If you are new to the site and want to participate in the project, we are glad to have you here! This section is for questions that beginners have about annotating, reviewing documents, how the site works, and more.
1 Like
Hello!
While browsing around to look for common mistakes sites make (either intentionally or unintentionally), I found one thing I’m a bit confused by – the bad point of “The service refers users to external documents for more information.”
My site uses Cloudflare as a CDN, and they have their own privacy policy so I provide a link to their privacy policy so users can have full transparency. Similarly, I embed videos from Vimeo (using their DNT header to avoid as much as tracking as possible), but I still want folks to know this so I link to the Vimeo privacy policy too.
Based on “the service refers users to external documents for more information” being a bad point, I’m not really sure what the appropriate solution is here. I don’t really want to remove links to the external documents because that just hides the issue, and I’m not sure that copying their terms into mine is helpful either – and arguably not legal.
Is there an obvious solution here, or am I just overthinking this?
Thank you!
Paul
That’s a good question, thank you for bringing the issue up. I can see how this can be misleading. What are your thoughts if we changed the bad case of "The service refers users to external documents for more information” to “This service refers users to external documents for more information regarding their own terms”? And perhaps adding a positive case of “This service links to external documents of third-party sites they use”?
1 Like
If I understand you correctly this makes much more sense. I’m reading it as follows:
“This service refers users to external documents for more information regarding their own terms”
I guess this would be “we have lots of terms and conditions, and they are linked here, here, and here” – that seems bad, because you can end up with a spiderweb of links to read, as opposed to one straightforward document.
And perhaps adding a positive case of “This service links to external documents of third-party sites they use”?
Yes, that sounds sensible to me – I think it encourages transparency, and gives site users the chance to understand everything that is being presented.
Sorry to keep bombarding you with beginner questions, but my site’s privacy policy has now been reviewed (thanks, @justin! 
), and received a bad point: “This service uses third-party cookies for statistics.” (Point 9730 (ToS;DR Phoenix))
I’m not contesting that, because as the privacy policy says “our CDN is Cloudflare, and they may include cookies with our pages to provide a better service”. However, does this mean then that no site using Cloudflare, Akamai or a similar content delivery network can receive an A grade?
1 Like
Misinformation. my bad
AFAIK one or two bad ratings (
) do not disqualify a service for the A rating, it’s the blocker rating which disqualifies (
) the service. But to your point, It was the only fitting point to me, as I have scrolled the case list for at least 5 minutes but haven’t found a proper case for it.
(Maybe we should create a new case "This service requires third-party cookies to work/performance reasons, etc.)
Edit: Text above is wrong
1 Like
If there is an update on a service's policies, what to do?
Just upload ("Overwrite") another Doc?
Or is there something more to that?
I was recently browsing the [Spotify Privacy Policy](https://www.spotify.com/us/legal/privacy-policy/) and comparing it to the [ToS;DR version](https://edit.tosdr.org/documents/66) and I realised it's outdated.
1 Like
Hi Dr_Jeff,
Good question! It’s supposed to be automatic, but it’s not running right now. I’ll try to find time to fix it during the next weeks.
2 Likes
Thanks mate. Please notify when fixed so I could get to work at it. 
1 Like
Btw how is a Point deleted?
(Shamefully, I got a lot of errors on an annotation process and feel bad for literally filling the system with tons of updates and then some. 
)
(I reassure you it hasn’t been, nor ever would be, my intention to spam.)
1 Like
Contributors can review a point again and set its status to declined.
Then it won’t show up in the annotation view again, making it kinda deleted for history purposes.
3 Likes
Is there a video of someone walking through a privacy policy and annotating stuff? I see some documents only have a few sentences annotated, when I tried annotating myself it felt like every sentence is important.
Perhaps a guide somewhere that I’m missing?