The Terms of Service of every social media platform you've ever signed up for contain language that allows the service provider to "unilaterally revoke" your account at any time, for (nearly) any reason. There is no system of due process, because your rights are not being infringed in any way. You have no right to use a private service.
If you think this status quo is unacceptable, then don't use these proprietary web services. Take control of your web presence and your "interactions with the entire world." Support projects like Diaspora and Pump.io, and run your own instance of their federated platforms. Your username cannot be taken away when you are the service provider.
> Take control of your web presence and your "interactions with the entire world."
That's all fine and good but there's no way to interoperate with the predominant (centralized) microblogging platform (Twitter) if one does this. It leaves you out of the conversation and puts you at a disadvantage - a non-starter.
Idealism like this is nice in theory, but fails hard in practice.
That's great in theory, but these companies heavily benefit from networking effects and become near-monopolies of their social network niche. You can't just switch to a different social network if you don't like it. And even if you could, it doesn't make it ok to screw people, it just means people can opt out of the screwing.
I'm not saying they are legally wrong, or violating anyone's legal rights, or that the government should do something. I'm saying that it's still wrong and unacceptable, and they deserve criticism.
If you think this status quo is unacceptable, then don't use these proprietary web services. Take control of your web presence and your "interactions with the entire world." Support projects like Diaspora and Pump.io, and run your own instance of their federated platforms. Your username cannot be taken away when you are the service provider.