Hacker News Reader

You don't seem to be engaging with the parents point about your messaging at all with this comment. FWIW, this all reads like an excellent demonstration why this category of app isn't trusted.

I'm explaining how the app can be both difficult to bypass and voluntarily used.

Again you are saying something very different here than any of your marketing.

If you want to make the choice to stop watching porn, that is fine. If you want to use software like this and you want to ask your spouse to help, that is fine.

But your marketing, your google play listing that I quoted it is not you making the choice. It is someone else "protecting" you and making the choice.

Quoting an exact quote from your google play listing. The very first sentence:

"Truple protects your loved ones against porn & other online filth. It holds your loved ones accountable in a way that's near impossible to bypass by capturing and sharing screenshots."

What if it said:

"Truple holds YOU accountable in a way that's near impossible to bypass by capturing and sharing screenshots."

Then at least what the OP is saying here and what the marketing said would align.

But at this time, there is one story of what this app does here (hacker news) and a completely different story from what is being told on the website and marketing.

The other apps that they are saying had no issues with approval, follow the story that is being told here.

I don't think it changes the problematic nature of the app. But they are claiming to be the same as the other app but there is a dramatic difference in how the capabilities of the app is communicated to Apple and users.

https://web.archive.org/web/20190424203239/https://truple.io... is the landing page when the original version of the app was submitted for notarization. Since you're digging into the ad copy, we might as well be looking at the appropriate website.

It's not two stories... I include customer reviews on my landing page that show spouses, individuals, and parents feedback because all benefit from it.

The Google Play app description is adjusted to be more in alignment with Google Play Developer Agreement policies.

To clarify, keeping Google, Apple, and everyone else happy with the wording in the marketing seems to demand walking a razers edge. I've done my best to comply appropriately for each platform. It's a disservice to the conversation for you to pull in the Google Play listing, make accusations about me/Truple as a result, and not have the full picture. I've shared more in this post than I originally cared to in order to provide the bigger picture. I'm not trying to hide anything here, but there are reasons other than malicious intent for why things are worded the way they are and instead of leaping to those conclusions you could instead ask why.

There is no razors edge here, your app violates nearly every standard Apple uses to distinguish itself from its competitors... privacy, security, safety. Why are you playing victim and getting offended when people point out the obvious? Were you just hoping for answers that blamed Apple?

I'm in the minority but I'd rather apple not censor my apps (unless they are malware).

It not being censored. Simply creating an app doesn't afford you the privilege of hosting on the app store.

Without any other way to load the app on the device, it is de facto censorship.

A device must have an option for its security to be exploited by allowing the installation of a tracking app that violates every aspect of users privacy, intended to be used by minors, with the express purpose of transferring explicit material to a third party?

If a device does not provide this option for compromised security, it is by default censorship.

I am deeply concerned by the mind games you are playing here.

It is 100% 2 stories. Over and over again here you are saying "personal accountability" or similar. Which on paper is fine. If you really truly voluntarily want to do this... great!

But do you not understand while personal accountability fine... your marketing is calling out spouses and parents reviews! Nothing about either of those being there says personal accountability. if you truly actually believed in personal accountability you could only show reviews from them, not from others!

To clarify. If my spouse is the one that thinks that this app "saved my marriage" as your reviews really like to say. There is something... very very wrong. If I feel the need to review it because I felt like I needed help. That is fine! Do you see the difference?!?

It used to say you. I adjusted the Google Play description due to changes in Google Plays Developer Agreement.

See https://web.archive.org/web/20200216145020/https://play.goog...

To be honest, I don’t believe you. “Our app will only be used by people on themselves in order to change their own behavior” is a wildly implausible use case to focus on for what is effectively spyware.

My takeaway is that I’m beginning to think that Apple was correct in blocking your app.

And in particular, there's a whole section that reads "With Truple, you can virtually "peek" over your child's shoulder & course-correct as needed."

So right there it's admitting that the intended use is to spy on someone else (in this case, "your kids"). I'm with you here. I just don't believe OP on this one.

Apple thinks this is a spying app, and they don't want it on their platform.

You need to tell us what gym you go to because your mental gymnastics are on another level.