They may give on this in the end, but it still shows the problem of consolidating too much power in one place. I have no problem with FB disabling my account, because it's not a necessity. But if G+ decided it was OK to disable my Gmail because of a change in policy, or a rogue automated profile checker then that's an entirely different story.
(Of course there are other Google-wide policies (e.g. egregious spamming, illegal activity, etc) that do apply to all Google products, and violations of these policies could in fact lead to a Google-wide suspension.)
So don't post about your favorite torrents site that violates copyright law. Or if you're like me and live in Illinois, video tape a police officer because that violates wire tapping laws. Yes, I know I would be in violation of this policy if I sent an email from gmail about these things, but I'm guessing I'm more likely to get caught if it's on g+.
Keeping my gmail account active is worth far more to me than any potential benefits of google+ at this point.
In any event, the down votes on the grandparent were uncalled for.
Glendale, CA (Los Angeles Area)
AT&T Interactive/Yellowpages.com/Yp.com
Startup like environment with AT&T backing. Imagine a magical place where engineers are in charge.
Hiring Ruby on Rails engineers at all levels for internally facing tactical tools to support our Search and Data organizations. We have giant data sets and need your help in managing them.
