Hacker News new | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit login

The grammar on that is also confusing. Is it IP && (impersonation || deceptive behavior) or is it (IP && impersonation) || deceptive behavior?

If it's the former (which is how I interpret it), then they should tell you what IP you've violated or who your accuser is. I understand they want to be vague to avoid giving information that may allow spammers to game the system, but I think they're going to be more persistent and sophisticated anyways. This leads to an ineffective deterrent technique and a poor experience for customers. You'd figure Google would have people smart enough to realize this.

Agreed. In my response, I tried to guess what the complaint could be and I addressed each possibility in turn. This made for a quite long response as I was addressing items that were likely not even a problem. In the end, the re-instatement notice was sent via email:

"Upon further review, we've accepted your appeal and have reinstated your application."

So, I still don't know what the problem was.

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | DMCA | Apply to YC | Contact