February 3, 2026
Spam filter ate my rights
I made 20 GDPR deletion requests. 12 were ignored
Readers rage over “spam filter loophole” as GDPR gets roasted and regulators go silent
TLDR: An EU user says 12 of 20 GDPR deletion requests were ignored, highlighting weak enforcement and a “spam filter” loophole. Commenters split between calling GDPR a sham, demanding a California-style fix, and warning steep fines could crush startups—raising real doubts about how easily your data actually gets erased
An EU user claims they filed 20 “delete my data” requests under GDPR—the European privacy law that lets you ask companies to erase your info—and 12 were ignored. The comments section didn’t hold back. One top quip calls GDPR “privacy theater”, arguing it’s all vibes, no consequences. Another camp says the real villain is enforcement: OP says a Czech regulator never acted, and commenters dunked on the cross-border handoff where one agency shrugs and another ghosts. The meme of the day: “Spam filter ate my rights.” A highlighted loophole says if a company’s inbox quietly trashes your request, it basically “never happened.”
Cue the feuds. Some users side-eye the choice to spotlight Prusa 3D (“plenty of worse offenders”), while reformers push, “Copy California.” They say the CCPA model—California’s privacy law—works better with clearer paths and faster action. Then the startup defenders show up swinging: proposals for automatic fines (like €5,000 per violation) get blasted as a “tech-killing” nuke on small firms. Meanwhile, pragmatists hunt for that elusive “how to avoid getting ignored” playbook someone swears they saw last year. The vibe: frustration, sarcasm, and open season on regulators—with a side of popcorn for the Prusa drama
Key Points
- •An EU citizen submitted about 20 GDPR deletion/information requests in the past year: 2 were immediately fulfilled, 6 after complaints, and 12 remain unresolved.
- •Prusa 3D is cited as an example where the company stated data deletion but the author reports the data remained accessible, including an email date discrepancy.
- •A complaint to the Czech data protection office in 2024 (case UOOUX00H3395) reportedly received no processing or response.
- •The German data protection office replied after about a month, stating they could only contact the Czech office, underscoring national-level enforcement limits.
- •Several organizations that eventually complied claimed they had not received the original requests, highlighting issues such as spam filters and proof-of-receipt burdens.