7 ms·

This is impossible at scale and a waste of a companies' time. Apple doesn't care if your account is reinstated. Odds are (just like the author here) you know ex

This is impossible at scale and a waste of a companies' time. Apple doesn't care if your account is reinstated. Odds are (just like the author here) you know exactly why your account is suspended. If you honestly don't, then you didn't do your due diligence in signing up. And, even if they cited whatever part of whatever agreement, it would just be onto the next excuse. It's a bottomless pit of arguing that solves nothing. It's the same reason reddit moderators don't answer when you ask why you got banned. Either you know why and you're just trying to weasel out of it, or you don't know why and you're a bad contributor in general, or you don't know why and don't care and just want back in. And the answer to all three is no. Why? Because who cares about you? You're one of millions. You're one infinitesimal speck in a deluge of others, all providing similar things but who are following the rules. You are not special. You are replaceable. After you're gone, 5 other developers will take your place, paying their dues, and following the rules, and you won't be missed. Nobody's app idea is so fucking star spangled awesome as to make them above the rules. You wanna play in Apple's sandbox? Cool, they're happy to have you. Do it right. And if you don't, they'll boot you out. Simple as.

chipsa 7y ago
If someone can manually kill a Dev account, they can include a message why it was killed. Even if it's generic form letter, it can be one that at least says what rule was broken.
- FussyZeus 7y ago
  They can. But why should they? What's the benefit?
  - rootusrootus 7y ago
    Goodwill. Just because you're the big gorilla and can act as such with impunity doesn't mean you ought to constantly remind people of that. One developer doesn't matter in the grand scheme, but every time they get to the front page of HN with a story like this it chips away at Apple's (or Google's, or whoever's) reputation. Collectively that does have value.
    - FussyZeus 7y ago
      Apple has tons of goodwill with their users, and that's what matters. That's who pays the bills, and that's who funds the App Store. From the beginning Apple has had a very standoff-ish relationship with their developers. Their rules are clear from the outset: Play by them, or don't publish on our platform. To be honest I think developers occasionally still got entirely too much leeway to break their guidelines and get chances to fix it. Their relationship to us has always been in very simple terms: These are the ways you're allowed to behave while doing business on our platform. Accept that, or do not publish here. If you publish here and break these rules, you will be removed without second chance. Yet again, and again, and again, we get pleas from fellow developers who broke those rules but think Apple's just being mean. No, they're not. They outlined exactly how you should not Do the Thing, and you Did the Thing, and now you're off. This situation is fixed, and you knew the outcomes. You made your bed, sleep in it.
      - pgaddict 7y ago
        Sure the primary concern for Apple is users. But it's not like the platform could exist without the ecosystem around it, which largely depends on developers publishing apps. And it's not as if the dev accounts are not subscription-based - it's not expensive and Apple does not make a ton of money on this, but it's not free either. And I don't think anyone suggests Apple should get rid of all the rules and accept anarchy on the platform, that'd be insane. They have the right to set the rules on their platform, and enforce them. And the developers should not be surprised when violations are handled accordingly. The first problem is that a lot of the rules are entirely vague, to the extent that it's hard to make judgments based on the wording. (Essentially what we used to call "rubber law" years ago, a vaguely worded law that can be used to support whatever the state currently wants.). The second problem is that you generally don't get clear explanation what rules you broke. That may seem reasonable, but whoever makes those decisions is bound to make some errors. And if you don't know what rule(s) you supposedly broke and how, you can hardly appeal the decision. Yes, for Apple it's much easier/cheaper to provide as little information as possible, eliminating the issue of appeals (i.e. costs). But it's a bit of a dick move, really. If you set rules for your platform, you really need to plan for proper enforcement, including providing information what rule was broken/how and allowing appeals.
  - ebiester 7y ago
    Because it is in their long term interest - seeing the way Apple and Google treat developers has stopped me, at the very least, from putting time into learning their ecosystems and choosing it for a side project. It may be true that there are plenty of people who will replace me, but the aggregate effect can eventually hurt their marketplaces.
    - FussyZeus 7y ago
      Your hypothesis comes up against the App Store breaking records each year and making tons of money for those who participate. It's the most profitable mobile store by a huge margin, and it's not as if these policies are new, this has been more or less the environment it's operated in since it opened.
      - logfromblammo 7y ago
        Ethics and economics rarely agree. Slavery was also profitable for slave-owners. Fascism was also profitable for the willing corporate partners of the state. The argumentam ad pecuniam is valid only for the accountants, not for policy-makers.
        scarface74 7y ago
        Really slavery? What next comparing developing for a mobile platform to Nazism?
        logfromblammo 7y ago
        Literally my next sentence after the slavery one. Finding counterexamples to the "profitable == okay" argument is really, really easy.
      - marcus_holmes 7y ago
        Not all those who participate. The vast (overwhelming) majority of app developers don't make a dime from it. A tiny, tiny minority make some side cash from it. A vanishingly small set of maybe a few hundred people maybe earn enough from it to make a living doing it (not developing apps for other people, but developing their own app products).
  - IOT_Apprentice 7y ago
    How about not being sociopaths and providing goodwill to their developers who fill their App Store with products customers use? I mean they aren't Google. :)
  - eckza 7y ago
    I absolutely see where you’re coming from here. But to me, the answer is, “because that is what is required for a civilized society to function”. It is not as if Apple has given developers this platform to create and sell software out of the goodness of their own hearts; the App Store is wildly profitable for them. What is being asked for here (in the comments, not in the blog post that was linked to) is nothing more than some common courtesy.
femto113 7y ago
Apple rakes 30 cents off of every dollar spent In the App Store. Their end totals billions of dollars a month. They absolutely could do this “at scale”.
- FussyZeus 7y ago
  Actually you're right, it is possible, but it's also not remotely worth it. I've been working with online communities for decades, and every person who hasn't done so has wanted to provide reasons, to provide explanations, and I will tell you in exactly every single interaction I've had when someone's account on whatever platform had to be terminated, that all they do is argue. I didn't do that. It wasn't that bad. But I didn't mean it. But this wording. But that rule is unfair. On and on and on. And yeah, once in a blue fucking moon, we get someone who understands they messed up, knows why, and wants us to bend the rules just for them this one time because they super super promise they won't do it again. NO.
  - zentiggr 7y ago
    But in how many cases is there no actual wrongdoing/misuse/rulebreaking, but an internal mistake, blind application of filtering that catches someone inadvertently, or a vindictive employee cutting someone off for <reasons>, and no one can tell the difference because of that no transparency? I get the little guy means nothing, so why bother, but some level of "Yep, that was a goof, you're back, sorry" would go a long way.
  - jtcruthers 7y ago
    You sound insufferable. I have no doubt you have been tricked by a multibillion dollar company to moderate their site in your free time for 0 compensation. And it doesn't surprise anyone here than you don't work with the community, you just enforce the rules as strictly as you possibly can. I'm sorry your life has divulged into trying to flex the insignificant "power" you unknowingly sacrificed your free time for on any mere user who dare break an online community rule around THE FussyZeus.
    - 7y ago
ryandrake 7y ago
You’re downplaying the scenario where you are banned, legitimately do not know why, and have good intentions. All moderation and enforcement systems will have false positives. Is there any evidence or reason to believe Apple’s false positive rate is infinitesimal, as you put it? Apple does not publish this information.
- mark-r 7y ago
  They can't publish information they don't have. If every investigation is stonewalled, there's no way to find the false positives.
tbrownaw 7y ago
This is impossible at scale and a waste of a companies' time. Apple doesn't care if your account is reinstated. Odds are (just like the author here) you know exactly why your account is suspended. If you honestly don't, then you didn't do your due diligence in signing up. The problem is that some of these are getting to be impactful enough that it's starting to look socially useful to give accused persons some of the same protections as we've learned the real legal system needs.
AnthonyMouse 7y ago
> Apple doesn't care if your account is reinstated. But that's the problem. These people who don't agree with the rules? They have the capacity to vote, to not develop applications for the App Store, not buy them from others and publish accounts to try to move public opinion and encourage others to do the same. That's what they're doing right now. You're saying if they don't like the rules they should do what? Shut up and do nothing? That doesn't effect change. So instead they raise Cain and do what they can to put pressure on Apple and their reputation in order to bring about a change in policy. Telling dissenters to eat sand because their opponent is bigger than them is not going to convince anybody that Apple is right. It does more to convince people that Apple is problematic.
PhasmaFelis 7y ago
> This is impossible at scale and a waste of a companies' time. It's not "impossible." It might be difficult, but good customer service always is. I'm not sure why I should take Apple's side just because providing decent service for a fabulously profitable global corporation can be tricky.
ddingus 7y ago
Some moderators do answer. And some of those conversations end well too. This is by no means universal.
felipelemos 7y ago
Or maybe it is because if they don't disclose the reason, you will never be able to rebut it and defend yourself. They will never lose, unless you are someone important and can have repercussions on social media.
serf 7y ago
>Odds are (just like the author here) you know exactly why your account is suspended. If you honestly don't, then you didn't do your due diligence in signing up. as someone who has been a victim of automated bans and account deactivation multiple times on multiple platforms, I view this statement as factually incorrect. >Nobody's app idea is so fucking star spangled awesome as to make them above the rules. Except, historically, any apps made by FAANG. I'm never in defense of actions where the victim is entirely out of the loop with regards to corrections they could possibly make in order to comply with whatever rules need to be complied with.
EGreg 7y ago
Lots of apps are above the rules. Facebook was secretly recording you with the camera! Is their app going to be removed from the store until fixed? Perhaps Apple would ban them for such sneaky tactics? Ha ha ha. You have more chance of USA getting sanctions for invading Iraq.

chipsa 7y ago

If someone can manually kill a Dev account, they can include a message why it was killed. Even if it's generic form letter, it can be one that at least says what rule was broken.

FussyZeus 7y ago
They can. But why should they? What's the benefit?
- rootusrootus 7y ago
  Goodwill. Just because you're the big gorilla and can act as such with impunity doesn't mean you ought to constantly remind people of that. One developer doesn't matter in the grand scheme, but every time they get to the front page of HN with a story like this it chips away at Apple's (or Google's, or whoever's) reputation. Collectively that does have value.
  - FussyZeus 7y ago
    Apple has tons of goodwill with their users, and that's what matters. That's who pays the bills, and that's who funds the App Store. From the beginning Apple has had a very standoff-ish relationship with their developers. Their rules are clear from the outset: Play by them, or don't publish on our platform. To be honest I think developers occasionally still got entirely too much leeway to break their guidelines and get chances to fix it. Their relationship to us has always been in very simple terms: These are the ways you're allowed to behave while doing business on our platform. Accept that, or do not publish here. If you publish here and break these rules, you will be removed without second chance. Yet again, and again, and again, we get pleas from fellow developers who broke those rules but think Apple's just being mean. No, they're not. They outlined exactly how you should not Do the Thing, and you Did the Thing, and now you're off. This situation is fixed, and you knew the outcomes. You made your bed, sleep in it.
    - pgaddict 7y ago
      Sure the primary concern for Apple is users. But it's not like the platform could exist without the ecosystem around it, which largely depends on developers publishing apps. And it's not as if the dev accounts are not subscription-based - it's not expensive and Apple does not make a ton of money on this, but it's not free either. And I don't think anyone suggests Apple should get rid of all the rules and accept anarchy on the platform, that'd be insane. They have the right to set the rules on their platform, and enforce them. And the developers should not be surprised when violations are handled accordingly. The first problem is that a lot of the rules are entirely vague, to the extent that it's hard to make judgments based on the wording. (Essentially what we used to call "rubber law" years ago, a vaguely worded law that can be used to support whatever the state currently wants.). The second problem is that you generally don't get clear explanation what rules you broke. That may seem reasonable, but whoever makes those decisions is bound to make some errors. And if you don't know what rule(s) you supposedly broke and how, you can hardly appeal the decision. Yes, for Apple it's much easier/cheaper to provide as little information as possible, eliminating the issue of appeals (i.e. costs). But it's a bit of a dick move, really. If you set rules for your platform, you really need to plan for proper enforcement, including providing information what rule was broken/how and allowing appeals.
- ebiester 7y ago
  Because it is in their long term interest - seeing the way Apple and Google treat developers has stopped me, at the very least, from putting time into learning their ecosystems and choosing it for a side project. It may be true that there are plenty of people who will replace me, but the aggregate effect can eventually hurt their marketplaces.
  - FussyZeus 7y ago
    Your hypothesis comes up against the App Store breaking records each year and making tons of money for those who participate. It's the most profitable mobile store by a huge margin, and it's not as if these policies are new, this has been more or less the environment it's operated in since it opened.
    - logfromblammo 7y ago
      Ethics and economics rarely agree. Slavery was also profitable for slave-owners. Fascism was also profitable for the willing corporate partners of the state. The argumentam ad pecuniam is valid only for the accountants, not for policy-makers.
      - scarface74 7y ago
        Really slavery? What next comparing developing for a mobile platform to Nazism?
        logfromblammo 7y ago
        Literally my next sentence after the slavery one. Finding counterexamples to the "profitable == okay" argument is really, really easy.
    - marcus_holmes 7y ago
      Not all those who participate. The vast (overwhelming) majority of app developers don't make a dime from it. A tiny, tiny minority make some side cash from it. A vanishingly small set of maybe a few hundred people maybe earn enough from it to make a living doing it (not developing apps for other people, but developing their own app products).
- IOT_Apprentice 7y ago
  How about not being sociopaths and providing goodwill to their developers who fill their App Store with products customers use? I mean they aren't Google. :)
- eckza 7y ago
  I absolutely see where you’re coming from here. But to me, the answer is, “because that is what is required for a civilized society to function”. It is not as if Apple has given developers this platform to create and sell software out of the goodness of their own hearts; the App Store is wildly profitable for them. What is being asked for here (in the comments, not in the blog post that was linked to) is nothing more than some common courtesy.

femto113 7y ago

Apple rakes 30 cents off of every dollar spent In the App Store. Their end totals billions of dollars a month. They absolutely could do this “at scale”.

FussyZeus 7y ago
Actually you're right, it is possible, but it's also not remotely worth it. I've been working with online communities for decades, and every person who hasn't done so has wanted to provide reasons, to provide explanations, and I will tell you in exactly every single interaction I've had when someone's account on whatever platform had to be terminated, that all they do is argue. I didn't do that. It wasn't that bad. But I didn't mean it. But this wording. But that rule is unfair. On and on and on. And yeah, once in a blue fucking moon, we get someone who understands they messed up, knows why, and wants us to bend the rules just for them this one time because they super super promise they won't do it again. NO.
- zentiggr 7y ago
  But in how many cases is there no actual wrongdoing/misuse/rulebreaking, but an internal mistake, blind application of filtering that catches someone inadvertently, or a vindictive employee cutting someone off for <reasons>, and no one can tell the difference because of that no transparency? I get the little guy means nothing, so why bother, but some level of "Yep, that was a goof, you're back, sorry" would go a long way.
- jtcruthers 7y ago
  You sound insufferable. I have no doubt you have been tricked by a multibillion dollar company to moderate their site in your free time for 0 compensation. And it doesn't surprise anyone here than you don't work with the community, you just enforce the rules as strictly as you possibly can. I'm sorry your life has divulged into trying to flex the insignificant "power" you unknowingly sacrificed your free time for on any mere user who dare break an online community rule around THE FussyZeus.
  - 7y ago

ryandrake 7y ago

You’re downplaying the scenario where you are banned, legitimately do not know why, and have good intentions. All moderation and enforcement systems will have false positives. Is there any evidence or reason to believe Apple’s false positive rate is infinitesimal, as you put it? Apple does not publish this information.

mark-r 7y ago
They can't publish information they don't have. If every investigation is stonewalled, there's no way to find the false positives.

tbrownaw 7y ago

AnthonyMouse 7y ago

> Apple doesn't care if your account is reinstated. But that's the problem. These people who don't agree with the rules? They have the capacity to vote, to not develop applications for the App Store, not buy them from others and publish accounts to try to move public opinion and encourage others to do the same. That's what they're doing right now. You're saying if they don't like the rules they should do what? Shut up and do nothing? That doesn't effect change. So instead they raise Cain and do what they can to put pressure on Apple and their reputation in order to bring about a change in policy. Telling dissenters to eat sand because their opponent is bigger than them is not going to convince anybody that Apple is right. It does more to convince people that Apple is problematic.

PhasmaFelis 7y ago

> This is impossible at scale and a waste of a companies' time. It's not "impossible." It might be difficult, but good customer service always is. I'm not sure why I should take Apple's side just because providing decent service for a fabulously profitable global corporation can be tricky.

ddingus 7y ago

Some moderators do answer. And some of those conversations end well too. This is by no means universal.

felipelemos 7y ago

Or maybe it is because if they don't disclose the reason, you will never be able to rebut it and defend yourself. They will never lose, unless you are someone important and can have repercussions on social media.

serf 7y ago

>Odds are (just like the author here) you know exactly why your account is suspended. If you honestly don't, then you didn't do your due diligence in signing up. as someone who has been a victim of automated bans and account deactivation multiple times on multiple platforms, I view this statement as factually incorrect. >Nobody's app idea is so fucking star spangled awesome as to make them above the rules. Except, historically, any apps made by FAANG. I'm never in defense of actions where the victim is entirely out of the loop with regards to corrections they could possibly make in order to comply with whatever rules need to be complied with.

EGreg 7y ago

Lots of apps are above the rules. Facebook was secretly recording you with the camera! Is their app going to be removed from the store until fixed? Perhaps Apple would ban them for such sneaky tactics? Ha ha ha. You have more chance of USA getting sanctions for invading Iraq.