Ok then: they have decided, and they decided not to take KF down.
Their TOS gives them the lateral autonomy to decide what breaks the TOS, whether or not something violates their TOS, and how harsh of a punishment to enact.
Their TOS gives them the lateral autonomy to decide what breaks the TOS, whether or not something violates their TOS, and how harsh of a punishment to enact.
Right, so what exactly is your point here? "Who gets to decide?" -- They do -- "Ok, that's what they decided".
We're all aware of who decided and what they decided. Decisions come with consequences, among them being criticized for your decision making.