Comment by midtake
3 days ago
But then you're lying. Why not add the comment "no tarot function" without reference to whether it existed in the past? A bit confusing because it's a trivial and seemingly unrelated statement but at least then you wouldn't be lying.
Why not say “app now has no tarot function” which can be read as implying that it used to but doesn’t actually say that.
It used to not have tarot function. It still doesn't. But it used to not too.
RIP Mitch Hedburg you would have loved the App Store
1 reply →
You are dealing with unreasonable party here. Like the game theory, you have to think what is the next best move. I bet you have not deal with appstore review before, I remember last time even mention google or android in privacy policy will get your app rejected
The endgame is that all apps publish a list of the functions they don’t have, to appease a baroque and obtuse review system.
because it would be rejected again
"Tarot function is not present in this version, and won't be present in any releases future ever".
That makes it sound like they made a mistake.
3 replies →
Why not just lie? The white lie is the most expedient thing to get the results you want, which is getting the app into the app store. It's not a slippery slope into a total moral decay of you as a human being. If a friend is hiding from an abusive partner, and that partner asks where your friend is, telling the truth would put your friend in danger, so lying is an important skill to have. The lie in this case gets past a pointless requirement.
[dead]
[flagged]
Lying is a subversion of morality and strawmanning doesn't change that.
If you can't state the truth, then don't answer.
Thank you Kant, but the world is never as black-and-white
You can just add one and then remove it. That way you're not lying. And also it doesn't sound like you're disagreeing with them so you sound like a problem.
[dead]