Jeremy says he wrote "something very close to" the following for his appeal, how would you have written it?<p>> "Mommy Saver Plus was removed for 'deceptive ads' which is a little silly because there is no ads in the app. The attached screenshots have nothing to do with Mommy Saver Plus."<p>I think it would be a bit too easy for someone a google employee reading this to go 'he's saying he doesn't consider them ads, and ranting about the screenshots out of frustration'. That's not a reasonable thing for the google employee to do, but it is a possible one. I think I would prefer something like<p>> The evidence attached for removing "Mommy Saver Plus" are screenshots from <i>a different app by a different developer</i>. "Mommy Saver Plus" was removed for having "deceptive ads", but unlike the app in the screenshot "Mommy Saver Plus" doesn't have any ads, so clearly this was done in error.<p>> Please see the attached screenshot of "Mommy Saver Plus" for comparison.<p>> Thanks,<p>> <Name>
Update: Google's reversed their decision and the appeal is accepted.<p>I wrote a passive-aggressive email.
I posted this.
I tweeted at them (first tweet ever).<p>I'm not sure what worked, but something got through. Thanks all for the support.
Congrats on getting back but it's sad that this story had two be on frontpage of HN twice before they took notice and accepted their fault.<p>Chances of this happening again are very slim for the next guy who falls prey to their faulty moderation (ai).
As I posted about recently - big organisations need to have an ombudsman - a way to resolve problems when the company's ordinary support mechanisms fail to resolve issues.<p><a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19092039" rel="nofollow">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19092039</a><p>It's silly that the only way to get big companies to resolve crazy failings in their normal processes is to take the problem public on social media.<p>Instead they should have a built in process that operates outside their normal systems - an ombudsman who has the power and authority to instruct other areas of the organisation to make different decisions.
So if I get this correct, the app ID of com.mommysaverapp.plus is correct but the screenshots they use to justify their app removal are not from that app?!
I tried tweeting at them now. My first tweet ever. (Please someone tell me if I goofed it in any way.)<p><a href="https://twitter.com/jeremydeanlakey/status/1110684501665996800" rel="nofollow">https://twitter.com/jeremydeanlakey/status/11106845016659968...</a>
There is no excuse for Google mistaking one app for another. They have literally all the data, so they know which app is which better than any other party in existence. It's their Play store!<p>It bothers me greatly that not only can they shut down your app, but they can shut down your Google account (and any future accounts they might deem as being related...)<p>What are the chances that they might accidentally (human failure or algo failure) believe one Google account is related to another "bad" account and close the good account? It certainly seems possible given that obviously Google does not have complete control over its systems.
The frequent lack of due process by the app stores is another reason I've been trying to do Web-first, in some startup ideas I've been tossing around.<p>I did ship a complex HTML5 Offline app for a client, and it was more pain than it should've been, but I made it work. (Tip: the two big mobile platform owners seem to have an obvious disincentive for HTML5 Offline to work well.) If I do something Web-first, it'll be handheld&desktop responsive, and I'll be keeping a smooth path to HTML5 Offline in mind as a possible alternative to the app stores.
Google can be very difficult when it comes to approving add-ons for their add-on store as well. They approved my add-on that blocks porn ads on a certain website, but won't accept a trivial update on the grounds that it is too NSFW.<p>They make you provide a screenshot to submit an add-on. I used a screenshot of the website it works on with the porn ads it blocks heavily pixelated. I can't think of any other way to take a screenshot of what my add-on does. So I guess users will have to do without the new update.
"This part scares me:<p>'... repeated violations can result in the suspension of this app or your Google Play Developer account.'"<p>Learn the lessson not to make yourself dependent on a despot.
I’m curious, you redacted something but don’t talk about it. What was the alleged “disguised app” you redacted, and why might they have thought you were disguising it?<p>And why did you redact this fact?
Your mistake was writing a "two sentence appeal" and expecting it would do anything.<p>Appeal again. But this time, put some real effort into it. Spend more than 2 seconds on it. Really make it clear that your app does not contain ads and the screenshot is not your app.