This has to be a mistake. Whenever you outright ban someone with the minimalist interaction the way Google does it, you open yourself up to accusations of all k

This has to be a mistake. Whenever you outright ban someone with the minimalist interaction the way Google does it, you open yourself up to accusations of all kinds of suppression. You allow the person who being banned to define why they were in the absence of any message from Google. Now, it's all well and good to go and ban white supremacists, KKK members, hate groups, etc. It's monumental stupidity to ban an academic with proper credentials. It's even in effective. Even in the most extreme case, his careful scholarly screeds about statistics isn't exactly going to make frothing hordes of racists; not near the same way as banning him without cause, reason or explanation. It's silly. His twitter shows him writing article headlines in provocative ways (for an academic) but, nothing even close to supporting a group like the KKK but, in this atmosphere and with Google trying mobilize probably thousands of young, probably uneducated (cheap) people review accounts for deletion, it was probably someone who saw one of these procative headlines and marked this blog for deletion without looking or realizing who this person was. Strangely, the same thing happen to Jordan Peterson not even a month ago. Another academic but, with far more controversial views but, far more outcry came of it and Google reversed it in a few days. All of this is embarassing for Google who for years has invested in very light touch style of customer service and it's coming back to bite them in the ass.