How can a person on one hand say "Apple did not reject this developer’s application for including references to common swear words" and on that other hand know that the app was being banned because they wanted a 17+ rating due to the availability, to quote the article, of the words "shit, fuck, and cunt, specifically." Are not the former common swear words, and is not the restriction of material from wider audiences censorship?
Yes. Gruber touts Schiller's response as 'thoughtful', but what Schiller says is inconsistent with Gruber's own excerpted reporting so far. Bottom-line:
Dictionary.com's app contains 'fuck', was released in April (before parental controls), and now has an "age 4+" rating.
NinjaWords was given 'fuck' as one of several examples of problem vulgar terms in screenshots and told to resubmit and/or wait for parental controls that would put them in the "17+" category.
At the very least, Apple's prior guidance to NinjaWords was confusing and incomplete, if it did not clearly state that 'fuck' was fine and the other slang was the problem.
Schiller (at least as Gruber has excerpted) doesn't address this failing at all.
Gruber consistently sides with Apple. He is, in essence, a fanboy. There are exceptions, and he's not a moron, so when there's community uproar and obvious stupidity he will say so. But his reporting is heavily pro-apple overall.
The thing I really hate is as an obviously intelligent guy with the influence to prompt a reply from an Apple exec his response is so... pathetic. That was not an encouraging and appropriate response from Apple, it was bullshit.
