3 ms·

From looking at the screenshot behind the dialogue box there is a link to "verify the account", which looks to me like an initial fix. My point being that bein

From looking at the screenshot behind the dialogue box there is a link to "verify the account", which looks to me like an initial fix. My point being that being told that I cannot run ads, doesn't mean that Facebook doesn't like my ad campaign. There are many reasons I would think why an ad account is disabled, to simply assume this was because FB didn't like your campaign despite having no rejected ads doesn't seem very smart and is a big call. If Signal had followed through to try resolve the problem and had actual evidence that it was due to the nature of the campaign, then they should be showing that, not conjecture.

toast0 6y ago
It's super unclear. Verify the account should fix the 'Ad account status warning', since it's in that section. But if that would fix the ad account disabled, you'd expect to see it mentioned in the modal's text. And why is it an ad account status warning if you need to fix it to proceed. I mean maybe Signal overreacted if the text in the big box didn't mean what it said. But I don't expect them to be experts at running advertising campaigns; and I kind of expect advertising campaigns to be easier; at least if it's supposed to be self-serve. If you're expected to work with an ad rep, sure it can be clunky and hard; train the reps, sell to Fortune 500, cash the big checks, whatever. Maybe the story here should be bad FB UI drives away advertiser who thought they were banned.
- NoPicklez 6y ago
  That's my point, if it's not clear exactly why the account is disabled, it is irresponsible of Signal to create a blog post blaming it on Facebook simply not liking their ad campaign. This isn't a couple of Tweets sent out harmlessly by Signal during troubleshooting, they wrote an official blog post about it. Signal should have verified the problem first, then ran the ads campaign and posted a legitimate response from Facebook regarding why. The situation makes Signal look nefarious.
  - toast0 6y ago
    When Facebook says you can't use your account to run ads, how do you verify the problem? Does that channel actually work? How would one know they could use that channel? Since there's no contact link or phone number on the thing that says you can't run ads. I guess the moral of the story is FB doesn't care about user experience for users or advertisers.
  - JumpCrisscross 6y ago
    > if it's not clear exactly why the account is disabled, it is irresponsible of Signal to create a blog post blaming it on Facebook This is called the benefit of doubt, and it’s something you lose when your company and culture gain a reputation of chronically lying to the public, regulators and legislature.
    - NoPicklez 6y ago
      I would be cautious of writing blog posts and sharing tweets based on the benefit of doubt, when the information you provide to substantiate your argument shows signs of going against your claim. Facebook would likely reject thousands of ad campaigns as they would go through an automated clearance platform. Therefore why are there no rejected ads at all in the screenshots provided by Signal. Without that information I would have expected Signal to have dug deeper to resolve the issue to find the reason why before launching a public claim. As I said in my earlier post, it's not the benefit of doubt but conjecture.
      - JumpCrisscross 6y ago
        > would be cautious of writing blog posts and sharing tweets based on the benefit of doubt Facebook has lost the benefit of doubt. That means when one is in doubt, Facebook isn't given the benefit of assumed good faith. > when the information you provide to substantiate your argument shows signs of going against your claim Reading this as someone who doesn't use Facebook Ads on a day to day basis, I don't see anything in their evidence that goes against their claim. It's only the fact that multiple credible accounts on HN have corroborated that claim of Facebook's that leads me to trust it. At the very least, the messaging therein sows doubt. You've repeated similar comments across this thread. It might make sense to consider where the other side is coming from. This may come down to nothing more than horrible UI at a predictably sensitive time combined with Facebook's arrogance in believing they can skate by with minimal support costs and Signal's trigger finger on its Twitter account.

toast0 6y ago

It's super unclear. Verify the account should fix the 'Ad account status warning', since it's in that section. But if that would fix the ad account disabled, you'd expect to see it mentioned in the modal's text. And why is it an ad account status warning if you need to fix it to proceed. I mean maybe Signal overreacted if the text in the big box didn't mean what it said. But I don't expect them to be experts at running advertising campaigns; and I kind of expect advertising campaigns to be easier; at least if it's supposed to be self-serve. If you're expected to work with an ad rep, sure it can be clunky and hard; train the reps, sell to Fortune 500, cash the big checks, whatever. Maybe the story here should be bad FB UI drives away advertiser who thought they were banned.

NoPicklez 6y ago
That's my point, if it's not clear exactly why the account is disabled, it is irresponsible of Signal to create a blog post blaming it on Facebook simply not liking their ad campaign. This isn't a couple of Tweets sent out harmlessly by Signal during troubleshooting, they wrote an official blog post about it. Signal should have verified the problem first, then ran the ads campaign and posted a legitimate response from Facebook regarding why. The situation makes Signal look nefarious.
- toast0 6y ago
  When Facebook says you can't use your account to run ads, how do you verify the problem? Does that channel actually work? How would one know they could use that channel? Since there's no contact link or phone number on the thing that says you can't run ads. I guess the moral of the story is FB doesn't care about user experience for users or advertisers.
- JumpCrisscross 6y ago
  > if it's not clear exactly why the account is disabled, it is irresponsible of Signal to create a blog post blaming it on Facebook This is called the benefit of doubt, and it’s something you lose when your company and culture gain a reputation of chronically lying to the public, regulators and legislature.
  - NoPicklez 6y ago
    I would be cautious of writing blog posts and sharing tweets based on the benefit of doubt, when the information you provide to substantiate your argument shows signs of going against your claim. Facebook would likely reject thousands of ad campaigns as they would go through an automated clearance platform. Therefore why are there no rejected ads at all in the screenshots provided by Signal. Without that information I would have expected Signal to have dug deeper to resolve the issue to find the reason why before launching a public claim. As I said in my earlier post, it's not the benefit of doubt but conjecture.
    - JumpCrisscross 6y ago
      > would be cautious of writing blog posts and sharing tweets based on the benefit of doubt Facebook has lost the benefit of doubt. That means when one is in doubt, Facebook isn't given the benefit of assumed good faith. > when the information you provide to substantiate your argument shows signs of going against your claim Reading this as someone who doesn't use Facebook Ads on a day to day basis, I don't see anything in their evidence that goes against their claim. It's only the fact that multiple credible accounts on HN have corroborated that claim of Facebook's that leads me to trust it. At the very least, the messaging therein sows doubt. You've repeated similar comments across this thread. It might make sense to consider where the other side is coming from. This may come down to nothing more than horrible UI at a predictably sensitive time combined with Facebook's arrogance in believing they can skate by with minimal support costs and Signal's trigger finger on its Twitter account.