I didn't really understand the question so I am struggling to summarise it, but I think it is "how do small sites comply"?

Ofcom:

1) we will approach things in a proportionate manner

2) we have published some practical guidance, and a digital service (based on interviewing 50 "smaller" service providers (but I don't know how small "smaller" might be)

3) we are trying to be clear about the minimum set of actions

Yes, this feels like a lot of work, but hopefully it will become easier over time (i.e. each admin doing this only has to do it for the first time once).

Strong "I have a question, but here's a comment first" energy here :)

Rachel: we are not going to change the underlying rules on this call with Ofcom. But it might be worth exploring how that might be done, in terms of writing to the Ofcom board, or to the Secretary of State.

Ofcom seems confident that one can run a small service with a minimum amount of administrative burden!

"If you are looking for a definition of what 'significant number of UK users' is, you won't find that in our guidance".

This particular point really does seem to be a stumbling block for some small services.

Hmmm... I wonder if a site can say "if you cannot read and understand these terms, I'm afraid that you are not permitted to use this site".

Terms should be written "to a reading comprehension of the youngest person permitted to use the services".

This is... odd.

If a site genuinely has no age restriction, because it has no need for it, it means it needs to make its terms comprehensible to, say, six or seven year olds?!

Ofcom talking about complaints reporting.

It appears to be comfortable with just an email address, which is welcome.

Ofcom implictly making the point that it is for site admins in their content moderation role to make decisions about illegality.

As someone who has done this and who has done a little bit of reading about the law, this can be really quite tricky to get right.

So I suspect most sites will craft their terms, and their practices, and err on the side of caution.

Perhaps reflecting some of the challenges in understanding the OSA, and also some of the technologies, there are some rather odd comments in the chat!

Specifically about fediverse services...

The same, single person can be the accountable individual and the senior governance body, because, well, it's only them.

An interesting comment in the chat about "Ofcom jargon".

Yes, it's tricky.

I am chuckling slightly to myself that the live chat is, in itself, a user-to-user service.

Ofcom is going over the risk assessment process.

I'm not tooting all of this, because this is not new and I suspect most of you reading this will already be familiar with it.

"We are interested in places where users can share and interact".

Ofcom has called out the "comments and reviews" exception, but not the nuance of the interplay of Schedule 1 and s55. Fingers crossed for this later.

It is a little hard to reconcile some of what had been said today with some of what was said last week.

For instance, last week, one of the presenters was really quite gung-ho on enforcement (in the context of Part 5), and that, once a site hears from Ofcom, it is too late, as enforcement is under way.

That's quite a different message - but perhaps Ofcom is approaching Parts 3 and 5 separately.

Ofcom is trying to provide useful resources, but "this is a journey".

They are considering what else they can do.

The recognise that it is not "feasible" for everyone to read many hundreds of pages of guidance.

(Hint hint: onlinesafetyact.co.uk is all CC-licensed, and I'd be open to talking with Ofcom about taking it over if they could make good use of it...)

Ofcom's preference is always to work with services to secure voluntary compliance.

It will be focussing its powers on "egregious" services.

If someone is working constructively, that will always be recognised.

Ofcom says that it does not expect the same of small sites and services, as it does of larger sites/services.

It is a principles-based regulator, which as pros and cons. It gives flexibility, but can leave people feeling lost.