https://www.crowdtilt.com/campaigns/eden-alexander-emergency...
Which part of the TOS did she violate?
I did read the TOS and I don't see how "tweets from others retweeted by Eden Alexander offering adult material in exchange for donations" "is in direct violation of our terms of service". (quotes from http://blog.wepay.com/post/86048891401/wepays-terms-of-servi... )
If not, why does it not point out the tweets that led to the decision?
The violation seems to be that it's a radio show which has at one point featured: "Pastor Scott Lively joined us revealing the evils of the homosexual agenda". This violates "you will not accept payments or use the service in connection with [...] hate".
This is... I mean, I agree that this is using the service in connection with hate. But if I have a criticism of WePay here, it's not "you should be taking down that fundraiser" and it isn't "leaving that fundraiser up is inconsistent with taking down Eden's". It's more like "hate is a ridiculously vague thing to disallow in your TOS".
So essentially, she repeated something someone else said, is that about it?
I think the bigger question is - WTF is up with the Doctor? I have never heard of this. I always thought they remained neutral regardless of beliefs?
ToS are are proven by courts right...
1) this wasn't about porn, it was about a seriously ill woman who needed help
2) she retweeted some stuff from third parties who weren't part of her campaign, probably out of ignorance, not realizing it might be a problem
3) wepay didn't do the sensible thing and just talk to her and let her know she might be breaking the ToS, they closed down her campaign, her situation escalated and now she's in ER
4) It's amazing that people just say banks deem adult content as risky, and just accept that this is ok. It only just recently broke that banks are actively closing down porn actors bank accounts just because of their profession.
This is a shitty situation, but that doesn't mean any of the parties involved are malicious or evil.
> wepay didn't do the sensible thing and just talk to her and let her know she might be breaking the ToS
I agree that they probably should have done this.
That's because it is risky. No question. Adult services have a higher rate of charge-backs and fraudulently obtained cards than many other sectors.
This is also an opportunity to take a stand and invite other payment processors to accept funds from legal adult activities, AMD thetebynwin your business.