3 ms·
> the person reviewing the message might not even know what the app is! Sorry, you have gone too far here. If the reviewer doesn't know what the app is, they a
by tempfile 2y ago
> the person reviewing the message might not even know what the app is!
Sorry, you have gone too far here. If the reviewer doesn't know what the app is, they aren't reviewing the app at all. Knowing that a photography app takes photographs is the absolute bare minimum of context that is required to even begin to meaningfully review it.
- happytoexplain 2y agoYou're right, they're not reviewing the app, they're reviewing the rationale for access! Separation was the point of my suggestion. It is probably not even true in the first place - it was only a conjecture. But if they did do that, it would have ups and downs. I could see a rationale that intentionally separating certain review duties from the context of the app could actually help to enforce objectivity. I tend to agree that it would probably be more bad than good, though.
- quesera 2y agoI'm totally on board with the idea that permission requests should include complete context, separated from any product description written in the App Store. For example, there's the case where you download an app today, and don't get around to trying it for hours or days or longer. Curt "duh-style" permissions requests are user-hostile. Apple insists that developers "try harder". In almost all cases, this is the right choice for the user. Sometimes it's hilariously wrong, of course! There are humans in the review loop, and I've been on the wrong side of some epic ridiculousness. But on the whole, they're usually more frequently right than wrong. I'll take it.