4 ms·

Eagerly anticipating a post from John Gruber explaining how satire is an inferior form of humor that drags a platform's comedic potential down.

danh 17y ago
Except, of course, satire written in C, Objective-C or Javascript.
tjogin 17y ago
Wouldn't that be completely out of character for him, since he's usually pretty hard on Apple for their mismanaged AppStore — especially when it comes to arbitrary refusals?
- tjogin 17y ago
  Like I said (he calls it "preposterous"): http://daringfireball.net/linked/2010/04/16/app-store-rejection-fiore http://daringfireball.net/linked/2010/04/16/app-store-reject... Gruber is not an Apple apologist, he's just too informed to knee-jerkingly bash Apple, unlike most other people with an opinion on Apple.
Hagelin 17y ago
You seem to have confused Daring Fireball with Roughly Drafted.
- ZeroGravitas 17y ago
  It is getting easier these days. From his recent comment on an app being allowed into the store, then later rejected, for an offence that large numbers of high-profile games also commit and aren't punished for: "this is Apple being consistent, not inconsistent".
  - tjogin 17y ago
    How is that not correct? Apple has stated that apps with runtimes interpreting code are not allowed, and now they're banning an app that does that. How is that not consistent?
    - ZeroGravitas 17y ago
      I'm glad you asked, since apparently I wasn't clear in my previous post. Firstly, only apps that download AND run code were not allowed, now apps that download OR run code are not allowed That's inconsistent over time, not necessarily a bad thing, though it was a change made quietly which is a bit of a poor show. On top of that there are still lots of apps, games mainly, running interpreters. That's also inconsistent, on a completely different axis. So yes they are meeting the letter of the (current) law in the banning of this particular case, but "consistent" is not a word I would leap to using in this case. The simple fact that they're kicking out an app that was already in, rather than blocking entry in the first place, makes it a strange word choice.
ryoshu 17y ago
Fiore ran afoul of the terms of the iHumor platform.
gkefalas 17y ago
Seems he's come out swinging, as he usually does with App Store shenanigans: http://daringfireball.net/linked/2010/04/16/app-store-rejection-fiore http://daringfireball.net/linked/2010/04/16/app-store-reject...
Terretta 17y ago
"This sort of app should not have been rejected in the first place — shouldn’t even have been considered borderline. Resubmission and hoping for a different reviewer sometimes works in cases like this, but at this point, there’s no way for us to know whether Fiore is getting reconsidered only because of the publicity stink. It’s possible that it really is Apple’s policy to reject any app related to political satire. It’s also possible that it is not. That’s the core problem — that we don’t know." — http://daringfireball.net/linked/2010/04/16/fiore-resubmit http://daringfireball.net/linked/2010/04/16/fiore-resubmit
ugh 17y ago
Can one of the many admirers of the parent explain why a comment completely mischaracterizing Gruber’s views is any good?

danh 17y ago

Except, of course, satire written in C, Objective-C or Javascript.

tjogin 17y ago

Wouldn't that be completely out of character for him, since he's usually pretty hard on Apple for their mismanaged AppStore — especially when it comes to arbitrary refusals?

tjogin 17y ago
Like I said (he calls it "preposterous"): http://daringfireball.net/linked/2010/04/16/app-store-rejection-fiore http://daringfireball.net/linked/2010/04/16/app-store-reject... Gruber is not an Apple apologist, he's just too informed to knee-jerkingly bash Apple, unlike most other people with an opinion on Apple.

Hagelin 17y ago

You seem to have confused Daring Fireball with Roughly Drafted.

ZeroGravitas 17y ago
It is getting easier these days. From his recent comment on an app being allowed into the store, then later rejected, for an offence that large numbers of high-profile games also commit and aren't punished for: "this is Apple being consistent, not inconsistent".
- tjogin 17y ago
  How is that not correct? Apple has stated that apps with runtimes interpreting code are not allowed, and now they're banning an app that does that. How is that not consistent?
  - ZeroGravitas 17y ago
    I'm glad you asked, since apparently I wasn't clear in my previous post. Firstly, only apps that download AND run code were not allowed, now apps that download OR run code are not allowed That's inconsistent over time, not necessarily a bad thing, though it was a change made quietly which is a bit of a poor show. On top of that there are still lots of apps, games mainly, running interpreters. That's also inconsistent, on a completely different axis. So yes they are meeting the letter of the (current) law in the banning of this particular case, but "consistent" is not a word I would leap to using in this case. The simple fact that they're kicking out an app that was already in, rather than blocking entry in the first place, makes it a strange word choice.

ryoshu 17y ago

Fiore ran afoul of the terms of the iHumor platform.

gkefalas 17y ago

Seems he's come out swinging, as he usually does with App Store shenanigans: http://daringfireball.net/linked/2010/04/16/app-store-rejection-fiore http://daringfireball.net/linked/2010/04/16/app-store-reject...

Terretta 17y ago

"This sort of app should not have been rejected in the first place — shouldn’t even have been considered borderline. Resubmission and hoping for a different reviewer sometimes works in cases like this, but at this point, there’s no way for us to know whether Fiore is getting reconsidered only because of the publicity stink. It’s possible that it really is Apple’s policy to reject any app related to political satire. It’s also possible that it is not. That’s the core problem — that we don’t know." — http://daringfireball.net/linked/2010/04/16/fiore-resubmit http://daringfireball.net/linked/2010/04/16/fiore-resubmit

ugh 17y ago

Can one of the many admirers of the parent explain why a comment completely mischaracterizing Gruber’s views is any good?