But remember the people generating publicity on blogs, because their Google+ account was deleted? Then it turned out they used a company name as their profile name, posted underage nudity, or otherwise violated the rules.
The blog assumes the developers are innocent and abiding by the developer rules. But can we take this assumption for a fact?
For all we know the developers might have been offering incentives to write reviews. The developers might have send account activation emails from a spammy host.
The email they received from Google isn't published, only described as vague. A tweet mentions "repetitive content".
Spam and placement in store
Do not post repetitive content
I wouldn't look at update frequency or an algo fluke as the culprit, but look how I could remedy this apparent repetition, both in game versions and game descriptions.
Many big-name games do this (you can choose between a paid version and a free, ad-supported version). Rovio released an Angry Birds Lite for a while when they were having performance issues on lower-end devices.
Assuming this behavior does break the rules (which is not a given), the rules are still enforced very inconsistently, with no recourse.
Star Traders Mini is a super stripped down low resolution version that is 1/7 the size of RPG. Tiny downloads are appreciated by some users, but can't be combined with full size editions.
The other two are basic freemium Paid/Free.
Explaining exactly what behaviour should be stopped may make Google's arms race with the bad guys a little bit more difficult but it makes things a lot easier for everyone else without causing the kind of costs that human intervention would.
What they do now is basically security by obscurity.
It sucks for people running into legitimate issues, but I've learned to develop a bias over the years for these types of stories (especially when the word "ban" comes into play).
The vast, vast majority of people who complain about being banned from one service or another are either straight up lying, or leaving out crucial details to make their story sound sympathetic. Again, this ruins it for people that have legitimate grievances, but that's so rarely the case it's a lot more useful to take that stance that the person isn't being truthful about the situation.
At least with Apple you can appeal to a human. With Google all you can do is appeal to the press and hope someone there cares.
But remember the people generating publicity
We're hearing one side of the story, where the players know that the other side is limited in what they normally can or will say (e.g. talk bad about Apple or Google -- playing up being the victim -- and for legal and professionalism reasons they usually won't correct egregious lies).
I want Google to seriously put the hammer down on the Play store -- this is a good thing for everyone. The people who exploited it before, who are the enemy of people who want a healthy and vibrant system, will inevitably cry foul and protest their innocence.
That isn't to say that I know anything about whether these guys are in the right or wrong, but it is curious how one-sided they are about Google's communications. It's also worth noting that very frequent updates are also a mechanism to get your app in the "New" category again and again, and we have to assume that Google has the capacity to know that the update wasn't an actual update but instead was simply, for instance, a version number change.
I know we don't.
Who's the we? I'm sure tons of Y Combinator startups use Google Apps.
brador's comment stands. Would I trust my livelihood to a company with a proven track record of not caring about its own digital sharecroppers?
That's now good customer service.
On the up side, I made $70 and learned some interesting stuff.
But here's yet another way for Google to run false positives which send you into their black hole of non-support. So one of the things I'm still learning is "don't let Google be a mission-critical part of a project."
This can be expanded to "Don't let any single company be a mission critical part of a project".
Also, just to be clear: once again, we're responding to a one-sided media story without reference to the app in question or the facts on the ground. And, once again, we're jumping in for or against the side we curently favor in the smart phone wars (I'll bet good money there's an iPhone in your pocket, so let me put down my Galaxy Nexus to respond).
I think the demands he made are pretty reasonable. Both Google and Apple need to improve relations and communications with developers in cases like this and trying to avoid the subject or turn it into a fanboy war wont help the case.
So please, put back your Nexus in your holster, cowboy.
I have my own perception about these things and that is that if this was an Apple case instead of a Google one it would have been overanalyzed and exaggerated ("devgate" or whatever other stupid name attached to it) and that one-sided stories would be welcomed instead of questioned.
This is probably coming across as a pro Apple statement, no doubt (and I do'nt really care, i don't make a big deal about what technology i decide to put in my pocket), but I also think it'd be against users and developer interests to say that the problem is not there or that is only a matter of perception based on your ecosystem preferences.
If there something wrong, or that needs improvement, it should be said regardless on what phone you use or your personal preference.
And just to be clear, the only reason you're responding is because ten thousand other people consumed and shared the story. And the reason they did that is because the narrative that nobody is home at Google is powerful in the development community. It threatens to spread to the rest of the web as well if you guys don't get in gear and start fixing this corporate culture problem.
The Android guys even have videos that touch on this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WDDgoxvQsrQ
And that's just one non-spammy reason for multiple versions. More sweaty Steve Ballmer and less Bill Lundburgh please...
Stop it, people. Find some real evidence and indict them with that.
That is the story. Google is threatening to remove non-shady apps for reasons that are entirely mysterious.
So the article details the attempt and failure of the devs to contact Google, and the author's attempt and failure to contact Google. What do you want, a seance?
Google didn't respond to a request for comment from me [the author of the article].
I think you need to read more closely.
And BTW I'm generally favorable toward Google, and my pocket holds an Android.
How would you suggest getting it?
If google is going to use an automated tool to detect violations of their rules that generates false positives, then if they have any clue whatsoever they need to put a human in between it and the developers to prune those out. Otherwise, it's like going to see your doctor and only getting a web browser set to WebMD instead.
When a problem happens with Apple's App Store, is there a guaranteed way to contact and get an answer from a human?
Once again we hope that getting publicity on blogs will catch the attention of someone at Google who can do something about it.
This time, I'd like someone to tell me why it was impossible for the dev to remedy this through the normal channels and tell us what Google are going to do to stop this happening again.