Well, that wasn't always the case. If they change the terms of service to disallow having a non-human account, that doesn't change the fact that it still exists. By the time I deleted my own personal facebook account, I hadn't used the dog account in years anyway. It only became an issue when the dog died. Also, I did nothing wrong to lock the account, it was their idiotic methods that caused the issue, not the fact that the account was actually for a dog.

> If the terms of service don’t allow you to create a Facebook account for a dog, is it reasonable to expect them to accommodate recovery when you do so anyway?

First, if the terms of service didn't have any exclusion against a dog then absolutely yes it's reasonable to expect them to accommodate recovery when you do so.

Second, if the terms of service explicitly state that you own anything then is it reasonable that they deny you your owership? We're talking about HUMANS here. If a business states that you are not permitted to enter their building but you do so anyway, and in doing so you lost your wallet, then is it reasonable to expect them to return it to you? Yes it absofuckinglutely is. This is no different whatsoever.

Third, terms of services are not a contract because nobody reads them. A contract specifically requires that both parties understand and comprehend the terms of the contract. Websites provide services despite the fact that 99% of people do not understand the terms presented. You're deluding yourself if you think it's reasonable to think that everyone fully understands "Facebook is not a place for pictures of my dog".