3 ms·
>At first glance a spokesman agreed with us that the situation looks odd. Seems like someone messed up somewhere and is probably being resolved. In all honest
by drusepth 7y ago
>At first glance a spokesman agreed with us that the situation looks odd.
Seems like someone messed up somewhere and is probably being resolved.
In all honesty though, no app with IAP (especially easy-to-access IAP or IAP that can't be locked by a parent) should get an E rating. Fleksy should get a higher age rating for this reason, not because of an emoji.
- jakemal 7y ago> IAP (especially easy-to-access IAP or IAP that can't be locked by a parent) should get an E rating I disagree. I think it's Google's job to provide parents with the tools to lock down IAPs for children. Once the phone is locked down, IAPs shouldn't matter. And the ratings would be useless to a parent if every app with IAPs was rated > E. They wouldn't know if the content is what is giving it the higher rating or just the IAPs.
- tssva 7y agoGoogle does provide the means to lock down IAPs for children.
- papln 7y agoHow convenient that "someone messed up", supressing installs of a competing product, with no compensation for the error. Under-12s can't have a Google Account of their own, so they can't spend money, so why would IAP be dangerous? The purchase part is behind a 13+ wall.