Adsense-bowling victim. Google gives nothing but cookie-cutter responses.

Discussion in 'Guidelines / Compliance' started by MarkusE, Nov 13, 2007.

  1. #1
    It's really frustrating because Adsense doesn't have any phone support. I could write out a full page with server logs showing how there was no way I could have personally placed my ad code on a violating webpage, and Google would just give a standard cookie-cutter response like

    "We have reviewed your website again and determined that there were invalid clicks. Your account will remain banned. kthxbai."

    I tried using a family member's name and registering a new account a while ago, and it got approved. After spending some 20 hours on launching a new website and racking nearly $100 on it, Google banned me again for being "associated with formerly banned accounts." I used a completely different name, tax ID, site URL, IP address, etc. The only way they could have known is through Gmail accounts...and if so, they're truly taking over the world. I've tried writing another appeal but I'm not expecting much.

    What can I do? This is extremely frustrating. It seems that Google doesn't even read your appeals and instead just responds with automatic cookie-cutter templates. It's also extremely assholish of them to ban people now, as opposed to during application (a simple rejection would have been better). On the other hand, there are some blatant violations up for months I've reported and Google doesn't seem to give a crap about them. The irony.
     
    MarkusE, Nov 13, 2007 IP
  2. Kngavl

    Kngavl Peon

    Messages:
    964
    Likes Received:
    26
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #2
    Once banned mate, always baned, few exceptions.
     
    Kngavl, Nov 14, 2007 IP
  3. astup1didiot

    astup1didiot Notable Member

    Messages:
    5,926
    Likes Received:
    270
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    280
    #3
    You were banned, end of story, sorry to say. Did you use a different "physical address", if you didn't then of course they realized it was linked to a banned account. Also, you agree to the GMail terms of service when you sign-up, so if it says they can read all your e-mail then guess what... they can. ;)
     
    astup1didiot, Nov 14, 2007 IP
  4. Remotay

    Remotay Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,426
    Likes Received:
    61
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    140
    #4
    They can track your IP Logins to. New account got log ins from a banned IP. Change you IP address. (Switch ISPs!)
     
    Remotay, Nov 14, 2007 IP
  5. MarkusE

    MarkusE Guest

    Messages:
    111
    Likes Received:
    0
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    53
    #5
    This is utterly retarded, then. This incident happened before Google introduced the "allow list" option, too.

    I tried twice, both cookie-cutters and gave up. You think I should send in another appeal and see what happens?

    Another company seriously needs to break Google's monopoly on the contextual advertising market. Awful customer service, ripping off publishers, etc.
     
    MarkusE, Nov 14, 2007 IP
  6. MarkusE

    MarkusE Guest

    Messages:
    111
    Likes Received:
    0
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    53
    #6
    People have successfully gotten around a ban before, right?

    Different name
    Different Tax ID
    Different physical address
    Different ISP
    Different website(s)
    Different email logins

    Anything else?
     
    MarkusE, Nov 14, 2007 IP
  7. RforRYUkunDetta

    RforRYUkunDetta Peon

    Messages:
    30
    Likes Received:
    0
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #7
    new OS! lol

    google can track down and DL your cookies, so if you use the same computer, expect to be busted
     
    RforRYUkunDetta, Nov 15, 2007 IP
  8. MarkusE

    MarkusE Guest

    Messages:
    111
    Likes Received:
    0
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    53
    #8
    How is a new OS necessary?

    I can just clear my cookies and browser cache.
     
    MarkusE, Nov 15, 2007 IP