My only point is that you don't have a "right" to use the service. The ToS not being legally enforceable does not change that fact. Spotify can kick you off for violating their terms, but they can also kick you off for whatever they want.

Being barred from the service is not some sort of injustice or violation of your rights, especially after breaking the terms.

The people in this thread claiming they can do whatever they want and block ads is true. That does not give them some sort of moral high ground, just because they can.

You would be absolutely incorrect. I've received scores of C&D's over the years, which I've always complied with, and seen several people get sued and lose with penalties being both criminal and financial.

I would say it's unlikely that Spotify would even send a C&D to an adblocking user, but the folks that make their own apps to bypass the advertising or rip the streams are at legal risk.

The legal enforceability of the TOS isn't really important here, when you use a service there are conditions with that service. Go ahead and try walking into starbucks, paying for half of a tall americano and walking out the door with half of a tall americano. Service providers have the inherent right to place conditions and limits on the services they provide.

Spotify isn't reaching into your computer and running ads, you are running Spotify. If you don't want Spotify and its dependencies, you can simply not run Spotify.

There isn't a difference, except that Spotify can drop you as a customer. Which is what they're doing. Which is fine.

The debate in this thread is not "what can you technically do?", but rather "who has the moral high ground?"

Ok so they'll ban you and then... what? You'll have no recourse, i.e., you have no inherent right to use their service as you see fit (outside your own head anyway).