A user-to-user service is exempt if the functionalities of the service are limited, such that users are able to communicate by means of the service only in the following ways—
(a) posting comments or reviews relating to content produced and published by the provider of the service (or by a person acting on behalf of the provider of the service);
(b) sharing such comments or reviews on a different internet service;
(c) expressing a view on such comments or reviews, or on content mentioned in sub-paragraph (a), by means of—
(i) applying a “like” or “dislike” button or other button of that nature,
(ii) applying an emoji or symbol of any kind,
(iii) engaging in yes/no voting, or
(iv) rating or scoring the content (or the comments or reviews) in any way (including giving star or numerical ratings)
How many places can claim that their comment section can only be used for such comments, and not for any other content? You would need to manually screen everything that was submitted to ensure it didn't stray off-topic.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/draft-online-safe...
The short of it: You are obliged to support processes to keep people safe, protect vulnerable users, provide complaint processes... and failure to take any of this seriously can have serious financial and legal penalties.
The current draft does not differentiate between a hobby static website with comments about Raspberry Pis, and harmful content via Facebook... the penalties are equal if this is a hobby effort or if you're Facebook.
It's not a great piece of law even in draft form.
PS: @dang this might apply to HN as the definition of a site with links to the UK is merely "a significant number of UK users" without clarity on what defines significant.