Privacy issues with Good Sam Club - Why?? Closed

I am the OP of the original post on the privacy issue.

I have yet to be contacted by MS Watanabe on the results of the policy review. It is possible that it may take some time. I am looking forward to hearing from her.

I too think it was wrong to close that original thread as people were engaging in an honest discussion of GSE's privacy policy which should concern all Good Sam Club members.

To those that feel that this subject is moot and that it is ok for parks all over the country, their employees, children and anyone who has access to the company computer to have access your address; you have the right to feel any way you wish about the subject. But why demean and dismiss those that do care about this very real issue?

I believe that because we have lost so much control over our personal information that it is absolutely critical to challenge any misuse of that information by any company, government or other entity, and to push back against those who want to expand the use of private information for profit.

Now to the moderator: This issue is not settled in my mind until I hear from MS. Watanabe again and you would not be violating any personal conversation I had by simply revealing the results of the policy review which is what the other poster was asking for.

I dealt with GSE in good faith on this issue and I expect them to reciprocate. Publish the results of the policy review for all to see who care about it.

Old-Biscuit wrote:

GMandJM wrote:

1968mooney wrote:

AllegroD wrote:
For those of us that it is not moot, this is important.

I owe you an appoligy. I did not realize your "importance" when we were conversing over on the CW Accessories Forum. You will never see another response from me to one of your posts. You are "blocked".

Would you please be so kind as to block our username as well.

Thank you.

The better way is to block '1968mooney' and then you will no longer see any of his postings.

That would not accomplish my intended purpose.

Like some, this issue is not as important to me as it is to others. However, we've allowed a simple discussion to degrade to attacking each other for no particular reason. Since GS's policy review may take a little time and the practice a programming change, I don't expect a rapid answer. It would be nice if GS informed us of their decision and policy change, if any, when completed. Let's stop the fight.

GMandJM wrote:

1968mooney wrote:

AllegroD wrote:
For those of us that it is not moot, this is important.

I owe you an appoligy. I did not realize your "importance" when we were conversing over on the CW Accessories Forum. You will never see another response from me to one of your posts. You are "blocked".

Would you please be so kind as to block our username as well.

Thank you.

The better way is to block '1968mooney' and then you will no longer see any of his postings.

Good Sam Care Team wrote:
AllegroD,

The policy was reviewed with the OP in a private setting. I will reach out to Ms. Wantabe to have her take a look at your questions.

Thanks,
Tom

Any response on the the review of release of PII?

1968mooney wrote:

AllegroD wrote:
For those of us that it is not moot, this is important.

I owe you an appoligy. I did not realize your "importance" when we were conversing over on the CW Accessories Forum. You will never see another response from me to one of your posts. You are "blocked".

You probably won't get this but I will say it anyway. It is not "I" that is important. It is the issues, to which you attacked the poster", that are important. Just because it is not important to one one or some members does not mean it is is unimportant to others. Your ascribing importance or unimportant to a post may not be accurate to how others feel. To denigrate others for their post is a poor way to discuss. You even through in snark above to attack me, in an attempt to make me a bad person as a diversion from the real issue.

I truly hope you do not block me or others for expressing our displeasure at your dismissal of our opinions.

Apology accepted. Thanks.

BTW, I have read the OPs topics and think them valid. Some, as this one, are important to me and as I see, others, as well.

1968mooney wrote:

AllegroD wrote:
For those of us that it is not moot, this is important.

I owe you an appoligy. I did not realize your "importance" when we were conversing over on the CW Accessories Forum. You will never see another response from me to one of your posts. You are "blocked".

Would you please be so kind as to block our username as well.

Thank you.

AllegroD wrote:
For those of us that it is not moot, this is important.

I owe you an appoligy. I did not realize your "importance" when we were conversing over on the CW Accessories Forum. You will never see another response from me to one of your posts. You are "blocked".

kalynzoo wrote:
Perhaps I am wrong to interject in this conversation. I truly do not wish to be disrespectful to anyone's opinion. But I, and perhaps others, find the topic moot, as our privacy has been so compromised by the phone companies, catalog companies, and everyone we seem to come in contact with that my concern on this issue is rather minor.
JMHO

There's no reason why you should accept that your privacy has been compromised except for your lack of not being diligent and not being on top of it. We haven't had any phone calls, catalogs, credit card offerings or ANY junk mail sent to us in 18 years now. It's very easy and possible not to get your information out there.

The issue here is that folks don't want to have the issue in the first place!

For those of us that it is not moot, this is important.