"zero-tolerance" spam policies . . . unenforceable?

[D]

seems their zero-tolerance spam policies might be unenforceable . . .

(using Tor Browser 13.0.9)
https://www.usenetserver.com/terms-of-service
>Spam. UsenetServer enforces a zero-tolerance spam policy regarding our
>users posts to usenet through our network. It is the sole discretion
>of UsenetServer to determine if a user's posts are considered spam. If
>UsenetServer has determined that a user has posted 1 or more articles
>of spam, that user will be charged a $500 per hour clean-up fee and
>the user's account will be canceled immediately with no refunds and
>all reasonable efforts will be made by UsenetServer to prevent the
>user from using our network anytime thereafter.
[end quote]

https://easynews.com/agreement/
>SPAM. Easynews enforces a zero-tolerance spam policy regarding our
>users posts to usenet through our network. It is the sole discretion
>of Easynews to determine if a user's posts are considered spam. If
>Easynews has determined that a user has posted 1 or more articles
>of spam, that user will be charged a $500 per hour clean-up fee and
>the user's account will be canceled immediately and
>all reasonable efforts will be made by Easynews to prevent the
>user from using our network anytime thereafter.
[end quote]

usenet has long-since been continuously inundated by weaponized troll farm
spam from both google and non-google servers, so once google cuts the cord
will many dozens of other servers pick up the slack without missing a beat?

[bernie]

On 04 Feb 2024, D <J@M> posted some
news:674f5bcc85900931...@dizum.com:

They can charge $500 on the prepaid $25 Visa gift card I used to sign up,
good luck to them.

I don't believe a word Easynews says. They have two of the historically
worst trolls in the last decade still running around polluting things. If
they really enforced their policies, the jerks would have been long gone
by now.