NEW ISSUE: Inauthentic activity


#123

I read the full article. I recall this being in the conclusion,but I didn’t full understand what they meant by this. Can you elaborate on your interpretation?


#124

No you won’t see it in Jarvee.


#125

Damn. What a pitty.


#126

When I got the notification about inauthentic activity, they erased some of my client’s followers. It means they’re following what they are saying and periodically sending these notifications/removing followers as opposed to limiting accounts daily


#127

If you guys haven’t read this. You should.


#128

So all those accounts that got banned, from that agency, changed their passwords?


#129

It’s unclear. I don’t think the changing of the password is the correlating factor. It seems that the agency was also offering powerlikes (growing the accounts first through automation) It’s possible these are the accounts that were deleted @eriu55


#130

I just want to say that in the event that this does end and it destroys our businesses, I will be running for US Congress. My main platform will be centered on breaking up Facebook as it has way too much power and influence over our freedoms. We already know Facebook is too dangerous for democracies everywhere. And their anti-competitive practices are destroying the entrepreneurial dream everywhere as well. I would love to have everyone’s support here.


#131

I volunteer running your campaign


#132

Let’s go!

Since I work remotely, I will be looking to move to New Hampshire in the next few months so we can organize folks to attend townhalls, question each of the 2020 candidates running whether they support breaking up Facebook, and gain more public attention to our cause. We will set up a political action committee soon to support this. I fear that if something is not done soon, Facebook could become more powerful than all governments combined.


#133

It is already my friend.


#134

Just replying again wondering if anyone has experienced anything new since the notices have been sent out? Still p worried about the risk for my clients :frowning:


#135

Right there with you. We’re in the dark here, we’ve always been, but now it’s scary to walk because there are apparent dangers.

Honestly, the FB Research white paper you shared really calmed my worries a lot - in the sense that, it seems their method of intervention is not drastic (blocks/account disables) but rather passive (delayed removal of activity). Further, I think they realize it’s better to go after big fish (large scale providers like Social Steeze who has 1000s of clients) as opposed to chopping the heads of individual accounts who are sold F/UF services not knowing any better. To an extent, we know what we are doing is “wrong” but our clients don’t and they shouldn’t be heavily penalized for it, I think Facebook understands this as well. Perhaps the push was a bottom-up test to see if clients of AAS will discontinue their service out of fear. Funny thing is I’ve only lost 1 client from this.

It was mentioned in another thread but to a certain point, FB/IG likes bots because they stoke engagement on the platform (bring people back on it) and drive more traffic which leads to more impressions on ads which leads to more $$. I think as long as the accounts you are running are high quality and create value for the platform, they will be left alone. If they are scammy/poor quality they could be at risk.

The last thing to consider is that without F/UF it’s virtually impossible to grow an Instagram account to a significant size. If new people/content creators can’t get any traction without us because Instagram doesn’t allow F/UF to exist, they are going to give up and stop investing time and capital into creating content.

So overall, I think we’re okay in the near term I’ve always been a bit more pessimistic in the sense that I think Doomsday is near, but I can’t tell when or how.

@Koven


#136

I have stopped receiving it for a few weeks and it just returned again today as I made a giveaway post. I haven’t done anything differently in between. Anyone knows why?


#137

got this notification on a new client too

they decided to make the post more scary as they switched from “please change your password to prevent these programs to accessing your account” to “please change your password to prevent your account from being disabled”


#138

What proxies are you using?


#139

Just data center ones 2 people per proxy. Never gotten any bans on accounts and clients


#140

I never had this ! Did you experienced a shadowban after this ?


#141

I’ve received the same message yesterday. It’s true that the wording makes it sound more scary. Over the last couple of days, I’ve been testing a couple apps, most of which are for scheduling posts. I realize there are some services, that I just now realize offer “promotion” services as well. There’s a mobile app called “Cleaner for Instagram”. They offer a new app named “Famous”. It’s simple for what it does. You submit a pic to the service, they show it to their users, and they can choose to interact with it through the app. It’s a big comment and like pod. I’d not write this comment, if I’d not have just received an email from Crowdfire as well – which is a far more popular, known, and reputable service. They offer new promotion possibilities now too. My suspicion is that the “crackdown” also affects this kind of promotion. I’ve been setting up Crowdfire for auto-posting, so it might have caused the warning to trigger.

Here’s an excerpt of the mail Crowdfire sent me:

Good news! You’ve been selected for Crowdfire’s Creator Program where we promote your posts to thousands of social media influencers for free. Here’s how it works—

  • You opt-in as a Creator and we start recommending your posts daily to social media influencers through the Crowdfire app.
  • They share your posts (with credits) with thousands of interested followers across Instagram, Facebook, Pinterest, and Twitter.
  • You start getting more and more views, likes, and followers every day!

Although I’m more leaning towards saying that participating in such a service is “authentic”, because a human interacts with the content, I can see how it’s also skewed, because some people are going to liking pictures only to get “free credits” – which has been shown in the past with similar services.

I’m not getting a sense of “it’s safe to do x, and not safe to do y” from reading this thread. Did we reach consensus yet?

Thank you all for sharing the information.


#142

general consensus is that accounts that are automated but are genuine people are at less risk than straight up CPA/bot accounts

Safest is to really have the most possible human-like settings with Sleep modes