4 ms·
Isn't this a bit different than your analogy? Google+ is a free service, and is hardly the only content-hosting/blog-esque product available (and it's free).
by bmj 15y ago
Isn't this a bit different than your analogy? Google+ is a free service, and is hardly the only content-hosting/blog-esque product available (and it's free). Certainly, if you (and others) don't like Google's policies, by all means, let them know, but realize that until those policies are changed, they will enforce them (and we know that Google's "customer service" is lacking, so it isn't a surprise that the poster didn't receive notification).
I don't necessarily agree with Google's actions here, but Google+ is what it is--a service provided by a corporation, bounded by rules for content. If you don't want to live with such rules, take your content and go elsewhere. If enough people do that (including high visibility users), I'm sure Google will listen.
- Supermighty 15y agoGoogle+ is free in name only. In truth we pay by being there, filling it with our personal information. Google isn't a non-profit, they see a way to make money off all the users. Do you think google+ would still be around if it only had one million users, no, they would shut it down. They need us to use their toys just as much as we want to use them. And if they want us to use their toys then they better let us use them any way we like.
- bmj 15y agoThat's kinda my point--if you don't like the service, then you should leave. That seems to get the attention of tech companies these days.