This is just total economically illiterate nonsense. The value of an active Facebook user for advertising is about $25/year in revenue, $6/year in profit. Faceb

This is just total economically illiterate nonsense. The value of an active Facebook user for advertising is about $25/year in revenue, $6/year in profit. Facebook spent $2 billion on Oculus. They've sold a couple of million headsets. Let's say that they're all still active users. That's $1k per user. Do you see how utterly implausible your theory about the VR just being a vehicle to drive revenue is? It's not that the numbers don't add up. It's that the numbers are off by orders of magnitude. And oh, just by buying a Quest 2 and a few games, I'm already a far bigger source of revenue to Facebook than an average user of the social network part. The idea that they'd be knee-capping the whole ecosystem by intentionally disabling paying customers just to make pennies more on ads is ludicrous. I think it's basically guaranteed that the explanation from my original post stands: their anti-abuse team did not consider this use case when building their bulk account models, but will obviously consider it in the future. I'd happily make a bet that my account will not get "banned" in the next year, despite not having any Facebook friends or Facebook social network activity.