual or organisation can have criminal prosecutions brought against them under the aforementioned EU regulation. The spirit of this regulation was adopted into UK law via the Data Protection Act 2018. Any prosecutions would be as a result of a breach of the DPA ‘18 act.
In the first instance, the Data Controller (in the case of this message board, ProBoards Inc.) would be responsible for investigation and any such enforcement action.
Given that ProBoards Inc is registered in the US any such enforcement action may be difficult for the UK regulator to achieve.
To agree with ProRege, enforcement action under the DPA 18 can be severe for organisations, depending on the organisation it can be fines of up to 4% of annual global turnover or €20 million.
I'd buy a few shares just so I could be a Rovers shareholder cos I've got a soft spot for the club, but that is it.
Robert Watt gave supporters the opportunity to acquire a few of his shares - provided the Directors contributed a similar number on a one to one basis. As I understand it no one came forward and asked for any shares.
Not true, Grant.
The Directors don't have that many shares to begin with, so any amount of shares someone would gain from this offer could only constitute a small amount. Enough to attend to the AGM and receive papers, but too few to have any real influence. And RW didn't promise that his matched shares would go to the person to whom the director was selling their shares - e.g. RW could then decide to 'match' this by selling his shares to someone else.
It is clear that myself and others are interested in obtaining shares, so if any Directors (or anyone else) reading this want to offload any, however small the amount, then I am interested - even more so if the money raised goes to the club.
All this would be well and good, but these would be small private transactions and would in no way come near to the massive benefit to the club that might come from a wider share issue.
Please get me the no. for forums anonymous!
Without trawling through all the message threads I think Robert Watt said to contact him directly regarding acquiring a small number of shares - agree not enough to make any impact upon the club but enough to give genuine fans - like yourself - the right to receive accounts, attend AGMs and ask questions. All Robert wanted was an agreement from the Directors - and yes you are right none of the current board hold large numbers of shares - to match whatever he would pass on. I understand Robert has in the past (before this offer was made) given (sold?) small numbers of shares to regular supporters. Perhaps Robert or those recipients could clarify. I think he was dissappointed that no one saw fit to contact him to take up his offer.