11 ms·
Google Plus Deleting Accounts En Masse: No Clear Answers
- nolite 15y agoshame..no better than facebook..
- tshtf 15y agoI use Google for everything from Google Apps to Google Voice. Given this recent behaviour of Google, I'm doing something wrong. Over the next few weeks, I plan to do the following: 1) Transition my gmail account over to a domain I own. I'll email everyone I know, and change all my known addresses. Thankfully, Google lets me connect via IMAP to retrieve all of this. 2) Move my Google Voice number to my VOIP carrier. The directions are here: http://kevinpaffrath.com/2011/06/22/port-number-google-voice-to-provider http://kevinpaffrath.com/2011/06/22/port-number-google-voice... Life is too short to worry about when Google will delete your account for silly reasons.
- unshift 15y ago> Life is too short to worry about when Google will delete your account for silly reasons. which is exactly what you're doing...
- danilocampos 15y agoHe won't be after he migrates his stuff. That strikes me as entirely reasonable precautionary action.
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- tectonic 15y agoIs there a good alternative to Google Voice? I want an online voicemail service and call forwarding for when I travel.
- rorrr 15y agovoxox.com - free youmail.com - free? phonebooth.com - $20/month ringcentral.com - $20/month line2.com - $10-15/month 3jam.com - $5/month
- kbd 15y agoI use Youmail for voicemail and have been really happy with it. I pay the $20/year or whatever it is for a paid account.
- saurik 15y agoAlso, the paid transcription they have is much much MUCH better than what is offered by Google Voice... (disclaimer: I actually use PhoneTag still, not YouMail, but both PhoneTag and YouMail have assured me that YouMail's new transcription feature uses PhoneTag's backend, due to their partnership to provide this service).
- djeikyb 15y agoI've been happy with Youmail's free and paid services. I paid when I needed voicemail transcriptions. Right now I'm using the free voicemail service.
- sliverstorm 15y agoEvery time I see these posts with alarmists giving bullet-lists of things they are "going to do", it sounds a lot to me like they are trying to threaten Google. Just so you're not surprised and disappointed later, I'll let you in on a secret- they don't care. Even besides the part where they are Google, I have witnessed a long history of complaints to different companies, and the more false bravado and chest- and/or drum-beating you display, the less they care about you.
- markkanof 15y agoI get your point, but I don't think that is what he is doing. Sending an angry email to Google listing all these points would be an example of chest thumping, and your right, Google doesn't care. I interpreted his comments more as "I need to look out for my own best interests." If someone has the technical know how and monetary resources to have more control over their email and phone service, then why not do it. For some people it's great to just use what Google provides. It's relatively simple and is free, but you are at the mercy of whatever new policies they might put in place. Also, it is purportedly very difficult to get any kind of customer service from Google, so if your account is deleted, you might be out of luck. Google doesn't care, but for an individual it could be a huge deal to all of the sudden be cut off from multiple means of communication. If this guy doesn't want to take that risk, what's the problem with that?
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- jdunlop 15y agoYou sir, aren't thinking things through. If you want to risk losing critically important emails because google decided it didn't like your google+ picture, you be my guest. I for one am deleting my g+ account until they fix all this garbage. If they don't, then I won't use it, simple as that. I'm using it for fun, I don't really need it (everyone's on facebook). BTW, let me know if you ever run any companies, I want to know who to short and what software not to use.
- 15y ago
- jrockway 15y agoI don't think this is recent at all: this has been going forever. It just happened most recently to someone with a love of spamming the Internet (which is why his gmail was disabled, apparently), and we all heard about this. Combined with ladyada and Skud, it seems like this is happening a lot. But it's three cases out of millions of users.
- cryos 15y agoDefine forever, becuase in my books Google+ is only a month old... and I use have used other Google services for a long time with fake names for online gaming... as do many others I've gmaed with (giving out personal information isn't desirable at all when gaming online). The first I heard of accounts banned was people trying to activate Google+ for gaming accounts.
- jshen 15y ago"But it's three cases out of millions of users" Are you saying that only three accounts have been suspended? I'm assuming not, but that's what your words mean. Hard to take the point seriously after that.
- bad_user 15y agoConsidering there are hundreds of millions of Gmail accounts, that statement may be pretty accurate.
- tuoru 15y agoIf you're not paying for it, you're not the customer; you're the product being sold. In this case, a product Google no longer wants to sell.
- imurray 15y agoI've lost count of how many times I've seen statements about users being products on here. Can we please stop reciting platitudes? Obviously Google would care if they annoyed enough users to lose ad revenue, or tarnish their reputation. The real argument is about whether the fraction they are annoying is small or otherwise irrelevant.
- dorian-graph 15y ago1) Transition my gmail account over to a domain I own. I'll email everyone I know, and change all my known addresses. Thankfully, Google lets me connect via IMAP to retrieve all of this. How do you plan doing that as I'd like to do the same.
- cubicle67 15y agocan't speak for tshtf, but yesterday I just put my gmail details in Mail an it spent most of the night donwloading my entire gmail history. I'm a bit more comfortable knowing I now have a local copy
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- Uchikoma 15y agoGood post would have been: "What I have done: ..."
- code_duck 15y agoOf course, why be vulnerable? Back up your stuff, and be self reliant and as independent as possible. Sound principles regardless of whomever else is doing anything.
- tonfa 15y agoI don't think accounts are deleted, if you read the article it only talks about suspension (of the Google+ profile).
- vaksel 15y agothat's because Google doesn't delete things...they just issue a permanent non-revocable suspension.
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- rryan 15y ago> ... by the bot ... Just wanted to mention this post: https://plus.google.com/106912596786226524817/posts/A3mStMmX6zu https://plus.google.com/106912596786226524817/posts/A3mStMmX... "we do not take automatic action based on the number of abuse reports submitted for a profile" Also, a real-name suspension only locks you out of Google+, nothing else. A Google TOS violation, however, can cause you to be locked out of your entire Google account.
- jdp23 15y agoIf the Google spokesman's claim is correct and there really is manual review, it's remarkably shoddy. One of the accounts that's been deleted was recently on the cover of Wired. Another had assembled a page documenting all the people who called her by the pseudonym and posted it on her G+ profile. What kind of training are they giving these reviewers?
- Matt_Cutts 15y ago"One of the accounts that's been deleted was recently on the cover of Wired." Regarding the cover of Wired case: if you do the query [site:plus.google.com ladyada] on bing.com, you'll see an older version of the profile, where the name was "Adafruit Industries." Google has said that Google+ isn't ready for businesses yet, and asks people to use real names. If a profile gives a name like Doctor Popular, I can believe that would be flagged.
- mdwrigh2 15y agoThe account was not deleted, it was suspended pending review. It has since been reviewed, and reinstated. As to why it was flagged for reviewal, I suspect the other person's comment (that she originally went by the name Adafruit Industries) is correct.
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- Aqwis 15y ago> It is not a simple matter of using a “real name” - as much of a problematic grey area as that is. Another person cited in my Google+ article has now had their account deleted for the simple reason that they were using Gmail and Google+ with multiple account sign-in: Does this mean I can actually get banned for using more than one GMail account? What the fuck?
- yanw 15y agoNo. It's a 2nd hand unconfirmed hypothesis, that is how panic spreads.
- mdwrigh2 15y agoNo, it doesn't.
- dorian-graph 15y ago> Does this mean I can actually get banned for using more than one GMail account? If this were the case they wouldn't have [recently ?] allowed people to stay signed into several accounts at once.
- Mithrandir 15y agoSo if I use 'Mithrandir' as my name, I could get banned?
- jdp23 15y agoYes. One-word names seem to be one of the targets for suspended. Plenty of the pseudonyms that have gotten banned have well-known existences at other sites. After appealing you might be able to get it reinstated but there have been a lot of complaints about the process as well.
- smokeyj 15y agoNSA told Google they want real names only.
- maigret 15y agoProofs?
- parfe 15y agoWhile I don't believe the google account deletion hysterics I did setup dove cot imap to trial hosting my own email. On friday I got an unshakable feeling of keeping all my eggs in one basket. squirrel mail is no gmail replacement but it's good enough so far, and I read mostly via imap
- cageface 15y agoI managed my own email sever for a long time but eventually grew tired of fighting spam. Unfortunately spam is so rampant now that you're going to have to devote a lot of personal attention to do 1/10th as good a job as GMail to fight it.
- bhousel 15y agoapt-get install postgrey That's really all I do...
- cageface 15y agoAdmittedly it's been a few years since I did this. Maybe it's gotten easier. What about other mail servers rejecting mail originating from your server? I had a lot of trouble with that too.
- protomyth 15y agomake sure you have a valid MX record and make sure the ip you get is not in a blocked segment in the major spam lists. You might need to do some work.
- icebraining 15y agoYou can use Gmail with your own domain. That way, it's easy to switch if this ever happens (just a matter of updating some DNS records).
- drivebyacct2 15y agoSquirrel mail is neither the easiest to setup, nor the most feature rich. Just saying, it doesn't have to be all or nothing.
- darksaga 15y agoWell it was fun while it lasted. If they delete my account, I'm not going to lose much sleep over it since 95% of the people I interact with are on Twitter or Facebook. None of them have Google+ accounts yet. Easy come, easy go.
- cageface 15y agoI don't find Google+ any significant improvement over Twitter or Facebook. That is, in the larger sense it's a mildly amusing diversion and not at all something I'd miss if it disappeared. Losing access to my GMail account, on the other hand, would be painful. The thing that's worrisome about this is that you really have no recourse if Google's automated systems mess up. For example, I've completely lost access to a Google Apps account I set up for another domain I own, and many other people have complained of similar problems on their support forum to no avail.
- ori_b 15y agoIt's a good idea to own the domain that you run your email on. Whether you run your own server, use Google's services, or whatever other service you want doesn't matter anymore -- if something goes wrong, you can transition the implementation without losing your identity.
- yanw 15y agoAs a change of pace from the usual pattern of comments on a 'someone got their account suspended' post I would like to offer a practical solution: Why not provide an optional pseudonym filed? that way you have the real name to enable searching for people within the service and users can use their desired display name.
- thristian 15y agoIn fact, there is a nickname field in the Google Profile page. However, it seems that this field, even if public, is not displayed anywhere or used when searching for people.
- RexRollman 15y agoI really like Google but they lack of human interaction when there is a problem is troubling.
- maigret 15y agoDeep rooted in the way they do hiring interviews in the first place maybe? Look like they target heavy cold problem solving people, can it get them conflict-solving people?
- diolpah 15y agoI believe I have woken up in an alternate universe today. Since when are random Google engineers so absurdly popular that a G+ account suspension is even noticed, let alone reacted to with a flood of tweets, emails, etc? Being a Google engineer appears to confer a seat at the popular kids' table, now.
- nostrademons 15y agoSkud was actually Internet-famous before being a Google engineer - she was pretty well-known in the Perl and open-source communities before joining Google as part of the Metaweb acquisition: http://www.oscon.com/oscon2009/public/schedule/detail/10173 http://www.oscon.com/oscon2009/public/schedule/detail/10173 http://search.cpan.org/~skud/ http://search.cpan.org/~skud/ She wasn't actually at Google all that long - hell, I'm more senior than she was, but I doubt anyone would notice if my G+ account disappeared, because I don't really put myself out there on the Internet (besides HN).
- frossie 15y agoSkud was actually Internet-famous before being a Google engineer Hell, Skud was Internet-famous before Google existed
- naner 15y agoAmazing. Google finally starts to make big advances in the coveted social arena only to shoot themselves in the foot.
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- walrus 15y agoThat last part is wrong: "It’s my real name, a picture of me – my posts and my nickname. I made sure it wasn’t “Adafruit Industries” and specifically me when google asked people to only use real names in their profiles. No explanation or reason why, just nuked." http://www.adafruit.com/blog/2011/07/23/google-suspended-limor-fried-ladyada-google-profile-no-show-and-tell-tonight/ http://www.adafruit.com/blog/2011/07/23/google-suspended-lim...
- biot 15y agoSee Matt Cutt's comment: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2797943 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2797943
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- lwat 15y agoSo let me get this straight Google: I can have a Google+ account for my business, but I can't have one for my pseudonym?
- bcl 15y agoGoogle's lack of real customer service is why I decided to move all of my google app domains over to fastmail.fm -- I'd much rather pay for a service and have a person I can talk to when there is a problem. I guess I'm lucky that I decided to setup my G+ profile with my real name instead of using the actual gmail name I picked.
- rjd 15y agoGoogle has great customer service. Your misunderstanding lays with the fact you are assuming you are the customer, when in fact you (as the user) are the product (your data) being sold (via ad sense automation). So put simply "if they are not receiving money off you are not the customer". Your relationship is a raw resource exchange of your data with the payment of free services from them. In a sense they are farming you.
- spooneybarger 15y agoI've paid for google apps for domains in the past and the service has been barely better than when I was using the free version, so while you point is valid, the statement that google customer service is lacking for many paying customers is also true.
- rjd 15y agoFair enough, I've seen some really good service from the ad sense guys, maybe its jsut the team I dealt with I don't know. I've never payed for Google Apps so didn't comment on it, and also didn't want to muddy my point as there is a definite grey area with a lot of Google uses in terms of thigns like blogger which make users also customers.
- johnl 15y agoWhen I played American Army a while back I was placed in jail for a cool down period when I hit one of my own team mates. Seems like Google ought to do the same thing, sweep the accounts looking for red flags and place into limbo. Write a program (I think Google knows how to do this) to globally communicate the best bet for correcting the red flags and reinstating when acceptable. It's good customer service, and could be a good startup idea. You solve the issue and in turn get loyal customers. Now all I need is two good programmers.
- FaceKicker 15y agoWhy does the headline say "no clear answers"? It seems obvious they are suspending accounts that have a fake name (including quoted nicknames). Whether you agree with this policy is another matter, of course.
- alayne 15y agoHow long are people going to tolerate the tyranny of large companies controlling social interaction? Google+ has all kinds of terms of service that I find infringing of free speech. Facebook has their own terms. I think we need to stop being sharecroppers and serfs and develop social network solutions that are distributed and open, or at least encourage the projects that are working on it already. The amount of press Google has been getting seemed like a consumerist distraction from fundamental problems, until the past few days. Now we see they are just the new monarchy, same as the old monarchy. Heads are rolling and maybe people will question these systemic issues.
- iamdave 15y agoEverytime I see someone referencing "free speech" in a way that makes it painfully obvious they skipped over the words "CONGRESS shall make no laws restricting..." I want to bang my head against a wall. Google is a company, a company that's providing you a service free of charge. They are 100% within their right to tell you how not to use their product.
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- alayne 15y agoFreedom of speech is a basic human right, not a privilege granted by governments. When companies stifle speech, it's immoral even if it is legal. However, I think I made it clear that I am talking about not allowing companies to control speech by adopting a social network system that is decentralized.
- kevinh 15y agoIf you're in my house and say things that I don't like, it's not immoral for me to kick you out. You can go say what you like outside. It's similar to companies allowing you to post your opinion on their service. If they don't like what you're saying, they have every right to make you leave.
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- jshen 15y agoThe bottom line is that you need to own and control your identity online. You can't leave it in the hands of others if you gain significant value from your identity. Most people don't gain much value from their identity, but those that do need to own and control it.
- bugsy 15y agoI agree and I don't limit it to online, but real life as well. The idea that a person's identity is something to be granted, approved of, regulated or controlled by corporations and governments is outrageous, offensive, and to be resisted with all necessary force. My identity is my own.
- sixtofour 15y agoI use gmail, but I use it as me@mydomain.com. If they ever suspend/destroy me, at most I'll lose a few emails before I point my domain elsewhere. I already maintain an account at fastmail.fm for the few times that gmails smtp has gone down; they are responsive and I've had email conversations with them a few times. I also use thunderbird and have it automatically save the All Mail folder. Given the years of monolithic indifference shown by Google, I don't know why anyone with the awareness and ability to use their own domain for email doesn't do so. It would be terrible to have your identity yanked from you; I think that's worse than losing copies of emails that you'll probably never look at anyway.
- nekitamo 15y agoInteresting. I got banned when using a pseudonym that I usually use in video games. It was 2 words (first name last name) so it shouldn't have come up as some 1 word spam/business account (which seems to be what they are targeting for the bans). The account was also active, with me interacting with lots of real-life friends. Oh well, never really planned on using Google+ in the first place.
- flowe 15y agointeresting to see such a big company fail early, fail fast... advice startups are often given (and should take)... they're not perfect, but at least now they're in the game.
- motters 15y agoAs someone else remarked, if you think that your online identity has some value then you really need to own it yourself. Giving the keys to your identity to Google or anyone else potentially gives them a lot of leverage over you. If you're using Google accounts for any business related activities then you're risking the chance that some bot implementing a set of dodgy heuristics and with no real accountability can shut down your operations at any time (see http://fora.tv/2008/08/08/Daniel_Suarez_Daemon_Bot-Mediated_Reality http://fora.tv/2008/08/08/Daniel_Suarez_Daemon_Bot-Mediated_...)
- Groxx 15y agoIs there much evidence that this isn't largely a rampaging set of over-enthusiastic rule-enforcing bots, or an exploit being spread, or something non-malicious? It seems like people are leaping to conclusions, assuming Google has just now assigned some incredible amount of (stupid) employees to go around and wield the ban-hammer. Why the wait? Why so many at once? It feels more to me like an error than something intentional.
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- leon_ 15y agoI guess my paranoia pays out for once ;) I joined G+ with a throwaway google account.
- narrator 15y agoThe whole real name thing was the deal killer for me. The last thing I need is more crap that will be stored forever, probably sold, analyzed, run through a bunch of machine learning algorithms and used to give me a multitude of bayesian probabilities forever and ever with my real name attached. The whole thing is just creepy. Google + isn't a financial institution or a military contractor. Why do they need to identify everybody so precisely?
- ulvund 15y agoI think the main purpose would be for Google to target ads very specifically like facebook does now.
- spot 15y agoto prevent spam bots.
- faboo 15y agoI don't see how that prevents spam bots better than a "don't be a spam bot" policy. Plenty of spam bots with real sounding names follow me twitter.
- faboo 15y agoTechnically, they ask that your display name is what your "friends, family, and coworkers" call you. To an extent I find it odd that somebody thinks that all three of those groups would necessarily call you the same thing. My google+ profile name is a nickname that my close friends and family would recognize but that none of my coworkers would. (Same with facebook, incidentally) I agree with you though. Nobody on the Internet but my bank really needs my real name.
- jfoutz 15y agoDo you use a credit card for anything?
- karussell 15y agoWhy not use a name which sounds like a real name but isn't yours? I'm doing so very successfully ;) ...
- vaksel 15y agothat's a mistake. eventually you'll have to login into your Gmail or Analytics where you gave your real name. Google will then cross reference your IP and notice that the information they have on file is fake. So they'll suspend all of your accounts.
- kragen 15y agoI haven't had that trouble so far. But, also, I have a dynamic IP, and I think I'm behind a couple layers of NAT.
- delambo 15y agoDoes anyone miss the pre-facebook days of online social networking where people mostly used aliases other than their real names? Back then, we actually networked and found like-minded people or new friends through the tool. Now, we wait until we meet someone in real life, then find and friend them on the tool.
- flocial 15y agoWell, we need not look any further than Hacker News to see how using pseudonyms only hurts interactions behind a veil of anonymity. These scary posts got me yearning to commit Google+ suicide to minimize risk. I don't want to play high stakes with my Gmail account because I don't seem "real" enough to an algorithm. What's next shutting you down because your friends don't seem real enough? Google's problem with customers is they come down on you pretty hard and give you little recourse. It's Kafka-esque unless you're a big ad account holder or minor celebrity. Next up Google+ vs the Scoble brigade.
- RocknRolla 15y agoI suspect the reason Google wants your real name is to match it with credit headers. And before anyone calls me a tin-foiler please read the following and understand that I work in the industry. I'm not making a judgment call one way or the other as to whether this is "right" or not. For those that don't know a credit header is information in a credit report that gives identifying information about a person. Credit headers contain: Name, AKA's, Maiden Name, Date of Birth, Social Security Number and Issuing State, Relatives, along with Current and Previous Addresses which can go back 25+ years. Credit headers have been ruled as to NOT be part of a credit report: http://epic.org/privacy/fcra/ http://epic.org/privacy/fcra/ <blockquote>A credit header is identifying information from a credit report. It includes name, mother's maiden name, date of birth, sex, address, prior addresses, telephone number, and the Social Security Number. Credit headers came into use after the FTC changed its definition of a credit report in the course of settling a case against TRW (now Experian). The FTC allowed the CRAs to treat headers as "above the line" information and to sell it with no legal protections for the individual. The reasoning was that this information did not relate to credit, and thus should not be considered part of the credit report. Credit headers are used for location of individuals and for target marketing. They are sold in bulk by the CRAs and can be purchased online.</blockquote> Google can simply take your IP address, trace it back and then run your name against the header database to locate individuals in your area with that name. The more unique your name the easier you are to identify. If you have a common name it would be further cross-referenced with other information like relative names or maiden names. Once identified they have your complete life history.
- rimantas 15y agoThere are more countries in the world.
- RocknRolla 15y agoAnd? Why would that stop them from getting this information and matching it? Are you saying because this information isn't available all over the world they wouldn't collect it it in the U.S.? The U.S. is the biggest consumer market in the world. What do you think they could achieve (monetarily) having a personal history attached to a social account? I can tell you the first thing I'd do is determine your influence. I could take your addresses/family addresses and reasonably determine what kind of spending power you have based upon cross referencing your address with tax information. On top of that I don't have to necessarily know about you in another country. I can simply define the influence of an individual here and you may end up in their circle of influence. Imagine a person that's been voted as highly influential in said system and they communicate with you on a regular basis. From that I could infer that you are also potentially influential. Other countries have similar systems. The information may not be as freely available but it's there. It just needs to be harvested. For example, one of the biggest sources of relative information is obituaries. Something that is freely printed all over the place.