The 'tool' seems stupid (every minute if post contains 'fade' downvote), but im genuinely curious - are there any rules against this kind of censoring? The article made it sound like this was a bit of scandal, but is there anything more to it than bad form?
Also Fade's notYikYak thing seems pretty juvenile.
There are no "rules" against it. YikYak isn't the federal government, and it has no such obligation to protect your free speech on its platform. If YikYak wanted to soft-censor -- or even hard-censor -- any mentions of the words "potato," or "HBO," or "Facebook," or "America," or what have you, it could do so.
That said, it's a shady thing to do, and while not illegal, it's certainly generating controversy and bad publicity. Time will tell if users vote with their phones against it. That's the recourse here: not the law per se, but the market.
Now, this would be a different story if YikYak had an overwhelming share of the market, and the DoJ were to view something like this as anticompetitive. But YikYak isn't a putative monopolist in the chat space. At least not at the moment.
Also Fade's notYikYak thing seems pretty juvenile.