This comment is far more true than people realize. And the worst part is, it's not an exaggeration in the slightest.
> You cannot point to the acceptance of one app as evidence that some rule isn't being applied to another app.
This is something they won't even discuss if you question how other apps can have some feature they may not like. You could have the same exact feature, and you'll get rejected.
Because someone else breaking the rules is no excuse for you breaking the rules. It's like when you were a kid, and you tried to say, "But Johnny's doing it!".
Yeah, but when you don't think you're actually breaking the rules, "you never did anything about that guy" is good support.
This is not a case of somebody breaking the rules and trying to say that the rules do not apply. This is a case of the rules suddenly being reinterpreted to mean something completely different from what they used to mean.
Imagine if you stepped on a worm and then got arrested for murder. Would it not be a reasonable thing to say, "uh, there's another guy stepping on worms right over there and you're not arresting him, so what gives?"
Every app violates the word of at least one of those rules. So the only thing you can do is interpret it the best way you can, and that interpretation is guided by what you see being approved.
> You cannot point to the acceptance of one app as evidence that some rule isn't being applied to another app.
This is something they won't even discuss if you question how other apps can have some feature they may not like. You could have the same exact feature, and you'll get rejected.