Re: How is this not being covered here?
1) Then this site has the opportunity to correctly identify the issues and what is going on.
You're confusing "opportunity" with "obligation." I know they both start the same. But, they have entirely different meanings. There's no real value in that opportunity. You have the opportunity to hear out Jehovah's Witness missionaries as they come to your door. Does that mean you should engage in the conversation?
2) Do you give waiters your banking passwords and any and all keyboard input as well?
This is a rather useless argument. It's essentially "Oh yeah!? Well they can take your money with your banking passwords just as easily as they can with your credit card." You're not showing a much greater level of risk. In both cases, there is risk involved. Being irrationally concerned about one while not even considering the other shows agenda rather than legitimate concern.
3) Jailbreaking requires a security hole to exploit to get that jailbreak. ALL jailbreaking is inherently dangerous. You install applications NOT checked by apple and hence can have information mining capabilities. iMore has the opportunity to remedy this ignorance, just like the bending crap. You may think this is a non-issue but not every iPhone user is a techie.
Here's some ignorance on your part. Yes. Jailbreaking requires a security issue to be exploited in order to gain root access. You're pretending phones checked by apple, or google for that matter, are automatically secure while ignoring the OS is where the security hole exists in the first place. Please learn what "hence" means. You didn't use it accurately in your grand argument.
4) If jailbreaking is not risky then Apple should be ok with it, no? The second sentence you then completely contradict yourself. iMore has a separate forum for jailbreaking and hence indirectly support it. As for the last sentence, again, stop with the false analogy fallacies.
The first question is an asinine argument. Apple provides a mechanism for the phone to be locked to a carrier. It's not risky to change cell carriers. So, why would Apple provide a means to prevent this? Do you see how that logic sounds when it's applied to something that doesn't fit your agenda? There are a variety of reasons Apple could be against jailbreaking. The most logical has nothing to do with risk and everything to do with branding. Apple is very big on branding. It's at the heart of what they do. When you jailbreak, you get to leave the ecosystem, to some extent. In doing this, you move away from the branding. At this point, your experience doesn't match what they desire and this can turn into word of mouth advertising they don't agree with, both good and bad. Sending pictures carries risk. A phone without a lockscreen password carries risk. Apple allows a lot of things that bring risk. They're not trying to stop risk. They're, as they're notorious for doing, worrying about brand.
Your second argument is even weaker. It's silly to point out there's a jailbreak forum and then use that to suggest that there is an obligation to report on every given topic related to jailbreaking. By that token, you're suggesting they're obligated to report on ways to pirate software because that's a subset of jailbreaking. Forums are generally self policing. Users will create threads and those that interest other users will remain towards the top. Others will fall off. If you're expecting a site to increase views in these threads, you're not understanding how a forum works.
Ultimately, it's rather obvious you've got a bit of an agenda here. Your arguments are weak to the point that you can't seriously believe what you're saying. You're trying to stir things up. It's adorable. But, you're not 12. It's time to start acting like it.