Vanguard,

Oh, so YOU decided to mislead with your arguments.

Did/do I now ? Lets see :

You: session cookies - as part of the "functional cookie" group - are
excluded from the GDPR requirements.

They are excluded from the GDPR *because* ...

You: They are not /excluded/, but as (long as) those cookies
do not contain PII the GDPR has nothing to say about them.

.... they do not contain PII. The "exclusion" is only given to take the wind
from under the "but we don't know what it applies to and what not" whining
companies wings.

You: isn't even about cookies
Can't make a decision, can you.

:-) Lol. You really are trying to grasp (at) straws, arn't you ?
*Claiming* that someone is wrong is easy enough. The remarkable (yeah,
right) thing is that people than, just like you did, go to a full stop, not
even bothering to try to support their "you're wrong" claims. :-p

But, I'll give you a chance : How does "(it) isn't not even about cookies"
contradict the the other two ? Up for it ?

I didn't think so.

The clarification of "functional cookes" vs "tracking cookies" was only
added later, to help the more "morinic" businesses/website owners
understand
what they could and couldn't do.

Verification from you the GPDR was not set in stone. Thank you.

Ah yes. I can see how the word "added" in the above quote must have
confused you. But, if you parse the *full* sentence you might notice that
that "added" is about "The clarification", not the Law itself.

Than again, I get the (rather strong) feeling you already knew that, but
where trying to find something, /anything/ you could complain about ...

No kid,

Your insult isn't working.

I don't get it, how is calling a kid a kid insulting ? If you do not want
to be referred to as a kid than stop behaving like one.

So, post a URL where are you online credentials as a contract lawyer.

Ah yes, "if you cannot prove you are talking with authority than you cannot
tell me I'm wrong" joker card.

Alas kiddo, I can tell you wrong on the same authority that you think you
may act as if what you post is right.

The whole difference between you and me is that I can-and-have underbuild my
position and taken yours down, while you on the other hand have done nothing
of the sort. Not underbuilding your own "That's what "consent" is all
about. *YOU* have to consent to allowing them to create a cookie for your
web session" claim, not responded to anything thats wrong with the
consent-cookie method, heck, not even acknowledged it, nothing, nada, zip,
zich.

All you have been doing is to try, one way or the other, get outof the pit
you dug for yourself.

There is as old saying : "Its not the mistake which defines a person, but
how he deals with it".

You made a simple mistake of not knowing much of anything about the GDPR,
but acting as if you did. You had the bad luck of encountering me, an
European who has followed the GDPR a bit , simply because he's affected by
it, and as such has picked up a few things about it.

Your second, *and by far biggest mistake* was not allowing yourself to
acknowledge that you perhaps might have been wrong. The rest just trails
off of that.

I think its a good idea to end our conversation here. You've shown you've
got nothing that I can learn from. Other than perhaps a bad attitude. :-)

Goodbye.
Rudy Wieser