Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:

On 04/10/2019 12:16, brian wrote:
In message , Stephen Cole
writes
Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:
On 04/10/2019 06:02, Stephen Cole wrote:
Roger Hayter wrote:
Graham. wrote:

There's been a definite sense of humour failure. I am not sure
whether
it is on my part or the moderator's?


On 02/10/2019 21:16, Mark Goodge wrote:
I was at an event earlier this week, where one of the trade
stands in
the exhibition hall had a selection of tasty refreshments on offer
adjacent to a sign which read

Free food and drink = Your business card

The sign gave no other information as to what would be the
outcome if
you put your card in the box.

Into the box, I placed a card that I had collected from a
vendor at an
adjacent stand. In return for which I received food. Which I
consumed.
And very tasty it was, too.

How many difference aspects of GDPR are engaged - and how many
principles have been breached - in this transaction?

Discuss.

I don't know about GDPR, but I'm concerned this may be out and out
fraud on your part, ie obtaining tasty food by deception.
After all, they asked for your business card. Now, I accept that
the
business card you gave them did belong to you, but the phrase 'your
business card' has a clear meaning, in my opinion, which is not any
business card that happens to belong to you.


"Your message appears to the moderator to be abusive or hurtful to
another contributor."




Try it with the appropriate smiley face next time.

HNY&WOTF.

"Appropriate smiley face" is an oxymoron.

How do you feel about the "jizzing cock" emoji, Rog?

8===D - ~ -

pervert

Just for you, Jim, the Goatse emoji: =(_o_)=

?_?

/Pedant

They're emoticons , not emojis

/Pedant


B
who cares what they are? ...

Anyone who cares about clarity and precision of communication.

--

Roger Hayter