The TD doesn’t have to offer this as an option. I know I don’t.
If you don’t want to pay the dollar, then you don’t get to play in the event.
But the point is moot because the OP is in the UK. 
1 Like
$1 option doesn’t apply as I’m in the UK
In order for players to be credited for their activity against this “Suppressed Player”, they must be included in the results submitted to the IFPA (if our rules dictate that they are eligible to be included).
The only way you can ‘legally’ remove them from the results is if:
-
They don’t participate in at least 50% of the qualifying portion of the event.
-
If the event is in the US/Canada, the TD has offered a player-opt-out for the $1 endorsement fee, and the player has opted to not be included.
Outside of that they have to be.
Your option #3 is the ‘best path’. We would ask you send the request to Suppress the player along with copying in that player on the email. I would then respond with acknowledging the suppression. If you were trying to suppress someone that didn’t want to be suppressed, surely I would get an email from that player shortly thereafter letting me know you were up to no good 
2 Likes
I guess you just saved me 144 emails
1 Like
I figure it would take about an hour for everyone in the top 100 to magically have a request from someone else to suppress them
This seems as good a place as any to just mention that us Euro citizens will soon fall under GDPR data protection.
Just checking you IFPA guys at least have this on your radar!? I’d suggest it probably impacts how you should treat suppressed players ‘behind the scenes’.
Getting into the technicalities, one way to handle it might be to securely hash the suppressed players name. That would anonymise the data, but still allow the player to be uniquely identified.
We could probably use some help in this area.
As a website that tracks existing results of tournaments, the only information we have on any player is that their name is included on the standings of an existing event. For suppressed players their name is of course hidden from public display.
There’s no other data to be found that’s attached to that player even on the back end of our system.
Unless they volunteer that data to us via a player profile update.
HELP HELP I’M BEING SUPPRESSED </python>
7 Likes
I’m pretty sure that simply hiding the data from view is insufficient under the GDPR, due to the “Right to Erasure”. There are a few exceptions (accounting records, legal discovery, scientific/historical archiving, and likely others), but by and large data has to be deleted, not simply darkened. This probably means that there needs to be some level “beyond” suppressed, where anything that reaches beyond what you might get away with calling “historical archiving” actually gets deleted.
IANALTINLA
This may be an overly simplistic solution and assumes some of the IFPA database architecture, but starting with a player record identified by a unique primary key (let’s assume IFPA number) then any attached records (say, tournament results) should then be associated to that PK only and no other tables should contain personally-identifiable information.
A player to be suppressed under this scheme can be handled by a flag on the user record, and a player wishing erasure can simply have all personally identifiable columns blanked without affecting any historical data associations like tournament results or rankings.
You’d then update all frontend code to handle the possibility of a player record with no name/country/whatever. Ranking and rating would probably still work. There’s also the upshot of letting said player continue to play by providing his/her IFPA number at tournaments, with the knowledge that any personally-identifiable information is not associated in IFPA’s database.
So there’s a spitball idea of how to handle it.
ye gods I wish GDPR were this easy.
PII as we use the term in the US doesn’t go anywhere near covering all the data the GDPR expects you to properly handle. Under the GDPR, personal data is defined as “any information relating to an identified or identifiable natural person.”
The gist is you can’t just strip the identifiers from the information, you actually have to discard the information if you no longer have an authorized or legally required use for it.
How will online newspapers handle this when they go to report news that includes the names of people?
If Raymond Davidson wins the World Championship, can we not report that on our site by displaying the results . . . but the Chicago Tribune can report those results on their website?
I feel bad for anyone that doesn’t wish to be included in the box scores of sporting events if this is the way it shakes out.
My understanding is that example would fall under the historical archiving use, but that’s probably a question for your legal advisor.
Maybe GDPR can kill the IFPA altogether and I can end up being a better husband and father out of the deal 
(My wife is investigating this possibility with great hope)
4 Likes
3 further options
4 Any player not wanting their data captured enters under a pseudonym. Creating a new pseudonym for every comp they enter. (It’ll certainly show a growth in number of unique players for the IFPA)
5 Have a disclaimer in the published rules and regs for every comp stating something along the lines of " The results of this comp WILL be submitted to the IFPA and results recorded. For further details visit the IFPA website."
6 Anyone asking to have their results removed should be told to STFU 
Points wise, this is no different than just not submitting that player. After all, a player needs to play in 5 matches (and contribute $5) before adding anything to the points.
That is true for North America only I believe.
The contribution part, yes, is for North America, but the 5 tournaments before that player contributes is a worldwide rule as dictated when it was introduced in 2015:
“Only Rated players will be included in the player count with respect to base value. A player becomes Rated after participating in 5 events lifetime. These unrated players will still be able to earn WPPR points, and impact the distribution of the points from a tournament, but they simply won’t be counted towards the 1/2 point per player count for the base. This is to limit the impact of organizers trying to sign up random participants, or worse, list fake names of players that did not participate as a way to artificially increase the base value of the tournament.”
2 Likes
This seems like an impossible nightmare in a world where nearly everything is digital and online.
How strict is the clause “identified or identifiable natural person?” If there was a generic user record with absolutely zero personal information on it, is that ok? If someone concludes a 30-hour deep dive into the past 4 years of tournament results and cross references tournaments with scrubbed results and finds only one person that fits all the possibilities, is that considered an identifiable natural person?
Frankly, I don’t like the idea of having to delete the data at all. If a person doesn’t want to be listed, then that’s fine. Forcing IFPA to pretend the person never played in the first place seems wrong. There should be no problem with keeping a tournament result.