Google suspended our app, threatened to delete our Google accounts(medium.com)
medium.com
Google suspended our app, threatened to delete our Google accounts
https://medium.com/@thedrbits/google-has-threatened-to-delete-all-our-google-accounts-over-nothing-13a05a31a55a
50 comments
I'm unsure how you came to the conclusion about the reviews being fake. Is there more information on this?
It's called 'context clues'. You don't get all 5 star reviews for an app just launched unless you're using relatives, friends, and paying for reviews.
Also, as their description states: It takes a long time to cash out the bitcoin, to receive even 1 cent worth... yet there are reviewers claiming they've cashed out within the first week? Yeah, no.
Also, as their description states: It takes a long time to cash out the bitcoin, to receive even 1 cent worth... yet there are reviewers claiming they've cashed out within the first week? Yeah, no.
You can cash out on the first day -- you're making assumptions without trying the app. What you're saying is false.
Edit: Also regarding the reviews on a new app it's called marketing you should look into it. What you do is, you pay money and then people hear about your app and go download it. People do it when they launch apps so they can get off to a good start in the store.
Edit: Also regarding the reviews on a new app it's called marketing you should look into it. What you do is, you pay money and then people hear about your app and go download it. People do it when they launch apps so they can get off to a good start in the store.
>Edit: Also regarding the reviews on a new app it's called marketing you should look into it. What you do is, you pay money and then people hear about your app and go download it.
https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/#bus...
"If we find that you have attempted to manipulate reviews, inflate your chart rankings with paid, incentivized, filtered, or fake feedback, or engage with third-party services to do so on your behalf, we will take steps to preserve the integrity of the App Store, which may include expelling you from the Developer Program."
https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/#bus...
"If we find that you have attempted to manipulate reviews, inflate your chart rankings with paid, incentivized, filtered, or fake feedback, or engage with third-party services to do so on your behalf, we will take steps to preserve the integrity of the App Store, which may include expelling you from the Developer Program."
Re-read the comment more carefully - "it's called marketing you should look into it" means you spend money to promote the app so it gets downloaded, ("and then people hear about your app and go download it"), and potentially reviewed by those users. Nowhere does it state that they paid money for any reviews.
And doing marketing is not a violation of any agreements, including the Apple one you pointlessly quoted.
And doing marketing is not a violation of any agreements, including the Apple one you pointlessly quoted.
Lets quote a bit more
"Also regarding the reviews on a new app it's called marketing you should look into it. "
Which was a reply to weird 5 star reviews. And no, posting arguably false good reviews on your product as id you were a random user is not marketting.
"Also regarding the reviews on a new app it's called marketing you should look into it. "
Which was a reply to weird 5 star reviews. And no, posting arguably false good reviews on your product as id you were a random user is not marketting.
sebastien_b got my point -- we paid for advertisement and that resulted in reviews. Why is that hard to believe?
You're correct we did not buy reviews, what I meant is that we paid for very targeted marketing on day 1. We did not buy reviews EVER.
From the Apple app store link, people are giving glowing 5-star reviews that are titled "Earn Crypto for playing games", "Playing = making $$$", and "Epic btc".
From the same link, the app description says "Most users earn an amount that is only worth a fraction of one cent (USD)."
Pray tell, where is your targeted marketing finding people who get excited enough to write gushing 5-star reviews over being paid "a fraction of one cent (USD)"? On the first couple of days after release, no less.
From the same link, the app description says "Most users earn an amount that is only worth a fraction of one cent (USD)."
Pray tell, where is your targeted marketing finding people who get excited enough to write gushing 5-star reviews over being paid "a fraction of one cent (USD)"? On the first couple of days after release, no less.
Users who already played on our android app. We sent out messages to all our Android users and some of them use both platforms have and iPad or use an Android phone for work iPhone for personal. They jumped straight in we had hundreds of downloads.
You "paid for very targeted marketing on day 1" to "Users who already played on our android app", to quote your own posts, to get the reviews we see on the Apple app store?
Your statements are difficult to parse into any kind of coherent defense.
Your statements are difficult to parse into any kind of coherent defense.
We did both. I was being asked about specific reviews and where I think they came from.
Which one is it? "BE ADVISED: It takes a long time to earn enough Loyalty Points to cash out for a meaningful amount of Bitcoin" or "You can cash out on the first day"?
"meaningful amount" -- the app rewards users in a very small amount we're very clear about that. There's no contradiction there.
You can withdraw even a fraction of a penny on the first day we're not hiding anything. Our users know this.
You can withdraw even a fraction of a penny on the first day we're not hiding anything. Our users know this.
Huh, so there are actual people out there that claims "you can make money on your first day!" and rate apps 5 stars because you can make a fraction of a cent.
I am sorry but I will disagree with your definition of marketing. If you are creating fake reviews that is just lying, not marketting
I am sorry but I will disagree with your definition of marketing. If you are creating fake reviews that is just lying, not marketting
Real users made those reviews. You're twisting my words. Marketing is how you get users in the app on the first day. We did launch day advertising. It's normal.
Edit: one other point on this. A lot of people are curious about Bitcoin and have never owned any. This is why they are happy. Imagine if there was this futuristic currency you heard about on the news and then someone said to you "You want to try it out I'll send you a small amount right now." That's basically what we do. We tell people they won't get rich from our app in the description very clearly, but they get to try Bitcoin for the first time and understand what it is. We're a gateway. We help them setup their first Bitcoin account, etc.
Apple? Isn‘t this about google?
(Sincerely puzzled, but it‘s late over here)
(Sincerely puzzled, but it‘s late over here)
The app I linked is the same app by the same guy and it's in violation of at least 2 sections of Apple's ToS. It's only a matter of time before Apple does the same thing Google did.
What terms does it violate? We have read them all in detail. I'll wait.
Indeed - I'd like to know which subsection states you can't do any marketing for your app.
*"marketing" != paying for reviews, as this joecool1029 seems to assume.
*"marketing" != paying for reviews, as this joecool1029 seems to assume.
It's the iOS version of the Android app that got pulled (app.getloaded.bitcoinblast). Seems like a fair assumption that the Android app was substantially similar.
They are similar although the assumptions about what the game entails written by joecool1029 are absolutely false.
joecool1029 has not even read the description clearly let alone seen the game in action. Lots of false accusations from this one. We have not violated any of Google's terms, or Apple's for that matter.
joecool1029 has not even read the description clearly let alone seen the game in action. Lots of false accusations from this one. We have not violated any of Google's terms, or Apple's for that matter.
There is no gambling in the app you're assuming a lot without trying the app.
You earn the exact same amount of points on every level -- those points are convertible to Bitcoin -- did you even read the description?
Edit 1: Regarding the term that you claim it's violating, we do not reward users for taking any specific actions. They receive loyalty points for playing. That's not a specific action.
Edit 2: Did you read the post? We had 20,000 reviews and over a million users you think that was fake generated traffic?
Edit 3: Google is hiring you might want to apply in the Google Play review department because you seem to jump to a lot of conclusions you'd fit in well there.
You earn the exact same amount of points on every level -- those points are convertible to Bitcoin -- did you even read the description?
Edit 1: Regarding the term that you claim it's violating, we do not reward users for taking any specific actions. They receive loyalty points for playing. That's not a specific action.
Edit 2: Did you read the post? We had 20,000 reviews and over a million users you think that was fake generated traffic?
Edit 3: Google is hiring you might want to apply in the Google Play review department because you seem to jump to a lot of conclusions you'd fit in well there.
So, let me get this straight: This is a game that pays you tiny amounts of bitcoin to play, with a semi-complicated payout scheme?
That sounds to me like you're running a bitcoin miner on people's devices and taking a cut yourself. I'd very much consider that "deceptive" unless made painfully obvious in the description.
Gambling is a grey area due to the game not requiring you to win, but it really should be considered gambling due to it being a game that pays you money, teaching an unhealthy association for young players.
Plus, the legal definition of gambling do not matter here, only Google's definition in the ToS, which includes games that provide prizes of real-world value. That would include Bitcoin.
That sounds to me like you're running a bitcoin miner on people's devices and taking a cut yourself. I'd very much consider that "deceptive" unless made painfully obvious in the description.
Gambling is a grey area due to the game not requiring you to win, but it really should be considered gambling due to it being a game that pays you money, teaching an unhealthy association for young players.
Plus, the legal definition of gambling do not matter here, only Google's definition in the ToS, which includes games that provide prizes of real-world value. That would include Bitcoin.
Google allows games that reward in real world value. They don't allow gambling. We were not suspended for violating the gambling terms because our app includes no gambling at all and no games of skill. We give away money to all users and nobody earns more or less.
Loyalty points convert to Bitcoin it's not complicated if it was would our rating be 4.5 we have not bought any users ever.
Search rewards apps on Google there are hundreds of them. Those do not violate Google terms.
Loyalty points convert to Bitcoin it's not complicated if it was would our rating be 4.5 we have not bought any users ever.
Search rewards apps on Google there are hundreds of them. Those do not violate Google terms.
You're avoiding the primary point, and the only point that Google complained about ("deception"). Suspicious.
If you really wish to keep nitpicking on gambling, I'll introduce you to a snippet of the Google TOS which invalidates any argument you may have as to whether or not your app can be considered gambling:
> "... including, but not limited to... "
The list of scenarios is non-exclusive, and Google is free to add additional scenarios and interpretations to the list as they please.
> Loyalty points convert to Bitcoin it's not complicated if it was would our rating be 4.5 we have not bought any users ever.
Your rating does not interest me, although I am slightly amused that you're saying you bought your users.
I, as an end-user reading your terms, find your payout scheme rather complicated: You only pay out above a certain threshold, only once a week, and only if you remember to register (despite probably mining regardless). A lot of areas that lead to no or missed payouts.
> Search rewards apps on Google there are hundreds of them. Those do not violate Google terms.
This is entirely irrelevant. Google's enforcement of a policy does not affect its validity.
If you really wish to keep nitpicking on gambling, I'll introduce you to a snippet of the Google TOS which invalidates any argument you may have as to whether or not your app can be considered gambling:
> "... including, but not limited to... "
The list of scenarios is non-exclusive, and Google is free to add additional scenarios and interpretations to the list as they please.
> Loyalty points convert to Bitcoin it's not complicated if it was would our rating be 4.5 we have not bought any users ever.
Your rating does not interest me, although I am slightly amused that you're saying you bought your users.
I, as an end-user reading your terms, find your payout scheme rather complicated: You only pay out above a certain threshold, only once a week, and only if you remember to register (despite probably mining regardless). A lot of areas that lead to no or missed payouts.
> Search rewards apps on Google there are hundreds of them. Those do not violate Google terms.
This is entirely irrelevant. Google's enforcement of a policy does not affect its validity.
We did not buy any users that is a misinterpretation of my point that we have reviews on day 1 because we paid for advertising.
Our app doesn't mine on their phone -- phone mining is not profitable at all.
Our app doesn't mine on their phone -- phone mining is not profitable at all.
Then where does the money come from?
This is even more suspicious if it is not sharing revenue generated by the user, as it then sounds like an unsustainable marketing stunt.
This is even more suspicious if it is not sharing revenue generated by the user, as it then sounds like an unsustainable marketing stunt.
Ads? Fractions of a cent is not much, seems like the same order as the amount that could be earned through ad impressions.
Does every user receive 100% of the bitcoins mined using their device’s resources?
If the answer is “no”, then you’re either running a Bitcoin lottery (which is gambling), a Bitcoin skimmer (which is stealing), and/or a Bitcoin pyramid scheme (which is fraudulent).
From your reply, the answer is lottery/gambling, and from other replies, you did not clearly mark your app as a gambling app. That you’re gambling “points bought with watts” in no way contradicts that.
If I misunderstand which of the three paths your app is taking, or if somehow you’re constructing a fourth path, please correct me in plain and specific language on how you acquire (through mining or currency conversion) the Bitcoin it distributes to end users, and how you are not a lottery system such that each user receives the full value of currency their device is responsible for creating.
EDIT: As a footnote, your article is full of outrage but contains no technical details about your app, which is a common red flag for “we got caught doing something we’re unwilling to describe plainly”.
If the answer is “no”, then you’re either running a Bitcoin lottery (which is gambling), a Bitcoin skimmer (which is stealing), and/or a Bitcoin pyramid scheme (which is fraudulent).
From your reply, the answer is lottery/gambling, and from other replies, you did not clearly mark your app as a gambling app. That you’re gambling “points bought with watts” in no way contradicts that.
If I misunderstand which of the three paths your app is taking, or if somehow you’re constructing a fourth path, please correct me in plain and specific language on how you acquire (through mining or currency conversion) the Bitcoin it distributes to end users, and how you are not a lottery system such that each user receives the full value of currency their device is responsible for creating.
EDIT: As a footnote, your article is full of outrage but contains no technical details about your app, which is a common red flag for “we got caught doing something we’re unwilling to describe plainly”.
We don't mine Bitcoin on users resources this is a witch hunt. I have nowhere mentioned mining and our app does not mine. Mining only works with huge ASIC farms mostly in China with cheap power. We are not involved in this at all.
Our app has ads, like many apps do. That's the primary way we make money. We give users loyalty points for playing the game, they can cash those out for a very small amount of Bitcoin that is it.
Our app has ads, like many apps do. That's the primary way we make money. We give users loyalty points for playing the game, they can cash those out for a very small amount of Bitcoin that is it.
Is your "primary" way the only way you make money through the app, or is there a secondary mechanism for making money through it?
Right now the other source is Coinbase referrals -- they have a referral program for new users that we onboard. You can google it to see how it works.
Is the game skill-based (poker) or luck-based (slot machine RNG)?
The game is a mix of skill and luck. The reward is not affected by your game performance —- win or lose you receive the same loyalty points. Thats what makes it neither a game of skill or gambling.
>You earn the exact same amount of points on every level -- those points are convertible to Bitcoin
>Edit 1: Regarding the term that you claim it's violating, we do not reward users for taking any specific actions. They receive loyalty points for playing. That's not a specific action.
Seems like a contradiction to me. From Google, "For all other locations, we don't allow content or services that facilitate online gambling, including, but not limited to, online casinos, sports betting and lotteries, and games of skill that offer prizes of cash or other real world value."
Most would agree redeeming bitcoin provides access to real world value.
>Edit 3: Google is hiring you might want to apply in the Google Play review department because you seem to jump to a lot of conclusions you'd fit in well there.
Aw come on, you're gonna make dang mad with these personal attacks. You should be paying me for taking the time out of my day to consult and provide this educational seminar. I take BTC: 1JRtfLaknTjzsLowQZYMLsanDx76rFhtER
>Edit 1: Regarding the term that you claim it's violating, we do not reward users for taking any specific actions. They receive loyalty points for playing. That's not a specific action.
Seems like a contradiction to me. From Google, "For all other locations, we don't allow content or services that facilitate online gambling, including, but not limited to, online casinos, sports betting and lotteries, and games of skill that offer prizes of cash or other real world value."
Most would agree redeeming bitcoin provides access to real world value.
>Edit 3: Google is hiring you might want to apply in the Google Play review department because you seem to jump to a lot of conclusions you'd fit in well there.
Aw come on, you're gonna make dang mad with these personal attacks. You should be paying me for taking the time out of my day to consult and provide this educational seminar. I take BTC: 1JRtfLaknTjzsLowQZYMLsanDx76rFhtER
It's not a "game of skill" or gambling look into Skillz or World Winner you're not familiar with the terminology being used here those are very specific things.
The term from Apple you're mentioning came about because during the ICO era people were rewarding users for taking actions like downloading an app, retweeting something, etc. Our apps do not do that.
It's not a complicated scheme. You earn loyalty points for playing the game, you cash those out to Bitcoin.
The term from Apple you're mentioning came about because during the ICO era people were rewarding users for taking actions like downloading an app, retweeting something, etc. Our apps do not do that.
It's not a complicated scheme. You earn loyalty points for playing the game, you cash those out to Bitcoin.
Update on this thread: Google just removed our suspension and asked us to resubmit the app. We have done so and are waiting to hear back.
I've learned a lot from this post on Hacker News about the general feeling people have about Bitcoin these days. I was accused of several scams and manipulations in this thread, all of which were false. I was a scammer until proven innocent and it appears to some the jury is still out or they have already decided that I am a scammer (I'm not).
Here's the Twitter thread of our users that broke through to Google if you want to see a sampling of our loyal Android users: https://twitter.com/bling_fi/status/1221902959023312896?s=20
I've learned a lot from this post on Hacker News about the general feeling people have about Bitcoin these days. I was accused of several scams and manipulations in this thread, all of which were false. I was a scammer until proven innocent and it appears to some the jury is still out or they have already decided that I am a scammer (I'm not).
Here's the Twitter thread of our users that broke through to Google if you want to see a sampling of our loyal Android users: https://twitter.com/bling_fi/status/1221902959023312896?s=20
Final update on this thread:
We are back on Google Play with no explanation or retraction of threats to related accounts if we get suspended again.
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=app.getloaded....
We are back on Google Play with no explanation or retraction of threats to related accounts if we get suspended again.
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=app.getloaded....
Don't build a product that solely relies on another product or service that cannot be replaced. That's just a bad business :)
True for any app company really but true it's a weak point of our offering at the moment. Startups tend to rely on another product early on, then de-risk as they grow which is our plan.
Regardless of the legitimacy of the app, it is unwise to be dependent on Google for your entire infrastructure. They do and have shutdown entire accounts with no information, feedback or appeals.
I'm overly dependent on them currently myself.
We had a recent issue in accounting where an unaccounted for charge kept hitting billing from Google LLC. As we use and sell Google Suite, run a few million in Google ads and have limited cloud services we assumed the error was on our side. I audit all google ads looking for appropriate matches and then call Google Ad support, which was helpful and able to confirm the charges were not in any way related to Ads ( billing prefix suggested it was not but frequency aligned with how ads bill so was the most likely candidate)
They could not tell us what it was for or what "google llc" is
A google search for the prefix identified it as what is used for Google Play.
That is the one service that has no legitimate uses on our corporate card.
Contacting Google play about the charges and asking for clarification and disputing was not difficult.
They have an internal review period. I think 5-7 days, the review came back as. Legitimate charges. Ok, what for? They can't tell us.
What?
These were multiple charges of $500 adding up to nearly 5k in a month, but they can't match the charge to a service?
And with several million in yearly spending with Google, one would hope for a little more response time and explanation, but, that's chump change to them.
I will still be using every service, but I definitely would invite some alternatives as It is unwise to depend on Google for anything.
I'm overly dependent on them currently myself.
We had a recent issue in accounting where an unaccounted for charge kept hitting billing from Google LLC. As we use and sell Google Suite, run a few million in Google ads and have limited cloud services we assumed the error was on our side. I audit all google ads looking for appropriate matches and then call Google Ad support, which was helpful and able to confirm the charges were not in any way related to Ads ( billing prefix suggested it was not but frequency aligned with how ads bill so was the most likely candidate)
They could not tell us what it was for or what "google llc" is
A google search for the prefix identified it as what is used for Google Play.
That is the one service that has no legitimate uses on our corporate card.
Contacting Google play about the charges and asking for clarification and disputing was not difficult.
They have an internal review period. I think 5-7 days, the review came back as. Legitimate charges. Ok, what for? They can't tell us.
What?
These were multiple charges of $500 adding up to nearly 5k in a month, but they can't match the charge to a service?
And with several million in yearly spending with Google, one would hope for a little more response time and explanation, but, that's chump change to them.
I will still be using every service, but I definitely would invite some alternatives as It is unwise to depend on Google for anything.
I've had clients that operate in such 'sensitive' or 'high-risk' areas. Specifically, ones like penny stock promoters and now some crpytocurrency promoters. I could grind my axe about what can happen with low-risk clients getting shafted by Google, but this submission comes along with the territory they chose to operate in. It's an expected result.
The thing is people like my earlier mentioned clients know they are in a field that walks the tightrope between what is legal and what isn't. There's claims they can't make, disclaimers they must post. But that's not all that's dealt with. Even simple sweepstakes have to comply with some basic regulations and required notices.
Google and stuff like merchant accounts treat that type of client just like they are lepers. Nobody wants to touch them, nobody wants to hear from them . They have a market, but not on FAANG's marketplaces, search engines, cloud platforms, etc. Because of it, they have to use more expensive high-risk merchant accounts and roll with the punches from Google issuing manual search ranking penalties because this is an industry they don't want to promote. Whether or not you're buying services off Google they still wield a massive amount of power through their monopoly on search. It is inescapable.
OP hasn't realized any of this, hasn't even tried to seem compliant or sneak in with their services while still doing his thing. This is a good learning experience.
The thing is people like my earlier mentioned clients know they are in a field that walks the tightrope between what is legal and what isn't. There's claims they can't make, disclaimers they must post. But that's not all that's dealt with. Even simple sweepstakes have to comply with some basic regulations and required notices.
Google and stuff like merchant accounts treat that type of client just like they are lepers. Nobody wants to touch them, nobody wants to hear from them . They have a market, but not on FAANG's marketplaces, search engines, cloud platforms, etc. Because of it, they have to use more expensive high-risk merchant accounts and roll with the punches from Google issuing manual search ranking penalties because this is an industry they don't want to promote. Whether or not you're buying services off Google they still wield a massive amount of power through their monopoly on search. It is inescapable.
OP hasn't realized any of this, hasn't even tried to seem compliant or sneak in with their services while still doing his thing. This is a good learning experience.
You haven't even tried to understand what we do and you've made a ton of false accusations in the process.
We're 100% compliant with Google policies I think you just aren't familiar with the rules in this regard there are literally hundreds of rewarded apps on Android that's not a violation of their terms.
You're not wrong about cryptocurrency being a rough area, but you are wrong that we haven't done our homework. We know every policy of every app store and ad network and mail newsletter system, etc. We read the terms of everything. We know where we stand.
We're 100% compliant with Google policies I think you just aren't familiar with the rules in this regard there are literally hundreds of rewarded apps on Android that's not a violation of their terms.
You're not wrong about cryptocurrency being a rough area, but you are wrong that we haven't done our homework. We know every policy of every app store and ad network and mail newsletter system, etc. We read the terms of everything. We know where we stand.
Right this is a nightmare example. You get too far into Google and it feels OK, until it's not and then you realize it.
There are way too many stories about Google and Apple suddenly closing accounts and removing apps to trust them with your business.
Let me tell you what happened: You created a gambling app and tried to pass it off as a game then bought a bunch of fake reviews. But yeah, sure... whining on Medium about it is going to turn things around for you. Stick to peddling on the malware app stores.
I'm upvoting this because I can't wait for an Apple employee to stop by and blast this 'Age 12+!' shit[1] out of orbit for violating their TOS[2], specifically 3.1.5(b)(v):
[1]https://apps.apple.com/us/app/bitcoin-blast/id1494240093
[2]https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/#cry...
EDIT: Please also see Google's policy on gambling apps (Which guess what? not permitted in the US!) https://play.google.com/about/restricted-content/gambling/