Windscribe banning high usage accounts

[cccthats3cs 15]

Over the past few days I have seen a lot of posts on r/Windscribe on Reddit that they are suspending/banning high usage accounts, even though it is advertised as unlimited.

https://old.reddit.com/r/Windscribe/comments/1ke2n8p/account_banned/
https://old.reddit.com/r/Windscribe/comments/1kd9nmy/rip_unlimited/
https://old.reddit.com/r/Windscribe/comments/1kfn6f4/banned_without_warning_rude_response_from_support/
https://old.reddit.com/r/Windscribe/comments/1jzfb2h/warning_about_the_unlimited_data_plan_and_seeding/

The limit seems to be at the most 10 TB/month, and it's nice to see much higher usage listed on the AirVPN servers page, of course subject to the minimum 4/4 Mbps allocation as a contingency if all the bandwidth is used.

[breezer 0]

10TB/month seems more than fair for unlimited but they should warn before banning accounts.

[go558a83nk 375]

24 minutes ago, breezer said:

10TB/month seems more than fair for unlimited but they should warn before banning accounts.

The article windscribe published says they do warn.  But, some people have no email associated with their account.  In that case it may seem like there's no warning but I think they'll give accounts a second chance in that case.

[fsy 37]

I have always supported Windscribe but this time I can't. Pretty sure that if Windscribe was in the EU it would have been heavily fined for deceptive advertising at the very least.
 

45 minutes ago, breezer said:

10TB/month seems more than fair for unlimited but they should warn before banning accounts.

10 TB/month is not unlimited traffic in legal terms and in common language and if you read the links you will see that it's not only 10 TB/month the amount triggering a ban, but also 1-2 TB in 3 days, which does not infringe the 10 TB/month limit by itself.

Seems clear to me that Windscribe is in serious confusion on this argument. In one of the official statements linked by OP, in order to stubbornly maintain “unlimited traffic” plain lie in their deceptive advertising, they are willing to grasp at straws, by writing that they will update their ToS with vagueness:

Quote

If you want to know what "abuse" is, it will be defined as "any activity that is substantially affecting the VPN service for other users through patterns of usage that are taking up too many resources". Yes this is vague, and it has to be, because abuse varies depending on the factors at play.

It's the first time I read that a contract "has to be vague".  Terms of Service are a legal contract. A contract must not and can not impose vague terms, on pain of its nullity and vulnerability to legal challenges. Huge embarrassment that they could have avoided by turning on their brain and studying a little more. What a disappointment, Windscribe.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, breezer said:

10TB/month seems more than fair for unlimited but they should warn before banning accounts.

Either it's unlimited or it isn't. Why not just clearly state that it's 10TB/month and not unlimited? False advertising by Windscribe.