Seeking developer insights regarding a 4.3(a) review response citing "similar binary, metadata, and/or concept." Our app implements distinct community-focused features that fundamentally differentiate it from existing applications in this category. Feature Implementation: Our app introduces new technological approaches to faith-based applications: Community System: Custom-built group participation with progress visualization Engagement Features: Peer support system with achievement tracking Progress Metrics: Proprietary points system for progress tracking Group Progress Features: Shared accomplishment tracking Achievement Architecture: Progress continuity tracking Performance metrics accumulation Custom recognition system for personal and group milestones Synchronized goal-setting framework Market Analysis: Our research indicates: No existing apps with group-based progress features No solutions combining community features with scheduling No applications with similar group achievement systems No platforms featuring synchronized progress tracking Substantial user base requesting these features Technical Questions: How have developers effectively demonstrated feature differentiation? What technical documentation best demonstrates unique implementations? What strategies work for showing market demand for new features? Best practices for documenting novel community features? Implementation Context: While core scheduling features necessarily overlap with existing solutions, our platform's focus on community engagement and achievement tracking represents a novel approach, validated through user research and community feedback. Seeking insights from developers who have successfully implemented unique social features in established categories.

We're seeking guidance regarding our latest app review (ID: fa69f469-2043-4069-a8be-249916c564ed) which raises concerns about our location services implementation. While we have submitted an appeal to the App Review Board, we'd greatly appreciate any community insights while we await their response. Key Issues: Our app calculates Islamic prayer times and Qibla direction - both requiring location services for religious accuracy Review suggests making the app work without location, which would prevent: Calculating accurate prayer times based on location Determining Qibla direction (mandatory prayer direction towards Mecca) Current Implementation: Two-step location permission process with proper iOS system prompts ATT framework properly implemented (screenshots provided) Non-location features (Quran, etc.) accessible without location/login Clear user communication about location requirements Previous Steps Taken: Provided screenshots showing ATT implementation Demonstrated proper location permission flows Explained religious requirements for location services Made non-location features accessible without permissions Question: How have other religious/prayer apps handled similar requirements where core functionality (prayer times, direction) inherently requires location services? I've attached a screen recording demonstrating: Two-step location permission process [Video Demo] Any guidance would be greatly appreciated, especially regarding best practices for implementing essential location services while meeting App Store guidelines.