Lack of privacy in photo competition

[redstone]

hmm......seems like that's a problem too. but how huh? it is quite hard to inform only the participants.

The organisers must be informed, and also as many participants as possible. I had already posted on another forums notifying people of the loophole.

 

[satay16]

The organisers must be informed, and also as many participants as possible. U had already posted on another forums notifying people of the loophole.

gee. where? me only subscride to CS. too many forums makes the world goes wild.

 

[redstone]

gee. where? me only subscride to CS. too many forums makes the world goes wild.

sgForums, not that I like that place.

 

[TMC]

so far only the subscribers can see other details, went to take a look and there is no IC number or other details available.

But then the rules and regulations for competitions in SG is getting more and more fked up.

 

[redstone]

so far only the subscribers can see other details, went to take a look and there is no IC number or other details available.

But then the rules and regulations for competitions in SG is getting more and more fked up.

I'm not logged in but I can see... you need to click the user's name.

 

[satay16]

sgForums, not that I like that place.

gee.......but i never posted in there. i never posted anywhere.

 

[TMC]

nvm......damn this is a big **** up. someone need to call CNA asap.

 

[satay16]

nvm......damn this is a big **** up. someone need to call CNA asap.

actually, in a way, they have broken a law right? i remembered govt implemented a law that the first few digits of nric cannot be shown.

 

[TMC]

Wouldnt know. Some peanut fed monkey is going to see his/her head roll for this fiasco. But I wouldnt be surprised if they keep this low profile considering you-know-who is head honcho of media in SG.

 

[eikin]

actually, in a way, they have broken a law right? i remembered govt implemented a law that the first few digits of nric cannot be shown.

i heard of that, but not sure of the full details. someone should just call CNA, they might know better.

 

[eikin]

if i'm the affected, i wouldn't waste time dwelling over it, it's personal particulars at stake for goodness.

 

[redstone]

No one called?

This is pretty serious...

 

[eikin]

No one called?

This is pretty serious...

why don't you call then?

 

[satay16]

No one called?

This is pretty serious...

erm....it's 1:51 am and it's a weekend you know?:bsmilie:

 

[eikin]

erm....it's 1:51 am and it's a weekend you know?:bsmilie:

ever heard of 24 hours hotline? usually news agencies have it. not sure about CNA, i've already given you all the CNA link, won't die calling right? the urgency is with those affected.

 

[Prismatic]

I don't think there's a law against the revealing of public info... yet.
But it's still very bad practice on the organiser's side. It also shows a lack of hindsight on the website design.

 

[eikin]

I don't think there's a law against the revealing of public info... yet.
But it's still very bad practice on the organiser's side. It also shows a lack of hindsight on the website design.

may or may not be in existence, i do remotely remember there's such a law or guideline for media agencies, that's why you don't see display of full NRIC on tv programmes anymore.

 

[satay16]

hm....i stumbled across this. it belongs to the MDA act chapter 172. dunno what this really means, but thought it will be nice to share it anyway:


Preservation of secrecy
59. —(1) Except for the purpose of the performance of his duties or the exercise of his functions or when lawfully required to do so by any court or under the provisions of any written law, no person who is or has
been —

(a) a member, an officer, an employee, an agent or a consultant of the Authority; or

(b) a member of a committee of the Authority,

shall disclose any information relating to the affairs of the Authority or of any other person which has been obtained by him in the performance of his duties or the exercise of his functions.

(2) Any person who contravenes subsection (1) shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $2,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or to both.

 

[eikin]

hm....i stumbled across this. it belongs to the MDA act chapter 172. dunno what this really means, but thought it will be nice to share it anyway:


Preservation of secrecy
59. —(1) Except for the purpose of the performance of his duties or the exercise of his functions or when lawfully required to do so by any court or under the provisions of any written law, no person who is or has
been —

(a) a member, an officer, an employee, an agent or a consultant of the Authority; or

(b) a member of a committee of the Authority,

shall disclose any information relating to the affairs of the Authority or of any other person which has been obtained by him in the performance of his duties or the exercise of his functions.

(2) Any person who contravenes subsection (1) shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $2,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or to both.

:think:

i'm not trained in law, but this legislation seems to be addressing the authority, MDA.

like i said, i'm sure CNA knows. even if the person at the hotline desk don't know, at least get their attention to have this matter raised for action.

 

[redstone]

gee.......but i never posted in there. i never posted anywhere.

Oooh.. my bad.. typo "I" became "U". :embrass: