After reading so many similar stories, here is what Google/Apple/etc should, in my opinion. If an automated process blocks/bans/rejects something, then the mes

After reading so many similar stories, here is what Google/Apple/etc should, in my opinion. If an automated process blocks/bans/rejects something, then the message to the developer MUST say "Our automated scanner discovered..." Any time something is blocked/banned/rejected, the message to the developer MUST explain exactly why. In the case of this article: "Your update was rejected due to a link to a third party payment system. This violates section N of our terms. The link we detected was <insert link here>." There should be two kinds of appeal processes. Automated, and manual. You should be able to appeal or resubmit to the automated process as often as you need to. The manual process should involve real time communication between the developer and an appeal agent. Via phone or chat. To prevent the system from being overloaded, only allow developers a few free appeals, then start charging a fee. Developer accounts should only be fully banned after multiple manual appeals and the appeals agent determining that the developer is operating in bad faith. Automated processes should never be able to fully ban an account. It must involve a real person. Full bans also must include a detailed email to the developer explaining exactly why they have been banned. The biggest, and most important, change these companies really need to make is including exactly WHY something happened. No more of these general "you violated our TOS" without any explanation of how the TOS was violated messages.