Dee in LondonDec 16, 2024

this morning I've made the choice to close 300 forum sites that have about 275k monthly active users, nearly all from the UK.

I've run forums for over 28 years, and did so to build families for those without families, to try and create a cure for social isolation and loneliness, to combat suicide, to create joy and love out of nothing but connections between people.

and it worked. it still works.

but on the 16th March 2025 I will delete the virtual servers running it all... that date is important, it's the last day before the UK Online Safety Act goes into enforcement.

I run these communities philanthropically, giving my time and money to do so, I ask nothing back, I just help build a nicer World.

but the scope of the Act is too broad, and my forums come under it... it does not matter that it's run by an individual and not a company, that it loses money every month... merely by being linked to the UK and allowing users to speak to users... it's within scope.

the penalties of non-compliance would be so devastatingly ruinous to me, that I don't see I have a choice... I must now perform a social harm to protect myself.

this is devastating.

https://www.lfgss.com/conversations/401475/

I cannot even express what these forums have achieved... the marriages, births, support for those with cancer, the love, the communities they have created.

Show threadAlisonW ♿🏳️‍🌈♾️Dec 16, 2024
@dee
I'm just reading through the act and, frankly, I think that *every* company is going to consider it too onerous to comply with. The expansiveness of the scope even captures Github and such ffs. Although it regularly mentions businesses, giving a possibility that only limited companies might be targets, it's not clarified further. "[T]he size and capacity of the provider of the service" is mentioned many times though in determining actions, so an individual would be treated differently to Meta, for example. The £18MM figure though remains the scare tactic. (I've been bankrupt and wouldn't recommend it), This law may have good intentions but it is a blunderbuss instead of sensibly targeted all in the name of "won't someone think of the children". Gah!
I'm so sorry you've found yourself in this position, it must really suck that your 28+ years of work comes to an end in this awful way.
Show threadDee in LondonDec 16, 2024
@AlisonW thanks Alison, and yes it's a bit crazy, I never thought it would pass in that form, but the implementation of it seems even messier than the Act itself... I already have a demanding day job, so all of the work I did to run communities was squeezed in around that, so even trying to campaign and bring awareness is more than I can give. it's a mess.
Show threadAlisonW ♿🏳️‍🌈♾️Dec 16, 2024
@dee
Found the definition of 'provider' which really sucks:
"A provider of a regulated user-to-user service or a regulated search service is a “UK provider” of the service if the provider is—
(a)an individual or individuals who are habitually resident in the United Kingdom, or
(b)an entity incorporated or formed under the law of any part of the United Kingdom."
Given the exemptions for news orgs, texts, and email, one could almost think this was targetted against people wanting to not be controlled by governments. The costs involved will be very substantial and the Act seems to think that everyone is in it for the money so have profits to cover these new expenses.
Show threadAlisonW ♿🏳️‍🌈♾️Dec 16, 2024
@dee
Reading on further it's very clear that the _intended_ targets are multinationals with massive numbers of users, eg in the fees sections “qualifying worldwide revenue” is used a number of times. Thing is that isn't the way the Act was drafted, so yes it will catch personal sites whereever someone permits users to post comments and others to reply to them (eg almost every damn blog out there!) Taking them all down is, so far as I can see, your only safe option until someone at OFCOM or in government realises they've gone too far. 😠
Show threadgroff 🇺🇦

@AlisonW @dee

"The illegal content duties apply to all regulated user-to-user and search services under the Act, no matter their size or reach."

Dec 16, 2024 at 10:17pmWeb
Show threadAlisonW ♿🏳️‍🌈♾️Dec 17, 2024
@geoffl @dee
Yes, but the definition of who is "regulated" does affect the numbers a lot.
Show threadgroff 🇺🇦Dec 17, 2024

It's all regulated unless exempt. All forums are included.

"The online safety regime applies to internet services that enable users of the service to generate, share or upload content (such as messages, images, videos, comments, audio) on the service that may be encountered by other users of the service.This includes services that enable user interactions."

They all need nominated responsible individual, risk assesments, documentation, moderation, content removal, appeals process, lots more.