[Molitor5901]

I think that dormant accounts, where someone has not logged in for, say, 2 years, does not post, does not engage, should be repurposed - with given notice. It's kind of the equivalent of cybersquatting. Also, technically, a platform is within its right to do this. I think the better course of action is to utilize the account. Gmail has made this clear that if you don't log into an account after some time they will repurpose it.

[sunnybeetroot]

I disagree, there are security implications if an account was previously linked to someone but then it’s repurposed allowing for fraudulent social engineering use to occur. It’s like as if Gmail gave your email to someone else after a while. They don’t because it’s a bad idea.

[Invictus0]

Are you aware that domains can be exchanged? And emails can be sent from domains?

[sunnybeetroot]

Yes, that’s why I don’t recommend people use a custom domain when signing up for accounts given they can eventually be used by someone else. Use email providers that don’t allow your email address to be reused ie gmail, apple

[zeratax]

both of you used gmail as an example to make opposing arguments

[protimewaster]

I'm confused about that. I was pretty sure that Google's policy was that, while they'll delete inactive accounts, the addresses don't become available for use. I thought those addresses were basically dead.

But at least one poster says they're reusing addresses.

[sunnybeetroot]

Yes, the other person is mistaken, Google does not repurpose accounts.