3 ms·

The stories like this can be heard every now and then and I think we all agree that Google's customer support could be vastly improved. But taking a step back,

by jacekm 7y ago

The stories like this can be heard every now and then and I think we all agree that Google's customer support could be vastly improved. But taking a step back, I am finding this particular story slightly suspicious as the site seems a little bit weird to me. The domain is only 4-months old and the entire site is almost empty, it consists of just a couple "reviews" of mostly VPNs and password managers and the author himself admits to participating in referral schemes. And despite advocating privacy he uses google analytics and one more tracking system on his site. The story he published is the only post that is not a review. If I had so much experience as he claims I would have better places to post my rant rather than at a newly created website. I can imagine a scheme where one posts a sensational story just to drive the traffic to their affiliate links-based business. Now, having said all of this - I do NOT accuse author of anything, their story may be true, it actually sounds plausible. I'd just like to remind you of another google ban story [1] that made headlines some time ago and was later debunked by Google. [1] https://www.reddit.com/r/tifu/comments/8kvias/tifu_by_getting_google_to_ban_our_entire_company/ https://www.reddit.com/r/tifu/comments/8kvias/tifu_by_gettin...

lonelappde 7y ago
What was the debunking?
- asdfasgasdgasdg 7y ago
  It's linked in the top comment. https://www.reddit.com/r/google/comments/8l231x/google_banned_an_entire_company_gsuite_accounts/dzf8cuq/ https://www.reddit.com/r/google/comments/8l231x/google_banne... Not so much a debunking as an absolute denial that the circumstances described transpired. It's difficult to prove a negative.
  - jacekm 7y ago
    > Not so much a debunking Yup, 'debunk' is probably not the best word here. English is not my native tongue, I apologize. What I meant is that a different opinion was presented by Google. But you're right - it's still one word vs another, it's impossible to determine who is telling the truth.
    - asdfasgasdgasdg 7y ago
      I don't think it was a particularly bad choice of words. The circumstances described were pretty outlandish. I was just trying to add some clarity. You're doing pretty good for a non-native speaker. Your English is much better than my nonexistent Polish.
6gvONxR4sf7o 7y ago
When these things happen, the pattern is always 1) shit happens, 2) company is unhelpful in resolving 3) victim writes it up and it ends up getting some publicity (e.g. front page of HN) 4) company says they're sorry and fixes the problem. As I read OP, I wondered what I'd do. I guess I'd have to write it up on my mostly empty, pretty much dead blog. It would look weird and out of place on my mostly empty blog. Then I look to the comments and see you calling them out for doing what I was just thinking I'd have to do.
- pvg 7y ago
  That's not the pattern 'always'. There are lots of such cases where the writer's account turns out to be inaccurate in key details. Sometimes inadvertently, sometimes less so. And companies don't always swoop in to apologize and resolve the issue.
burnaway 7y ago
Let me also add that "the author wishes to remain anonymous" is a usual BS for 100% affiliate-scheme funded 'we care about your privacy and here are the best tools' sites, while also claiming total independence and honest editorial process. Sure. How they don't lose all credibility instantly when it's not clear who runs it is hard for me to gauge - I can only go back to "if it's on the top SERP on Google/DuckDuckGo or main page of HN it must be valid".

by jacekm 7y ago

lonelappde 7y ago

What was the debunking?

asdfasgasdgasdg 7y ago
It's linked in the top comment. https://www.reddit.com/r/google/comments/8l231x/google_banned_an_entire_company_gsuite_accounts/dzf8cuq/ https://www.reddit.com/r/google/comments/8l231x/google_banne... Not so much a debunking as an absolute denial that the circumstances described transpired. It's difficult to prove a negative.
- jacekm 7y ago
  > Not so much a debunking Yup, 'debunk' is probably not the best word here. English is not my native tongue, I apologize. What I meant is that a different opinion was presented by Google. But you're right - it's still one word vs another, it's impossible to determine who is telling the truth.
  - asdfasgasdgasdg 7y ago
    I don't think it was a particularly bad choice of words. The circumstances described were pretty outlandish. I was just trying to add some clarity. You're doing pretty good for a non-native speaker. Your English is much better than my nonexistent Polish.

6gvONxR4sf7o 7y ago

When these things happen, the pattern is always 1) shit happens, 2) company is unhelpful in resolving 3) victim writes it up and it ends up getting some publicity (e.g. front page of HN) 4) company says they're sorry and fixes the problem. As I read OP, I wondered what I'd do. I guess I'd have to write it up on my mostly empty, pretty much dead blog. It would look weird and out of place on my mostly empty blog. Then I look to the comments and see you calling them out for doing what I was just thinking I'd have to do.

pvg 7y ago
That's not the pattern 'always'. There are lots of such cases where the writer's account turns out to be inaccurate in key details. Sometimes inadvertently, sometimes less so. And companies don't always swoop in to apologize and resolve the issue.

burnaway 7y ago

Let me also add that "the author wishes to remain anonymous" is a usual BS for 100% affiliate-scheme funded 'we care about your privacy and here are the best tools' sites, while also claiming total independence and honest editorial process. Sure. How they don't lose all credibility instantly when it's not clear who runs it is hard for me to gauge - I can only go back to "if it's on the top SERP on Google/DuckDuckGo or main page of HN it must be valid".