3 ms·
That's why T1 would write a justification of a request for ban to T2. They would provide an argument to T2 and T2 would review it. Banning shouldn't be the un
by cptskippy 6y ago
That's why T1 would write a justification of a request for ban to T2. They would provide an argument to T2 and T2 would review it.
Banning shouldn't be the unilateral decision of a single individual. We've had our App updates rejected numerous times for arbitrary reasons that were approved without change when resubmitted because we got a different reviewer.
- pwinnski 6y agoYour frame of reference is the number of times a T1 made a bad call. Apple's frame of reference is the number of times a T1 made any call. So let's say they've made hundreds of bad calls. Is that out of thousands of decisions, or millions? Or tens of millions? If tens of thousands of apps are banned, but only hundreds are banned incorrectly, that doesn't suggest the same thing as if a large percentage of bans are later reversed.
- cptskippy 6y agoIt's not about the number of decisions they've made, it's specifically about decisions to ban Apps that were already approved to the store. How many Apps are banned after having been approved? I would certainly hope they haven't had to ban thousands, millions or tens of millions of Apps after they had approved them to the store. That would speak to a very big problem with the initial review process that admits an App into the store.
- pwinnski 6y agoI wouldn't be surprised if it were tens of thousands. Clever scammers play a long game, and at Apple's scale, they deal with a lot of them.