No. But even if that was the case, why punish anyone who upvoted it by restricting their account?
From the page and other articles, the review details the malware installed as part of the drm/anti-cheat system, and how it is not removed. There's an update now in which Valve falsely claims that the review information was wrong (which as far as I can tell it isn't) and deleted it presumably because they don't want people to not buy games just because they install malware. They're offloading that on to some "moderator" rather than themselves which I assume means either moderators are unpaid, or they have a contracting layer that allows them to claim a different entity it (even if it was according to rules Valve sets as a contractor relationship would imply).
But the important message being sent here is very clear: if you upvote a review detailing malware installed by a game your account can be restricted, so don't ever do that. You can only upvote positive reviews.
Impressively the grid is not really a grid and certain regions are truly inaccessible. This does feel like some sort of "built from spec, in a different country, knock-off" so at least we can be glad there will be loads more mediocre code out there.
They’re buying a MVNO that runs on their network. All they’re doing is buying a consumer brand. This has little to no effect on competition, all Mint customers were already on the T-Mobile network.
I don't disagree, but as someone who uses T-Mobile, the only thing they have going for them is their cheap prices and freebies. And even then they're barely worth it. If prices rise their customer base will disappear.
I am also a T-Mobile customer, but more companies is better even if don't use them. For me paying few dollars more is nothing and we get priority on the T-Mobile network. However, some people might really need that few dollars, few bucks here and there add up.
A big MVNO has far more power to negotiate lower rates for use of the network than the MVNO's individual customers do. And the MVNO can provide far better customer service. And have better computer security for customer data. And present its customers with fewer dark patterns. And...
Looks like T-Mobile's found a fix for those "problems".
This is the cycle of MVNOs. They are selling a commodity with tight margins, are almost always dependent on a single network, and when money gets tight, they sell to the network they're dependent on.
I've never seen an MVNO do a very successful switch to another network, and if you can't switch networks, you have less negotiating power than consumers.
The only one I ever saw do a switch was Republic Wireless (very early on they were on Sprint IIRC, and then slid over to Verizon or something, I wasn't paying much attention) but that has a whole separate VOIP over phone/wireless confusion to deal with.
Yeah, Republic Wireless was started by Bandwidth.com, a registered CLEC and leading provider of wholesale telephone services. It's not surprising that they'd have the wherewithal to build their MVNO with switching in mind, or that they owned the voice calling portion.
Apparently it was spun off in 2016, and is now owned by Dish. And looks like they switched to ATT and carrier based calling. I'm just summarizing wikipedia though; I don't know if there were SIM replacements or if the SIMs were network independent so they "just" had to have a different network allow attachment.
I used them for a bit right after they switched, and iirc it was a shitshow technically, this was BEFORE everyone had wificalling as an option, and the phones had to be relatively specific Android models, and there were some older ones you had to send back to get a new one or you had to limp along on the old network.
I didn't care because I was 99% wifi at the time anyway.
