Of course, Limor has no idea why this happened. Because commenting on specific accounts, even to the owners of those accounts, is "against policy".

If you work for Facebook, quit:

There are more Russian bots or whatever they are on Facebook than USA female EEs & CEOs from MIT on Facebook that have USA manufacturing companies in the USA, way to set the world on fire Mark.

Zuckerberg, 2010 2004:

Zuck: Yeah so if you ever need info about anyone at Harvard
Zuck: Just ask
Zuck: I have over 4,000 emails, pictures, addresses, SNS
[Bro McBro]: What? How'd you manage that one?
Zuck: People just submitted it.
Zuck: I don't know why.
Zuck: They "trust me"
Zuck: Dumb fucks

It of course goes without saying that, having banned someone with connections and influence, there may shortly be a fauxpology saying that "upon review", whatever triggered this ban did not actually violate their terms of service. (Implied: "this time"). Maybe they will even, in passive voice, throw an anonymous sweatshop contractor under the bus and abstractly "regret" any "inconvenience".

People without such influence don't get even that level of royal treatment.

This is your irregularly-scheduled reminder:

If you work for Facebook, quit.

It is morally indefensible for you to use your skills to make that company more powerful. By working there, you are making the world an objectively worse place. I'm sure you can find a job working for a company that you don't have to apologize for all the time.

You can do it. I believe in you.

Previously, previously, previously, previously, previously, previously, previously, previously, previously, previously.