There's nothing in the article indicating why he was banned. They say he violated the ToS. He says he didn't. Maybe it was a false positive, but we don't have enough information to know what happened.
He didn't post screenshots of his profile so we have no idea what's on there, it's completely possible (like, even) that his profile text did violate the TOS. Instant perma-ban might be a bit harsh but we have no reason to believe one side over the other and no evidence pointing either way.
I think the "innocent until proven guilty" rule that we have in our justice system prevents things like this to happen (best effort of course).
But for these companies, it's probably easier and cheaper to do the "guilty until proven innocent" strategy. That's probably also the reason why they don't want to disclose why he was banned, because he could make a stronger case for himself.
They did more or less say why: that their algorithms determined he was a dupe account of another banned seller. Presumably they don't want to give more details so people who really are making illicit duplicate accounts can't use the data to tune their avoidance strategies. But if there are false-positives, that's definitely super-frustrating.
Everything you listed is someone else's opinion on what happened, but never stated by the company. All the company did publicly was say "this account is banned" with no libelous or defamatory statements attached. IANAL.
There's virtually no chance that the automated system that banned him knew the account belonged to someone with whom Stadia was doing business. Even if we assume there's a list of high profile people/accounts not to automatically disable, I can't see him being on it.
I am confused, maybe I misread something but it seems like you did get banned for unknown reasons (which very sadly seems to becoming a common occurrence) but has nothing to do with how you looked like that morning? Are you sure you did not violate any ToS even if accidentally?
Since you're bringing up the idea that perhaps the ban was legitimate, it really does need to be mentioned that one scenario here is that the user did actually fail to comply with the terms or policies.
But even if this were the case, it is pretty unfair to not at least know what you are being accused of.
From what I gather, OP is an anonymous voice on the internet. He might as well be Indian, Russian, Bulgarian, etc. pretending to be a US developer. That might have led to the ban.
reply