Google can ban your Android app if they think you’ve clicked on your own ads

Post by malka » Wed, Apr 28, 2021, 12:50 PM UTC

PeterisP wrote: post #209

wombatpm wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But the bank will point to a specific transaction as the reason or a series of transactions to show a pattern. i.e., You've had 15 $9000 deposits over the last 15 weeks in what appears to be an attempt to avoid reporting to to the federal government.

No, I've worked a bit with banking fraud and money laundering, if we'll "fire" a customer, we won't provide any specifics. Pointing out specific behavior is appropriate if you want people to change that behavior. But in such cases we don't want them to start working differently, we want to stop doing business with them. We don't want them to create a new company and try to do the same thing more carefully and keep wi…

Post by oefrha » Wed, Apr 28, 2021, 12:54 PM UTC

matsemann wrote: post #304

sva_ wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> With the way the system is designed, it's trivial to game the system in such a way that your ad-supported competitors get purged from the play store. Its only a matter of time until people start abusing this heavily, if they don't already do so. But then Google will probably have to do something about it, if it gets out of hand.

It happened with SEO. People found a way to game their rankings by buying backlinks to their pages from spam sites. Google started punishing that behavior, so some have instead started buying backlinks for their competition to de-rank them.

Post by corobo » Wed, Apr 28, 2021, 12:58 PM UTC

wombatpm wrote: post #71

cmeacham98 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not aware of any major business that publicizes this kind of information. Try going to your bank and ask them for details on how their anti-fraud system works. The problem here is this imperfect click fraud ban can ricochet into your app getting banned too.

But the bank will point to a specific transaction as the reason or a series of transactions to show a pattern. i.e., You've had 15 $9000 deposits over the last 15 weeks in what appears to be an attempt to avoid reporting to to the federal government.

Post by panic » Wed, Apr 28, 2021, 1:04 PM UTC

matkoniecz wrote: post #97

ryandrake wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Legit question: is there any other service/company on earth that bans you for having multiple accounts? This seems like an insanely restrictive policy. One of the defining characteristics of internet communication is that you can have a “work persona” and a “home persona” and maybe another one for your hobbies, another one for your porn browsing and gambling, another one for your aunts and uncles. To deny this basic,…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppetry It is also a common policy on many forums. And while I love complaining about policies and behavior of FB, Google, Amazon etc, this one makes sense. Almost always you ban person, not account - so standard is to allow one account or to require accounts to be clearly linked (for example, a separate bot account that is clearly declared).

Post by colanderman » Wed, Apr 28, 2021, 1:13 PM UTC

nextlevelwizard wrote: post #81

colanderman wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many content creators are starting to move to a Patreon+Twitch model, in addition to YouTube.

Works if you are only delivering live videos. I've never been able to get into Twitch because there is so much dead time without anything interesting happening. Patreon only works if you already have established fan base that is willing to pay for your content. It does not help with discoverability at all. Youtube is still the king of video no matter how you slice it.