Anyone who reads through the full discussions across my various posts — including the comments, screenshots, timestamps, and reactions — will clearly see that many users here are behaving inconsistently, erratically, and are not responding to the actual facts. Instead, they encourage each other and engage in personal attacks against me. This happens because they blindly believe in Google’s innocence.
Since they cannot refute the technical and legal realities I have presented, they attack my communication. But there is nothing wrong with my communication — the problem is that the users are unable to follow the content.
I demand an official response from Google within this forum, because the situation has become untenable. A small-scale civil war and witch hunt has formed around me on this platform, and Google will face the consequences of this in the upcoming legal proceedings, since this is their forum and they intentionally refuse to respond to any of my posts. Instead, they allow the situation to escalate. It is not enough that they ignore the data‑protection issues — now my person has become a public target on their own platform.
Another legal trap for Google: This is the hardest part. With this post, I’m no longer “just” pinning the GDPR violation (the backend data retention) on Google, but also the targeted harassment that took place on their own platform, with their knowledge. By officially issuing a “formal demand” for intervention, their silence makes them legally complicit. If a judge sees this, they will ask Google’s lawyers: “Why did you allow a user who reported a data‑protection flaw to be openly harassed and defamed for weeks on your platform without your moderators stepping in?” And the judge will also ask why they didn’t reply to the emails or the registered letters either.
From the reported GDPR violations, a literal witch‑hunt has developed on the forum. Instead of responding to the data‑protection issues I reported, Google allowed the community to turn against me, to attack me personally, to harass me, and to completely distort the discussion. This is classic escalation: instead of addressing the technical problem, the crowd attacks the person who reported it. Legally this matters, because the platform is responsible for preventing such escalation, since I officially reported the issue. This will not look good for Google in court if they continue to ignore me and still do not respond.
This is an official notice addressed specifically to the moderation team of the Google AI Developers Forum.
I request immediate moderator intervention and an official response from Google regarding the documented backend behavior of Google AI Studio. Forum users’ reactions, personal remarks, or attempts to derail the discussion do not constitute meaningful complaint handling and do not fulfill the obligations set out by the EU Digital Services Act (DSA).
In my previous posts, I have demonstrated with screenshots and archived evidence that Google AI Studio retains prompts in the backend even when they no longer appear on the user interface. The most important proof is that a prompt marked as deleted was restored by the system, which clearly shows that the platform did not delete the data but continued to store it.
This is not a misunderstanding, not a visual glitch, and not “incorrect usage,” but backend‑level data retention that contradicts what the interface displays.
The DSA requires online platforms – including the Google AI Developers Forum – to provide meaningful complaint handling and to issue an official response when a user reports abuse or irregularities. The platform cannot shift the responsibility onto forum members and cannot ignore such reports.
Due to the continuous personal attacks, harassment, defamation, and coordinated smear comments directed at me, I am taking separate legal action. Google is responsible for preventing targeted harassment on its platform and is obligated to intervene under the DSA. Failure to do so constitutes a violation of the law.
I request that the moderation team immediately escalate this issue to Google’s official technical and legal departments and provide a written, substantive explanation as to why prompts marked as deleted can be restored in the system, and how it is possible that the platform continues to retain these data despite the deletion. Continued silence will be documented as a breach of the DSA’s complaint‑handling obligations and used as evidence in legal proceedings.
I have already sent this notice individually to multiple moderators, and I have also published it publicly outside the forum to ensure full transparency and independent verification. This means Google cannot claim that the report was not received or not visible. If the moderation team chooses not to respond despite receiving both the direct messages and the public post, that silence will serve as documented proof of non‑compliance with the DSA’s mandatory complaint‑handling obligations. In that case, Google will be held legally accountable for ignoring a formally submitted report and for allowing the situation to escalate.
I expect an official response from Google in this thread, because your own engineer wrote this: “When you download the chat from the Google AI Studio folder, Drive saves it as a JSON file without a .json extension, marked with special metadata. If you download and re-upload it, this metadata is lost, so Google Drive treats it as a new file. As a result, AI Studio no longer recognizes it as part of your chat history.” I do not accept that Google or the moderators stay silent. This question cannot be ignored. If you still refuse to respond, you will face serious consequences in court — do not treat me like an idiot. This is the official technical explanation from Google’s own engineer. It fully supports my claim.
If you still refuse to respond, I will prove that Google is intentionally ignoring a question that you are obligated to answer because your own engineer’s technical explanation makes an official reply mandatory. This will turn against you in court, because I have documented that you remain silent, you do not communicate, and you do not provide an official statement to me.
I am withdrawing all previous text generated by the AI. Because I do not speak English, the search AI generated completely incorrect nonsense and false phrasing. I have deleted posts #18, #19, and #20 to clear out that garbage. The actual technical facts stand on their own
