[prof-dr-ir]

Ehm I am very sorry and not the greatest fan of Google by a long shot, but... who are you? Why should we trust you?

Again I am really sorry but I'm just missing street cred; I only see two new HN accounts and a Twitter account with 79 followers.

Edit: in response to all the comments and downvotes: really, I would not be that hard to convince. How about a LinkedIn page? Glassdoor? An archived version of the site? A personal webpage? A cached Bing search result? Anything, really.

[jjulius]

>An archived version of the site?

Instead of making that snarky edit, did you try going to Archive.org and looking up the website via the Wayback Machine? Because I did, and there are plenty of captures of the site. Took me probably about the same time or less than it took you to edit yours.

https://web.archive.org/web/20180701000000*/lyearn.com

[prof-dr-ir]

I did not mean the edit to be snarky. And I also did find the archive link, but none of those pages seem to load for me. Maybe the error is on my side - can you get a snapshot from the past year or so to load?

[sanxiyn]

Here is a LinkedIn profile I found with quick search, seems legit. Why didn't you do the search yourself before posting this?

https://www.linkedin.com/in/shuchitgandhi

[prof-dr-ir]

I did, but LinkedIn asked me to login and I do not have an account.

[tasuki]

You specifically asked "How about a LinkedIn page?" and... now you're saying you can't see the page because you don't have an account?

[Barrin92]

> who are you?

I suppose we'll never figure that out, because his domain is gone. Little bit cynical and circular isn't it, cull the 100 follower people, who will care, they only got 100 followers!

[zo1]

And if this was a coordinated deplatforming, who knows how many properties of theirs went down simultaneously, including cache from various search engines. E.g. If they used their Gmail account for emails to all those services mentioned up in the thread. Your email is your identity and it's not owned by you atm.

[hulitu]

You should trust Google, and Facebook, and PayPal and Amazon, and Apple and Microsoft, and Cloudfare, and ... Don't worry. Everything will be fine. /s

[croes]

Why shouldn't we? It's not like Google didn't do such things before.

[londons_explore]

At least ~half the 'BigCo is being unreasonable' stories here have another side where the poster was doing something terrible (eg. sharing child porn on their google drive account), and then complaining when their account gets blocked for 'no reason'.

The BigCo can't typically make any comment when this happens - merely say 'we have investigated and decided to uphold the ban', and then they look unreasonable.

Sometimes the unreasonable thing is done by malware on the users computer/phone, so even the user isn't aware, but from BigCo's perspective it all looks the same.

BigCo processes are still opaque, but often the outcomes aren't as unreasonable as they seem.

[Nicksil]

>At least ~half the 'BigCo is being unreasonable' stories here have another side where the poster was doing something terrible (eg. sharing child porn on their google drive account), ...

Where did "at least half" come from? Is this a statistic derived from factual information or just some gut feeling?

[londons_explore]

Knew someone who used to be involved in investigating these cases.

[candiodari]

You neglect to mention that this "child porn" example was private communication between child/parents and their doctor showing a medical issue, which (an algorithm of) Google had decided to upload, scan, and sent to the police.

It was never the intention of "the poster" to "share child porn". They never had any to begin with. It's just algorithms doing things, then blaming the owner of the device for what Google (incorrectly) perceived them to be doing.

[croes]

BigCo most of the times says we banned you but we don't tell you why.

[rwalle]

Dude, what's your issue

I only have something like 3 followers but I don't post fake stuff

Meanwhile people with millions of followers post misinformation all day long

Has it ever occurred to you that the number of Twitter followers means absolutely NOTHING?

[johnywalks]

Why should we trust google? They have a proven track record of doing this.

[effingwewt]

Yea GP has it backwards, I will literally take the word of a random on the net over google.

A random person may do something shady.

google does do shady shit constantly.

[glowupbot]

I can access the site, presumably their DNS records are cached by my ISP: https://i.imgur.com/75enaj3.png