Surely you’re aware of the embrace, extend, extinguish corporate strategy.

People only get to decide what they want from their platform until facebook starts extending the spec. Then your client will become incompatible with some posts, and so on and so forth.

In summary, it’s a threat to the platform itself.

Sorry I don’t really understand your position.

You’re rejecting the quotes from the article on the basis of the publication, suggesting a better accusation would be a “scam”, and then refuting that accusation as baseless.

I’m not trying to be an ass, I mean this as kindly as possible, but this is a straw man argument. You should look into logical fallacies. They’re well documented tactics for manipulating people and misrepresenting information. Everyone should. It will help you to reason about information and ultimately identify when you’re being manipulated.

If the app was banned due to it being a scam (which is not the case)

The term “scam” is a straw man. “Scam” is subjective, so you could define a scam as “an app that provides no content and steals your money” and conclude that the app in question is not that, and therefore fine.

The main assertion in the article is:

the app deliberately targets young men and encourages misogyny, including members of the app sharing techniques on how to control and exploit women. The firm has also claimed that there is evidence to suggest that the app is an illegal pyramid scheme

People were such dimwits about it though. Even if you had a security guard at the entrance to every shop challenging people to wear properly fitted n95s, I’m certain heaps of people would remove it after they walked past just on principle.