5 ms·

A part of that frustration has to be from that email that gets sent out. I haven't been on the receiving end, but I've read it in a couple of blog posts about

A part of that frustration has to be from that email that gets sent out. I haven't been on the receiving end, but I've read it in a couple of blog posts about this sort of thing, and honestly: that letter is awful. It contains exactly one piece of "useful" information, the link to the disabled account FAQ. The rest is just simply terrible. It starts with a very serious accusation, intoning "significant risk" and "financial damage", but Google wasn't "compelled" or "forced" to act, it "decided" to, implying not that some mandatory threshold was reached but that someone sat down and worked it out and reluctantly agreed that this was the way to go, or worse, that sometimes similar situations might go the other way. Immediately after accusing the person of being an evil bastard, it turns on the smarmy fake politeness. "Please understand" that we think you're an evil bastard. "Thank you" for understanding that we think you're an evil bastard. And thanks for "cooperating", even though you actually have no choice in the matter at all. If you have any questions, kindly fuck off and don't use the same method of communication we just used to reach you, here's a link to more standardized dehumanizing copy. It reads like Google is breaking up with you while checking its phone, acting like you've done something horrible enough to merit no discussion on the matter, trying to act nice enough so you don't think it's a bitch, but making it clear it doesn't give a shit and really never did.

MattCutts 17y ago
calambrac, I personally agree with you about the wording/tone of the current letter. I would like them to take a look at changing that, although no one will ever be delighted to get that letter.
- calambrac 17y ago
  That's true, it's always going to be a hard letter to get, and I'm sure that most of the time it's being sent to people who deserve to get it. I think a rewrite should simply dispense with the dire accusations, the fake politeness, and the implication that there's a significant human presence behind the individual decision. Don't waste people's time or patronize them, be direct about what's happening and acknowledge that there may be some kind of recourse if you want to work through the process. 'We're disabling your account because our algorithm told us to. We regret if this is an error, please see this page for more information if you feel this is the case.'
  - andreyf 17y ago
    I'm sure that most of the time it's being sent to people who deserve to get it Bingo. It's optimized to stop spammers, not be inoffensive to false positives.
  - peoplerock 17y ago
    Yes, it's a nasty, no-easy-solution dilemma: Shugging off the spammers yet not mistreating the "false positive" decent customers that your algorithm bans. What I find distressing (and would find even more so had I been the victim) is that Google refuses to to identify which part of TOS have been violated. Police and courts have to specify which parts of criminal code a defendant is accused of violating. Can we not get similar fairness from corporate America? Are you afraid that such clarifications would give too much useful info to actual spammers? Well, maybe a slight edge. But I might compare this to the dilemma that clarifying legal defendants their constitutional rights ("Miranda" in the U.S.) deprives law enforcement of some opportunities to tap some useful self-incrimination: It's part of the cost of valuing Constitutional rights. Would Google dare to offer its customers some Consumer Bill of Rights?
    - zach 17y ago
      Google is in a contractual business relationship with its partners, not an hiring or governing relationship. The contract may suck, but does anyone sign up for AdSense because the contract is great?
ahoyhere 17y ago
I love your characterization. Except it's not just breaking up with you, it's breaking up with you -- and stealing your TV, your sofa, and your cat!
- stanleydrew 17y ago
  Not really. In Google's eyes (or Google's algorithm's eyes) you "earned" your Adsense credits in a way that was unfair to the advertisers. So basically Google's returning the TV, sofa and cat that you "stole" from advertisers in the Adsense network in the first place. Obviously the process by which Google decides what accounts are fraudulent is imperfect, so some of the time legitimate accounts will get flagged. I do agree though that this is a big enough problem that Google should devote more time and effort to improving the systems they use to flag Adsense accounts, and certainly improve the letter and general customer support experience once your account has been flagged.
  - jonah 17y ago
    "So basically Google's returning the TV, sofa and cat that you "stole" from advertisers in the Adsense network in the first place." I haven't heard either way but if you're an advertiser, does goog credit your account - "we believe these x number of clicks you paid for were fraudulent, so we're not charging/crediting you for them."

MattCutts 17y ago

calambrac, I personally agree with you about the wording/tone of the current letter. I would like them to take a look at changing that, although no one will ever be delighted to get that letter.

calambrac 17y ago
That's true, it's always going to be a hard letter to get, and I'm sure that most of the time it's being sent to people who deserve to get it. I think a rewrite should simply dispense with the dire accusations, the fake politeness, and the implication that there's a significant human presence behind the individual decision. Don't waste people's time or patronize them, be direct about what's happening and acknowledge that there may be some kind of recourse if you want to work through the process. 'We're disabling your account because our algorithm told us to. We regret if this is an error, please see this page for more information if you feel this is the case.'
- andreyf 17y ago
  I'm sure that most of the time it's being sent to people who deserve to get it Bingo. It's optimized to stop spammers, not be inoffensive to false positives.
- peoplerock 17y ago
  Yes, it's a nasty, no-easy-solution dilemma: Shugging off the spammers yet not mistreating the "false positive" decent customers that your algorithm bans. What I find distressing (and would find even more so had I been the victim) is that Google refuses to to identify which part of TOS have been violated. Police and courts have to specify which parts of criminal code a defendant is accused of violating. Can we not get similar fairness from corporate America? Are you afraid that such clarifications would give too much useful info to actual spammers? Well, maybe a slight edge. But I might compare this to the dilemma that clarifying legal defendants their constitutional rights ("Miranda" in the U.S.) deprives law enforcement of some opportunities to tap some useful self-incrimination: It's part of the cost of valuing Constitutional rights. Would Google dare to offer its customers some Consumer Bill of Rights?
  - zach 17y ago
    Google is in a contractual business relationship with its partners, not an hiring or governing relationship. The contract may suck, but does anyone sign up for AdSense because the contract is great?

ahoyhere 17y ago

I love your characterization. Except it's not just breaking up with you, it's breaking up with you -- and stealing your TV, your sofa, and your cat!

stanleydrew 17y ago
Not really. In Google's eyes (or Google's algorithm's eyes) you "earned" your Adsense credits in a way that was unfair to the advertisers. So basically Google's returning the TV, sofa and cat that you "stole" from advertisers in the Adsense network in the first place. Obviously the process by which Google decides what accounts are fraudulent is imperfect, so some of the time legitimate accounts will get flagged. I do agree though that this is a big enough problem that Google should devote more time and effort to improving the systems they use to flag Adsense accounts, and certainly improve the letter and general customer support experience once your account has been flagged.
- jonah 17y ago
  "So basically Google's returning the TV, sofa and cat that you "stole" from advertisers in the Adsense network in the first place." I haven't heard either way but if you're an advertiser, does goog credit your account - "we believe these x number of clicks you paid for were fraudulent, so we're not charging/crediting you for them."