concerned
Posts:49
 |
| 20 Jul 2008 21:16:19 |
 Alert
|
IanC : I can't account for you changing the messages. When I read your message it said that you "apologized for the previous posts". I assumed that you were apologising for the general content of all your posts.
reply :
I believe you are more confused than I originally thought.
|
|
|
|
|
concerned
Posts:49
|
| 20 Jul 2008 21:20:56 |
Alert
|
IanC : Do you actually read any of the posts? You just seem to bang on and on and don't listen.
REPLY :
I read the posts very carefully especially your replies and sometimes the ommisions are more revealing than your replies |
|
|
|
|
concerned
Posts:49
|
| 20 Jul 2008 21:40:19 |
Alert
|
IanC : The police work shifts, so the cameras can be check by an officer on back shift
REPLY :
I have no understanding of this at all.
IanC's previous post : The system is live and operating. There are some issues gaining access to the system when required, but these should be resolved in the near future. This means the police can only access the system after normal office hours.
I can only assume IanC can not answer the question honestly, and resorts to gobble de gook.
|
|
|
|
|
concerned
Posts:49
|
| 20 Jul 2008 21:55:36 |
Alert
|
IanC : There is only one data controller, but each member must control the data they deal with on a daily basis.
REPLY :
The data controller is legally responsable for the data held and it is his/her sole resposability to be in control of the information held. They will be held legally responsable for lost or misused data, and it is their duty to be sure that others who have access to the data are aware of this. |
|
|
|
|
concerned
Posts:49
|
| 20 Jul 2008 22:09:10 |
Alert
|
IanC : As no one views the footage that is recorded, how do you think the footage you appear on will be identified, and how do you think the data could be transfered to you?
REPLY :
It is a legal requirement under the DPA That information being held on an individual is made available to that individual on request. The information should be in the form of a copy. I would have hoped a system administrator who claimed to take his responsabilities seriously would already know this.
|
|
|
|
|
concerned
Posts:49
|
| 20 Jul 2008 22:13:50 |
Alert
|
IanC : Let me know when you want to see the camera.
REPLY :
That is the problem to much of the camera is on view. I want the camera setting adjusted |
|
|
|
|
concerned
Posts:49
|
| 20 Jul 2008 22:20:08 |
Alert
|
IanC : This is my last word on this thread.
Ian
REPLY :
I do hope so, it's time you took some action and had the camera setting adjusted. As should have been done weeks ago |
|
|
|
|
Kingswells Sommelier
Posts:13
|
| 21 Jul 2008 06:41:24 |
Alert
|
Concerned. Reading this you come over as the unreasonable one, in my opinion. You are aggressive in your tone, comparing Ian C to Stalinist activities amongst other things. You use inflammatory language (like SPY in caps) and seem incapable of creating a coherent and easily followed rationale. Quite often you resort to personal attacks on Ian. Ian has not done this. About all you have demonstrated is your ability to use google. We could solve all this by just getting well meaning members of the public to sit down outside the shops and take a note of everyone who went past. Because nothing is recorded a whole raft of data protection issues are avoided. Or some other equally ridiculous solution.
As far as I can see your complaints can be as follows:
1) £3000 being spent on CCTV - is this a good use of money? I haven't seen anything about cost:benefit, or what else in the community could benefit from £3000.
2) Lack of representation on KCC - well, we can all see what you think about this, but you don't actually seem to want to do anything about it
To me, it seems like you are a serial compainer with nothing better to do with your time than whinge. But at least it's keeping the board busy. It's better than when there was nothing happening on here. |
|
|
|
|
resident@4
Posts:10
|
| 21 Jul 2008 09:05:40 |
Alert
|
| Kingswells Sommelier : RUBBISH |
|
|
|
|
Kingswells Sommelier
Posts:13
|
| 21 Jul 2008 09:32:36 |
Alert
|
[quote]Posted By resident@4 on 21 Jul 2008 09:05:40
Kingswells Sommelier : RUBBISH[/quote]
Your attendance at the Cambridge school of debating has obviously paid off. As I said at the top of my post, it was my opinion. I'm not going to repeat myself (take the hint) but to talk of debating openly and then complaining when others want to debate something else smacks of double standards.
:cool: |
|
|
|
|
loggs
Posts:6
|
| 21 Jul 2008 16:54:39 |
Alert
|
I agree that IMHO concerned & resident@4 (number 4 where ?)are just moaning for the sake of it and do not seem to listen or accept simple messages. Go to the community centre and see for yourselves what images can be seen. Another case of waiting until money has been spent and then complaining rather than coming up with your own ideas. Simple but seems too much effort.
Do you really think IanC or others are going to spend time going through hours of images?
I feel this is just a personal attack that obviously for some reason stems alot deeper than just a CCTV camera.
|
|
|
|
|
concerned
Posts:49
|
| 21 Jul 2008 21:11:04 |
Alert
|
loggs quote : I agree that IMHO concerned & resident@4 (number 4 where ?)are just moaning for the sake of it and do not seem to listen or accept simple messages
REPLY :
Please read all the posts very carefully, you may gain some understanding.
loggs quote : Go to the community centre and see for yourselves what images can be seen.
REPLY : There is a question mark over the integrity of some answers given to questions; other questions are ignored, despite a plea to be very specific. The images which would be shown at the community centre may not be quite as straightforward as some may suggest. You may wonder why the absolute refusal to carry out a simple minor adjustment is so important.
Consider if you would feel comfortable, believing you were being spied on in your own home and garden, 24hrs 7 days a week 52 weeks a year.
loggs quote : Another case of waiting until money has been spent and then complaining rather than coming up with your own ideas.
REPLY : Not every KCC member can attend every meeting. Residents who would like to attend meetings but find it impossible, have to rely on the minutes of the meetings, these are never up to date, accurate, or reliable. No consultation was held. So unfortunately the money is already spent. Before the community have an accurate picture of what is planned.
loggs quote : Do you really think IanC or others are going to spend time going through hours of images?
REPLY : It’s a legal requirement.
Surely you would have expected the people involved to have researched and considered this before installation. Makes me wonder what other important matters have been overlooked.
loggs quote : I feel this is just a personal attack that obviously for some reason stems alot deeper than just a CCTV camera.
REPLY : That’s your opinion, and I have mine.
|
|
|
|
|
Swellking
Posts:8
|
| 26 Jul 2008 19:02:29 |
Alert
|
| I'll get the camera removed then all can live happily. |
|
|
|
|
concerned
Posts:49
|
| 27 Jul 2008 12:01:15 |
Alert
|
That would be good swellking even better than having it realigned “THANK YOU”
|
|
|
|
|
andy92
Posts:48
|
| 01 Aug 2008 16:17:26 |
Alert
|
[quote]Posted By Kingswells Sommelier on 21 Jul 2008 06:41:24
Concerned. Reading this you come over as the unreasonable one, in my opinion. You are aggressive in your tone, comparing Ian C to Stalinist activities amongst other things. You use inflammatory language (like SPY in caps) and seem incapable of creating a coherent and easily followed rationale. Quite often you resort to personal attacks on Ian. Ian has not done this. About all you have demonstrated is your ability to use google. We could solve all this by just getting well meaning members of the public to sit down outside the shops and take a note of everyone who went past. Because nothing is recorded a whole raft of data protection issues are avoided. Or some other equally ridiculous solution.
As far as I can see your complaints can be as follows:
1) £3000 being spent on CCTV - is this a good use of money? I haven't seen anything about cost:benefit, or what else in the community could benefit from £3000.
2) Lack of representation on KCC - well, we can all see what you think about this, but you don't actually seem to want to do anything about it
To me, it seems like you are a serial compainer with nothing better to do with your time than whinge. But at least it's keeping the board busy. It's better than when there was nothing happening on here. [/quote]
Have got to agree with Kingswells Sommelier. If you are so "concerned", its maybe time to move. Reality is that the camera's are there for the safety and good of the community and you would be better getting on board as opposed to posting rubbish :whistling:
|
|
|
|
|
concerned
Posts:49
|
| 01 Aug 2008 21:54:12 |
Alert
|
Andy92
I have already replied to kingswells sommelier’s comments.
I don’t consider it necessary to add anything further.
It Seems clear that kingswells sommelier and you are happy to have IanC and KCC
make decisions and decide for you without question, Although Kingswells Community Council
Has never gone to election and no consultation was deemed necessary on CCTV installation.
You believe that I am a serial complainer with no good reason to complain, I suggest you
Check the following government web site www.ico.gov.uk (left hand Column click A to Z)
Then (letter C) then (CCTV) then (CCTV Code of Practice) after checking this out you
might just reconsider if it is appropriate for a community council to install and monitor a CCTV system at a cost of at least £3000:00 which will have to be run and maintained in good order for it to be effective; Data Protection rules will have to be adhered to; the police would not contemplate being involved with the running of the system.
Aberdeen City Council is seeking to make spending cuts of almost £50 million. |
|
|
|
|
andy92
Posts:48
|
| 02 Aug 2008 16:47:51 |
Alert
|
If you are not happy with the decisions made by IanC and KCC, why not do something about it??? Have you ever thought about standing for election or attending a meeting. There is nothing worse than someone who complains and when given the chance to do something about it, turns it down!!
The CCTV will hopefully prevent crime in the village centre and the village as a whole. Please explain what is so bad about that. |
|
|
|
|
concerned
Posts:49
|
| 03 Aug 2008 08:53:16 |
Alert
|
[quote]Posted By andy92 on 02 Aug 2008 16:47:51
If you are not happy with the decisions made by IanC and KCC, why not do something about it??? Have you ever thought about standing for election or attending a meeting. There is nothing worse than someone who complains and when given the chance to do something about it, turns it down!!
REPLY
I have already done quite a bit about it, you may not agree with my point of view, but check the total views on this subject
KCC have never gone to election. If I had attended a meeting my views would remain unknown as the information released from KCC meetings are edited by the secretary and made available when he chooses
The CCTV will hopefully prevent crime in the village centre and the village as a whole. Please explain what is so bad about that.[/quote]
REPLY
You have obviously not read or understood the previous postings
You have obviously not read or understood The CCTV Code of Practice; reference is made to the appropriate use of CCTV.
Ask why the police would not contemplate being involved with the administration of the system. Ask if this was known prior to installation, if not why not. There are issues regarding Data Protection, Privacy and human rights issues. There are issues regarding the cost of the installation, maintenance costs and the cost of providing a copy of images held on file when an individual makes a request under the data protection act 1998 section 7, ask why questions are not answered freely openly and honestly when the person who volunteers to reply, claims to represent the community, why no consultation, why is a simple request from an individual refused, the onus is on the administration to comply, not the individual.
|
|
|
|
|
Kingswells Sommelier
Posts:13
|
| 03 Aug 2008 13:51:01 |
Alert
|
Concerned, if you count "RUBBISH" as replying to my queries then you can't complain about the level of response from Ian.
And can you please try to make an argument with "human rights" as a core theme? Exactly which area of your human rights do you feel are being violated? What, and I would like something tangible as opposed to the usual ramblings about codes of conduct etc, do you (not a commissioner or anyone else) do YOU think is fundamentally wrong with this?
Why do you think you can get away with accusing a member of the community council of editing the minutes to misrepresent a meeting? What basis do you have for this? Were a newspaper to print that without evidence, they could be subject to legal action and would have to print a retraction and an apology.
As far as requests refused, as far as I can tell Ian has offered to share images etc. The fact that the terms don't meet with your approval is neither here nor there, but what grown up people do is meet in the middle. It's called compromise. Try putting that into google.
|
|
|
|
|
andy92
Posts:48
|
| 03 Aug 2008 14:33:14 |
Alert
|
Concerned,
You do not make any sense.
I think you will find the majority of Kingswells residents are behind the scheme, I certainly am. If it makes Kingswells a safer place, thats a good enough reason for me.
I dont see your point about the Police not getting on board. The majority of CCTV systems (apart from City Centres) have nothing to do with the Police, they are run by retail premises.
When are you standing for KCC if you think you can make a difference? |
|
|
|
|