I replied to appeal, asking them to identify the GPT and clarify the exact issue, but I received no direct response. A few weeks later, I got the follow-up message below, along with a warning about my account access.
Reading the terms, I understand that providing legal advice is an issue (today at least, as I don’t it was an issue when I set them up 2 years ago) . I can therefore understand and agree with the outcome, but the initial communication was not helpful.
Constructive feedback for OpenAI: When flagging an account, please explicitly state which Custom GPT is in violation in your very first email. You cant expect users to figure out which one it is if they have many.
when NEVER flagging an account for existing assets such as GPTs that have been operating for two years, GPTs that may then be completely unmanageable by the user not having a Plus subscription but yet still using ChatGPT for casual and their past chats, you instead:
NEVER threaten the status of the account
NEVER make automated decisions against the account
DO demote items from the store sharing if they match denial policy, as determined by multiple types of graders each returning a positive AND the weight of no positive flags for an ongoing two years taking precedence against one non-deterministic AI (the type that can decide “I should delete all these files on a whim”.)
Do maintain a view status for a GPT ID in case of restoration or meeting the requirements of appeal - in this system of view counts that makes it essentially impossible to be discovered if new.
And then:
Do not take any automated action against accounts without personnel to handle appeals thoughtfully and in a timely manner.
Do not employ AI to judge or classify people nor make business-critical decisions (see terms and conditions)
