[guygurari]

Your responses remind me of disturbing passages from Kafka's The Trial. There is no need to discuss specifics in public, but why not let the Accused know the violation they've committed? Why is there no appeals process where the Accused can respond to specific allegations? And why not let the Accused download their data?

I'm sure your response seems reasonable to you, since you are familiar with the details, but try to understand what it looks like from the outside. Personally, once the Apple cloud is up I'm moving all my important data away of Google.

[Matt_Cutts]

I know that from the outside that it probably looks like Google has been unfair or uncaring in this case. I'm sorry that I can't go into the details.

[Matt_Cutts]

Now I can: http://www.twitlonger.com/show/bvqdos

[_delirium]

Ah man, child pornography, once again the edge case that screws up reasonable planning. Can't explain, for fear that if the user wasn't really guilty, you're taking a pretty serious step in accusing them of peddling child pornography. And also can't give them their data, for fear that if they were guilty, you're redistributing child pornography.

The only thing that might be nice, besides some personalized review of hard edge cases, is to allow users to export "untainted" data, if it can somehow be isolated. E.g. if one gallery was flagged, still let him export his uncontroversial email archives.