Koptalk: “Post your email address and we’ll ban you!”

by HonoraryMember.

__________________

I’ll keep it short and sweet, leave out my opinion and stick to the facts.

Koptalk now has a “Privacy Statement”. Had a quick read and there are some interesting things that stood out.

“Your information is used purely to administer your memberships to our features. We do not use any of your information for marketing nor do we provide your information to anyone else.”

Obviously Dunk forgot to mention that he (and his family) also use information to contact former members workplace’s to make threats to them!

And this is the main point;

“It is a breach of of our Acceptable Use Policy to request email addresses of other members and to post your own email address on any area of our websites.”

So to the few members Dunk has left, please be warned, don’t post your email address or request the emails of other members, otherwise you risk being banned for an AUP violation! Please note however you can submit a support ticket and you can communicate to members via Dunk.

The full Koptalk privacy statement can be found and read here: http://www.koptalk.com/detail_subtitle.php?subid=140

I have made a copy just incase it disappears in the next few days.

Please leave your comments below, it would be especially nice to hear what current members think of this new “privacy statement”, did you know about it?, how do you feel about being banned for posting your email?

_________________

Written by HonoraryMember
(Please note: A. Friend is a current Koptalk and Est1892 member)

Advertisements

7 Responses to “Koptalk: “Post your email address and we’ll ban you!””

  1. Lindsay Says:

    I would love to see him explain banning me if I breached the AUP since that wasn’t the one I signed up to or paid for.

    Be warned fatty, ban me and I’ll come pay you a visit to get my refund.

  2. jj_sawyer Says:

    This is astonishing… he is truely running scared and making some very bad fundamental errors of judgement. There’s plenty more to come. We don’t need to kill of his “business” any more, he’s doing a good enough job on his own.

  3. ROCK Says:

    i seriously beleieve it wont be long before he pisses someone off who will do something about it.

  4. Lindsay Says:

    Tick tock, tick tock

  5. univofchicago Says:

    I think people ought to be more proactive than reactive on this Oldham issue…Not that even I was always proactive – was once very skeptical myself until this blog presented me with bags of evidence. But at least I knew that Duncan WILL and HAS DONE some horrible things and other people also ought to see that by now especially with all the evidence. Knowing Dunk, recent events does not surprise me.

    “The blog is sad”, “Do you have a day time job?” “You are an obsessed stalker” – these kind of accusations has nothing to do with the criticisms. It is the kind of stuff Mr Oldham (under an alias) would say ON THIS BLOG, trying to give the impression that the mental state of the blogger and contributors like myself is in question and veer the topic away from whats important.

  6. univofchicago Says:

    I thought that this was a very good reply by the Insider to accusations that he was stalking Mr Oldham (From Est1892):

    I don’t spend that much time on looking at what Dunk’s doing. Without going into too much detail about how I get the information and write it up, or what I do for a living, I generally have time in my day where I can read his forums and write my opinions on stuff I find.

    Anyone who uses any internet forum is probably spending as much time doing that as I am spending writing the blog. So if you think I’m sad then you’ll be reforming yourselves and taking up cross-stitching and stamp-collecting rather than spending time on any internet forums.

    A lot of stuff I get is emailed to me, I don’t even go on Koptalk’s forums every day that I post something on the blog.

    It’s strange how many people slag the blog off but read it every day. You’re entitled to your opinion of course, but if you are slagging off the blog are you also saying Dunk’s not that bad after all?

    As for calling me a stalker – read the thread on this forum where someone got called by Koptalk and threatened at work. For what? That is stalking – and illegal.

    How much time I (and others) spend on producing that blog is of no real concern to anyone reading it. It isn’t important. As a criticism it isn’t really valid. Who I and the others are who write for the blog isn’t important either. What is important is the issues the blog raises.

    Are you Liverpool fans happy that Dunk uses the S*n the way he does?

    Are you Liverpool fans happy that Dunk threatened he’d end Peter Crouch’s career when it suited him?

    Are you Liverpool fans happy that Dunk made similar attempts to end Robbie Fowler’s Liverpool career first time round by selling lies to the press?

    Are you Liverpool fans happy that he lies to new members about the information he can give to them in return for up to £30?

    Are you Liverpool fans happy that when questioned about why donations to Lauren were going into his mum’s bank account he hid the site, saying that he had to do this because Lauren’s family were being attacked because the blog was attacking Lauren? Lauren was never attacked – I doubt she got all of the money donated to her either. The site was pulled because Dunk was trying to hide the evidence.

    Are you Liverpool fans happy that Dunk lies about virtually everything he says on his site, from the most minor of things to the most major?

    Are you Liverpool fans happy to use a site where any attempts at feedback are made at the risk of being banned?

    Are you Liverpool fans happy to use a pay site where you are paying for stolen goods?

    Are you Liverpool fans happy to use a site where the owner claims he’s got something he can use to blackmail Rick Parry (even though he hasn’t).

    Are you Liverpool fans happy to use a site where the owner claims to have bribed corrupt members of staff at Anfield, implying there’s corruption at all levels of the club?

    If any of you Liverpool fans are happy with all that then why not go back to Koptalk and enjoy it for what it is?

    If any of you Liverpool fans aren’t bothered about it, maybe you need to do something else other than reading the blog about the site.

    And for the majority who are bothered and interested keep reading, and keep letting me know what’s going on.

    Those who want the blog to stop, and for est1892.co.uk to stop talking about Koptalk, are being quite selfish. You know about Dunk, you’ll probably not be paying him any money again and you’ve probably stopped visiting Koptalk as much, if at all. What about those still to find out? They don’t matter now do they? They’ve as much right to find out about it, and then to find somewhere to talk about it, as you had. If the blog winds you up don’t read it, or better still write something for it yourself and send it on to me.

  7. rupertinsider Says:

    The Hillsborough campaign has thrashed out all the issues about the limits of the boycott. They (and LFC) have decided that the boycott is on the S**. That is very definite.

    The fact is that Oldham :

    (1) buys the S** for his personal use and boasts about it on his site when he feels invincible – but then performs “comical” and insincere S**- burning stunts when he feels the blog’s criticism is hurting his business:

    (2) he argues repeatedly that the boycott should be a matter of personal choice and he will not impose it on his readers because that is “politics” and his site is about “entertainment”. He uses the same argument to explain why KT does not feature the Hillsborough campaign or support it. Since we all know that by defintiion a boycott is a voluntary action, we have to look beyond his words to understand why he states the obvious. It is clear that he uses his KT to undermine the boycott.

    (3) one of the ways he seeks to undermine the boycott is by citing stories from the S** that have been cited by the BBC. He calculates that if people can be led to reading the S** in this way, their support for the boycott will become problematic.

    Furthemore, as the only LFC site to cite the S** he steals an advantage of other sites. It does not matter that the S** stories are false – as the Woodland story was – and as the S** Hillsborough story was false – the fact is that his S** derived headline shows up on News Now and other news services, bringing him probably thousands of extra hits. Those hits produce real money which goes into his pocket, and they reinforce one of the strongest misconceptiosn about KT – that it is a one-stop source of all news and info about LFC.

    I have no sympathy for those who rely on KT for news on LFC. And I have no patience with those who start theological arguments about why it is alright for KT to sell headlines taken from the S** stories because they were not taken directly from the S** but from the BBC – citing the S**. If you want to read the BBC site it is more accessible and quicker than KT. The fact is you are reading the S** as summarised by the BBC and as sold by Oldham.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: