I know a guy who developed for a company who over time "became" a little shady. At one point they were simple apps and this dev was working for them on contract so he put out some one time apps, his personal account was associated for a while (bad choice).
Anyway he leaves and joins another company and suddenly that company is banned from the Play Store. Took awhile to figure out that his previous employer (and some mysterious sub companies) were banned at the same time and presumably associated through this guy who again at his new employer had his personal account tied in some way.
And in fairness his new employer very much could have looked like a shadow company created by the first.
Yeh, but we're not talking about "Hitler drank water, if you drink water you're a Nazi".
We're talking about a practice that is intended to avoid abuse detection. In the case of the non-sketchy parties, they're hoping to avoid false positives, but they're still doing the same thing. I'm not criticizing, I'm pointing out irony. When legitimate users have to do the same things as sketchy users, your abuse detection sucks.
I know a guy who developed for a company who over time "became" a little shady. At one point they were simple apps and this dev was working for them on contract so he put out some one time apps, his personal account was associated for a while (bad choice).
Anyway he leaves and joins another company and suddenly that company is banned from the Play Store. Took awhile to figure out that his previous employer (and some mysterious sub companies) were banned at the same time and presumably associated through this guy who again at his new employer had his personal account tied in some way.
And in fairness his new employer very much could have looked like a shadow company created by the first.
Keep that stuff separated.