Hear head. I'm with TreKing. A simple algorithm for highlighting and pulling the dregs would add enormous value to the market. At the moment its a bit stagnant, pull the plug and let the crap drain away. The good apps and those being improved will be able to stay ahead of the curve.
Survival of the fittest, not the most numerous. Its very similar to the strategy being used to thwart denial of services attacks which asks each client to send larger files to validate their intent. DoS client can't afford to consume the extra bandwith and still maintain a DoS attack. Similarly spam developers won't be able to afford to maintain and publish a plethora of crap apps. On Oct 7, 7:11 am, ses <[email protected]> wrote: > > Rereading the OP, I think I veered a little OT (again). ses is talking about > > moderating quality (which is much more difficult and I don't think needs to > > be done or should be) while I'm specifically talking moderating the spam > > (which automatically implies poor quality). > > Actually my main concern is those apps that you call 'spam', and I'm > glad my thread has prompted some interesting discussion. Obviously if > an app is fundamentally functional but has a few issues, it shouldn't > be removed. But apps that simply don't work or re-uploaded in > different forms in a spamming fashion should be removed. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
