Slashdot Mirror


Ask Slashdot: Getting an Uncooperative Website To Delete One's Account?

First time accepted submitter trentfoley writes "I've been trying to clean up my digital life (insert joke about having a life) and have run into a situation I fear is too common. Many social websites, nextdoor.com in particular, do not allow a user to delete the account they created. In the case of nextdoor.com, their privacy policy makes it clear that the user owns all of their data. If this is true, I should have the right to destroy that data. These lines of thought brought to mind the recent privacy defeat in Europe. Does the defeat of the EU's Right-to-be-Forgotten legislation bring a practical end to this debate?" I've read complaints today from Nextdoor.com users who say their data was sold, too.

7 of 171 comments (clear)

  1. call them by Karmashock · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I've gotten a lot of sites that don't let you delete accounts to delete the account by simply calling them. Their numbers are often hard to find but get them on the phone and ask nicely.

    --
    I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
    1. Re:call them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I've never given correct information to any website to start. It was completely obvious that they would use that information to their advantage as that is what capitalist corporations *do*.

      Was there ever an advantage to me having the information with them? Is the information needed for them to perform a service for me? If the answer to those questions is no, then they get BS info, and a lower level password I keep in a protected space with all the rest.

      If a company truly needs correct information from me, then I'm considerably more careful. However, that is actually quite rare. In most cases I can obfuscate and lie about my identity, even with paid services. Although they are working to plug those "meta" holes by heavily restricting just what you can purchase with prepaid credit cards, money orders, etc.

      Social Networking is just plain dangerous when the information is centralized, and I never fell for it. It didn't matter what they were offering. I'm only interested in a completely decentralized, encrypted, p2p model similar to OneSocialMedia and Diaspora. Basically, if the infrastructure is inherently resistant towards surveillance and monetization by hostile parties (I consider advertising and marketing to be extremely hostile to my life) then I'm interested.

      This post is a question about how to mitigate or outright reverse the damage to the person's privacy. I'm not sure that is really possible at all. More than likely, it's Pandora's box.

      The answer is to have never danced with devil in the pale moonlight in the first place.

      Here, just like other places, I purposefully choose identities that have conflicting data sets when you search for it. I know that I'm not 100% protected, but if they want to violate my privacy, they will have to work pretty damn hard to do it.

  2. social media site trust by turkeydance · · Score: 5, Insightful

    could be classified a delusional state.

  3. Do what you can by nospam007 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Change all your details in the account settings, name, address, email etc.

    Then, deactivate the account like they tell you in their help on their site.

    http://help.nextdoor.com/customer/portal/articles/805273-deactivating-your-account

    That's about it. Not even Slashdot will erase your old posts when you decide to quit here, nobody does that, it would ruin all the past conversations.

  4. Re:bit of a tricky question with forums by lgw · · Score: 4, Insightful

    George Lucas was (at least until recently) the owner of the Star Wars Christmas Special. That doesn't give him the right to destroy all tapes made of it in the world. (Much as he wanted to - rumor has it he bought up and destroyed a great many copies before the digital age made it pointless)

    Ownership isn't the right to "unpublish".

    --
    Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
  5. Re:bit of a tricky question with forums by Chrisq · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How does being the owner of something entitle you to someone else being required to provide the means to destroy it?

    That's what "ownership" means. You get to control it.

    Not necessarily. If you own a listed historic building then destroying or altering it is a criminal offence. There are quite a few other examples where you can own something but not legally destroy it.

  6. Here's a thought by ArcadeMan · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If you don't want your life on the net, stop registering with your real information.