昨天下午，我收到了Apple高级副总裁Phil Schiller关于Ninjawords和App Store的深思熟虑的电子邮件，我认为这对两个故事来说都是好兆头在Schiller的许可下，我在这里重印了它的重要部分：
When I read your column last night about the Ninjawords dictionary application I immediately investigated it with our App Store review team to learn the facts of what happened.
Let me start with the most important points - Apple did not censor the content in this developer’s application and Apple did not reject this developer’s application for including references to common swear wordsYou accused Apple of both in your story and the fact is that we did neither.
Ninjawords is an application which uses content from the Wiktionary.org online wiki-based dictionary to provide a nice fast dictionary application on the web and on the iPhoneContrary to what you reported, the Ninjawords application was not rejected in the App Store review process for including common “swear” wordsIn fact anyone can easily see that Apple has previously approved other dictionary applications in the App Store that include all of the “swear” words that you gave as examples in your story.
The issue that the App Store reviewers did find with the Ninjawords application is that it provided access to other more vulgar terms than those found in traditional and common dictionaries, words that many reasonable people might find upsetting or objectionableA quick search on Wiktionary.org easily turns up a number of offensive “urban slang” terms that you won’t find in popular dictionaries such as one that you referenced, the New Oxford American Dictionary included in Mac OS XApple rejected the initial submission of Ninjawords for this reason, provided the Ninjawords developer with information about some of the vulgar terms, and suggested to the developer that they resubmit the application for approval once parental controls were implemented on the iPhone.
The Ninjawords developer then decided to filter some offensive terms in the Ninjawords application and resubmit it for approval for distribution in the App Store before parental controls were implementedApple did not ask the developer to censor any content in Ninjawords, the developer decided to do that themselves in order to get to market fasterEven though the developer chose to censor some terms, there still remained enough vulgar terms that it required a parental control rating of 17+.
You are correct that the Ninjawords application should not have needed to be censored while also receiving a 17+ rating, but that was a result of the developers’ actions, not Apple’sI believe that the Apple app review team’s original recommendation to the developer to submit the Ninjawords application, without censoring it, to the App Store once parental controls was implemented would have been the best course of action for all; Wiktionary.org is an open, ever-changing resource and filtering the content does not seem reasonable or necessary.
After going back to Ninjawords’s developers and conferring with some trusted sources within Apple, I believe what Schiller says here is genuinely the case — that what the App Store reviewers wanted for Ninjawords was a 17+ rating, not for Matchstick Software to filter its dictionary listings.
特别是，它似乎真的归结为父母控制的推出时间不佳Matchstick Software最初于5月13日提交了应用程序App Store的回应是Apple不会在没有17+家长控制评级的情况下发布这些词但家长控制 - 指定应用年龄等级限制的偏好 - 在iPhone OS 3.0中首次亮相，直到6月17日才发布并且，值得注意的是，6月17日的发布日期直到6月8日的WWDC主题演讲才公布早在5月，Matchstick Software就知道OS 3.0即将推出。
Matchstick可以做的是等待iPhone OS 3.0并发布具有17+评级的应用程序但是，他们想要做的是尽快发布他们的应用程序因此，Matchstick决定开始过滤出App Store评论员认为令人反感的词语正如Matchstick的Phil Crosby昨晚通过电子邮件告诉我的那样，“当我们推出时，有17个以上的评级不可用，这意味着当时我们的字典根本无法在未经审查的情况下进入App Store考虑到我们的竞争对手吃午餐时审查或坐在边线上的选择，我们选择推出。“
维基词典的英语词典内容是否应该被评为17+，这当然是有争议的我个人不同意这一点但是我 - 和，从判断昨天在网上反应，许多其他人 - 发现蛮横的苹果坚持说Ninjawords都过滤了它的字典和仍然持有17+评级。
一方面，Ninjawords的17+评级可能看起来并不完全脱节，因为Apple目前要求许多应用程序获得17+评级，理由是显示“未经过滤的互联网内容”但是Ninjawords没有显示维基词典的实况内容 - 它包含数据库的快照对维基词典的未经过滤的更新不会通过无线方式进入Ninjawords。
（iPhone开发者在向App Store提交申请时会设置自己的评分，但与Ninjawords的情况一样，App Store评论员偶尔会坚持一定的最低评级。）
Regarding this discrepancy between the ratings for dictionaries, Crosby said to me, “Apple may slap a 17+ rating on our app and wash their hands, saying ‘you’re not required to censor your app’, but at the same time, they’re putting a great deal of pressure on us to do soWho wants to be the only illicit dictionary on the App Store? That may work for Urban Dictionary, but not us我认为在我们的案例中，不一致地应用父母评级与审查密切相关，对其他应用也是如此。“
As is clear from the screenshots, Qingwen doesn’t bombard you with words like “cock” and “penis” the moment you start it upNo, the Apple employee who took those screenshots specifically searched for those wordsAs far as I’m concerned, it’s the same thing as opening a website that contains swear words (like the page you’re reading, for instance) on the iPhoneIf they don’t want Qingwen on the iPhone because it can show you “objectionable material”, then why allow Safari, Mail, YouTube and pretty much any other app, which can easily show you all sorts of even more “objectionable material”?
现在，维基词典数据库可能包含某些“城市俚语”（使用席勒的术语），保证与其他英语词典有不同的评级，但从App Store评论员收到的反馈Matchstick软件非常具体他们被标记为单词屄，他妈的，和拉屎这三个词在其他词典中，被评为低至4+If there are other terms in the unfiltered Ninjawords dictionary that Apple considers more objectionable, why weren’t those terms pointed out?
我相信Phil Schiller认为Apple的政策并不是拒绝App Store词典中含有咒骂词但是，很明显，App Store审核小组并未始终如一地执行此政策我认为问题不在于一个或多个App Store评论者不知道字典中包含其他语境中不可接受的单词是可以接受的。错误是不可避免的问题在于开发商没有很好的办法来诉诸这样的错误Matchstick Software应该足以指出在初始拒绝中被标记为令人反感的词实际上存在于商店中已有的其他几个词典中。
Apple’s goals remain aligned with customers and developers — to create an innovative applications platform on the iPhone and iPod touch and to assist many developers in making as much great software as possible for the iPhone App StoreWhile we may not always be perfect in our execution of that goal, our efforts are always made with the best intentions, and if we err we intend to learn and quickly improve.
这对我来说是音乐Schiller愿意以如此详细和长度作出回应，记录在案，这是我见过的第一个证据，证明Apple的领导力正在努力使课程更正，我们许多人认为这对于平台的长期成功是必要的The improvement I consider most important is a significant focus on fairness, consistency, and common sense in the App Store review process.