Google: Hello, for reasons we won't explain you can no longer submit updates to your app to the Playstore until you make changes to it we won't specify. We will send you the same mail again if you appeal but have fun trying regardless.
Also Google, a few days later: We feel like we haven't wasted enough of your time yet, please answer these questions about your recent app suspension, did you think it was as funny as we did?

I just want to publish the app I develop for free in my freetime and I have absolutely zero energy to deal with this shit but because of Googles monopoly I have to.

Here is the rule they say Tusky violates. Yes Tusky shows "User generated content" but I don't have any control over it. There are also no terms of use, why would Tusky have terms of use, it makes no sense.

So I guess could invent some stupid terms of use and slap them onto the startpage, which would annoy all users but probably allow me to publish updates again.

The majority of users come from F-Droid, but Google Play has crash reporting so dropping it would severely impact app quality.

The next Tusky release is almost done and it has amazing improvements but it has to wait until this situation is resolved.
I have dealt with a lot of app rejections already both at work and with Tusky, but this time I'm out of ideas.

@ConnyDuck two different departments that don't talk to each other each developed half of that sentence

@ConnyDuck Do you know, what percentage of your users are coming from GPlay?

@MagicLike about 40%. Thats a lot and also Google Play has crash reporting that I don't get anywhere else, without it app quality would drop significantly.

@ConnyDuck Maybe - for the other 60 % you could use an FOSS reporting tool to get also some reports from them

@MagicLike @ConnyDuck in theory, yes. In practice, you get way less reports and the quality is much worse.

@ConnyDuck du könntest auch einfach behaupten, dass tusky gar keinen user generated content anzeigt sondern nur instanz-generated content. chrome hat schließlich auch keine terms of use und mehr user generated content als tusky zeigt das auch nich an. das ist doch offensichtlich das logik-level auf dem die operieren.

@benni Google Chrome hat sogar ziemlich lange Terms. Und eigentlich hab ich ihnen das schon im ersten Appeal erklärt, glaub einen zweiten krieg ich nicht.

@ConnyDuck Der konnte wahrscheinlich nicht automatisiert geparst werden. 🤡 @benni

@ConnyDuck @benni
Nach meinem Eindruck hat #heise online schon oft in passendem Kontext darüber berichtet, wenn Google mal wieder App-Entwicklern aus fadenscheinigen Gründen das Leben schwer gemacht hat. Und ein bisschen Öffentlichkeit könnte ja vielleicht helfen, Googles Gesprächsbereitschaft zu befördern. Gibt es jemand von der Redaktion hier im Fediverse?

Dir hier genannten Beispiele für Nutzungsbedingungen wären für mich übrigens überhaupt kein Problem.

@ConnyDuck if a stupid click-through gets google off your back, then a stupid click-through we shall click. :flan_q:

@ConnyDuck If they want to get rid of a high quality app...

@M4x @ConnyDuck they most likely want to get rid of federated apps which endanger their monopolistic business model based on centralization and full control.

@ConnyDuck Does manually sideloading an updated .apk from e.g. GitHub on top of an existing Google Play install work and keep the crash reporting? I know it's *very* much not-ideal but I wouldn't mind if it came down to that personally, at least for now if you have something you want to release.

@ConnyDuck what would it take to get some form of app crash reporting from non-playstore users?

@ConnyDuck new Tusky terms of Service: you have to agree to say "fuck google!" aloud three times before launching the app the first time after any update. [does not apply to users who install thru f-droid]

@ConnyDuck even as an fdroid user, a ToU click through would not bother me. Assuming it is simple and short terms.

@ConnyDuck Do it. Add a basic thing on first launch.

"Third-party servers you use may impose their own terms of service. Please familiarise yourself with these before registering or adding new accounts."

If you want more:

"Use of this program to view and generate content may be restricted by local laws, please ensure you are aware of and agree to these before continuing."

[Agree] [Exit]

Skip it in the fdroid builds, obvs.

@ConnyDuck this is what i would do, make up some bullshit terms so google is happy and people can ignore it. but it will make the app needlessly suck a bit more. uhh

@ConnyDuck just have a page that says there are no terms of use, and have the user accept that?

@ConnyDuck can you fetch instance-local ToS and show it? I guess it must be available via api

@ConnyDuck put ToS only in GooglePay version
Content of ToS: “don’t be evil. More details at [link to this thread].”
Add opt-in crash reporting to start page in f-droid version.

@ConnyDuck What? Since when do you need terms? I don't have app terms for any of my apps...

@ConnyDuck Would this not also apply to E-Mail clients? They show user generated content, too...

@bastelwombat Either that, or they just don't understand how Tusky works, I'm not sure which one is the case.

@ConnyDuck @bastelwombat Would IRC work as an analogy to make Google understand Tusky at least a bit better? I've only ever used IRC like once many years ago, but I believe it's that whatever client itself you use has no terms of use and whatever terms you agree to would come from which channel or room or whatever you're joining, no?

@ConnyDuck Will Google accept a user policy like:

“You agree to not be a prick, nor act in a manner indistinguishable from one.”


I believe that Tusky had issue with it not wanting to be used by certain instances.

While I understand the sentiment, I think that this is a mistake, and depending on how/what, may make the software non-FLOSS.

@emacsen @ConnyDuck why would an instance try to dictate what app end users can access it with? That makes zero sense

@rolenthedeep @ConnyDuck

No, Tusky wanted to not be used with certain instances (ie Gab).

@emacsen @rolenthedeep @ConnyDuck And this does not make the app non-FLOSS, I don't understand how you get the idea that this might be the case.

@morre @rolenthedeep @ConnyDuck

If you put that in the license or TOU, it makes the app non-FLOSS.

@ConnyDuck I think some other Fediverse apps ran into similar problems this year, but since this is the Fediverse, I can't find any of the relevant posts... Maybe ask Gargron?


Really sorry to hear you're going through this :(

Please let the rest of us know if we can help.

@ConnyDuck And then somehow /you're/ the jerk if you write "Why do you THINK?!?" in the response field.

@ConnyDuck "I really wanted it to be approved, is the thing"

@ConnyDuck I've set a reminder to google the next sentence in a few days :cat_si:

Is this some sort of easter egg? :acat_coming:

@ConnyDuck can you do some FOSS reporting tool and yank the play store app completely? It may come to that considering its google we are talking about. That or abandon tusky

@tclark Meta has ToS and has enough market share to silence Google and has enough budget for a legal battle with Google

@txt_file I was thinking that as a developer, Facebook is far more difficult to deal with than Google.

@ConnyDuck getting to the point where you need a whole Google department in your org just to deal with Google bullshit

Sign in to participate in the conversation – a Fediverse instance for & by the Chaos community