Reminds me of the time the EU Commission itself was caught violating laws in the course of their pro-Chat Control ad campaign,<p><a href="https://noyb.eu/en/noyb-files-complaint-against-eu-commission-over-targeted-chat-control-ads" rel="nofollow">https://noyb.eu/en/noyb-files-complaint-against-eu-commissio...</a> (<i>"noyb files complaint against EU Commission over targeted chat control ads"</i>)<p>> <i>"In September 2023, the Commission used unlawful micro-targeting on Twitter (X) to promote its heavily criticized chat control regulation... This move both undermined the established democratic procedures between EU institutions and violated the EU GDPR."</i>
Is there a source that isn't a gif on reddit?
As ones of the comments says, you can go to <a href="https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/14680-Data-retention-by-service-providers-for-criminal-proceedings-impact-assessment/feedback_en?p_id=19693" rel="nofollow">https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-sa...</a> and search by "invasive" to see that several responses are the same, some identified as police.<p>But I don't think that's evidence of a botnet. Seems more likely a conventional letter writing campaign where people are invited to paste the same response. Could easily be within the police,which is dubious, but individual police officers may have the right to respond as individuals.
Yeah, I saw this comment [0] and I'm very confused as to how one concludes there is a botnet in play, let alone by a public institution. Most likely it is an employee in the police, which is totally fine. They're not forbidden to express opinion.<p>0 - <a href="https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/14680-Data-retention-by-service-providers-for-criminal-proceedings-impact-assessment/F3567054_en" rel="nofollow">https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-sa...</a>
It doesn’t really matter whether it’s a botnet or a coordinated campaign by police officers. The fact that police is interfering with the political process is somewhere between a breakdown of the rule of law, and an attempted coup.<p>Voting isn’t going to fix stuff like this, that’s for sure.
The "Organization" field is provided by the submitter themselves. It is <i>not</i> based on an IP (geo)location feed. I have deduced this based on a comment where the organization field is "federal police" in lower case [1].<p>There are a total of 19 comments with the same content. The claim that they were submitted by a botnet is easily dismissable. Especially given the fact that a "botnet"/troll farm would likely use different IP addresses, names, organizations and comment content ...<p>What remains open is whether these 19 commenters were instructed to submit these comments or if they did so on their own. If they did do it on their own, was it in their free time? If so, is it okay to do so under their employers name?<p>[1] <a href="https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/14680-Data-retention-by-service-providers-for-criminal-proceedings-impact-assessment/F3566978_en" rel="nofollow">https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-sa...</a>
EUSSR
The proof in the post is pretty dubious.
Another thing that will not be properly investigated, as usual.