Why ban people for using Ripcord? It’s a lightweight discord client. That seems like a tactical mistake. It’s in your interest to let users use popular third party clients that clearly aren’t malicious. Discord doesn’t make money on ads (at least, not in the server) so this also doesn’t warrant a ban.
If I were you, I would be seriously concerned by the fact that they were banned at all. They handled this thing all wrong — they should have been making noise like “Discord bans me for using popular third party client”.
Notice that this story was flagged. But if they had done it that way, it would be news. And discord would look seriously bad.
Please, consider spending an hour investigating whether (a) they were banned solely for using ripcord, and (b) are we communicating to our users that they will be banned for using ripcord?
I don’t understand why nobody seems to have noticed or cared about this angle. This is really not a great look for discord, and it’s the only piece of news that has ever made me reconsider whether it was a good idea to base our 1,000 user ML discord on your platform.
Because I could imagine myself getting banned for this. And if I get banned, as the server owner, I feel queasy not knowing whether that might destroy my server and undo a year of work.
All that said, I wouldn’t be surprised to know that OP was in fact doing something more, not merely “using ripcord”, and that you can’t discuss it publicly. But, if it’s true, I urge you, regardless of your position at the company, to nip this PR disaster before it has a chance to happen. Because literally no one will be sympathetic to any of your justifications for a ripcord ban. They have users’ interests at heart, and they let people on bad laptops use discord. Banning them for normal usage is a huge mistake — it makes no sense that you’d have to “protect” discord via a ban.