Monday, August 1, 2011

Transcript of my Appeal on the Google+ Suspension

Botgirl Questi is the name I'm best known by and most commonly use in daily life. Out of the many hundreds of people I consider to be friends, 95% of them know me by that name. As far as I can tell, this is in accordance with your policy. If not, please provide details and be clear about what needs to change.


sororNishi said...

good luck, it will be interesting to see how this develops

Cisop Sixpence said...

Given that Botgirl Questi is the only name I've known you by and the fact if you went by another name I wouldn't know you from Adam (as the saying goes), I certainly hope this is resolved in your favor soon. Common sense must prevail.

Anonymous said...

Maybe they consider you an "other entity"... :D

Kwame Oh said...

I can tell you the outcome based on your transcript not just because of my views which are well known re anonymity but also had a chat at Google HQ in London just last week.

It boils down to this, and here the context of society my differ from yours but is the definition used by G+

In the case of the following laws
Due diligence
And with reference to international concerns with both terrorism, money laundering and Pedophilia will this identity stand up to scrutiny ?

You should understand the pressure sometimes unwarranted being put on both ISP's and service providers is peaking within governments at the moment so most now err on the side of caution rather than be sanctioned by deeds of some idiots of which there are many.

Good luck though we shall watch with interest.

Vanessa Blaylock said...

"After reviewing your profile we have determined that some of the content, text, images, names..."

We've said it all already, but Google+ seems so much worse than even Facebook. It almost seems shocking now that Myspace has never shared this policy.

Do we really want the Orwellian spectre of Google surveiling and approving or rejecting our TEXT, IMAGES, NAMES... can anyone NOT think this is profoundly disturbing???

Google is leveraging it's new media power to control the lives of the general public in ways governments only previously monitored and discriminated against a small percentage of people.

In the 21st century world of code, Google is God, and this is an angry god that smites users whose data isn't "useful."

We want to be on platforms like Facebook and Google+ because that's where everyone is and we don't feel we should be discriminated against or marginalized, but the price is just too, insanely, high. We must turn to platforms like Diaspora, Myspace, Twitter, Plurk, where there is not the authoritian force of Google causing us to rethink and self-censor our every action online.

In addition to being data mines, we are also human beings.

Botgirl Questi said...

Kwame: The logic you heard from Google HQ would only make sense if there was some validated identification. If not Botgirl Questi is no better or worse than John Smith.

Vaneesa: It wouldn't shock me if Google eventually ran into some anti-trust issues or EU-mandated changes in the way they handle personal data.

John said...

Politics aside, we miss you over there, too. Very annoying.

Thankfully, identity-redundancy keeps this from being tragic. Good luck with the appeal!

Botgirl Questi said...

Dale: You may be right. "Non-real Entity"

John: Thanks!

Miso Susanowa said...

I have been asking a question that is partially answered by your own comment to Vaneeesa:

"It wouldn't shock me if Google eventually ran into some anti-trust issues..."

Google is being investigated by the FTC for antitrust violations concerning its web-advertising dominance; the Google cash cow.

Take this piece, and put it next to the piece that shows Google's continuing handling of this issue in the face of a real groundswell of negative opinion and debate.

There's a third piece, the just-passed Protecting Children from Internet Pornographers Act aka the Data Retention Bill.

There's a great line in that linked article:

"The Constitution protects privacy against government intrusion, but it doesn't stop the government from forcing private companies to do its dirty work."

Khani said...

Heya. I filed a protest over you have been banned.


Jim Tarber said...

My continued presence on Google+ is dependent on the inclusion of those online identities who keep me informed of current events and news. Botgirl is one name that I know, respect and demand to be able to interact with. Otherwise Google+ is a complete failure in my case.

Botgirl Questi said...

Miso: Google is such an overwhelmingly dominant force today that I think they need governmental oversight. I'm not confident that the U.S. is going to do anything pro-consumer in the near future, but since it's a global company it's possible that more progressive governments will make rulings that promote fairness and privacy.

Khannea: I added your post to the @plusgate site.

Jim: Thanks!

Unknown said...

Interesting where/how they are drawing the lines, if not a little ridiculous. Keep us posted on how things unfold.