27 ms·
Simeon/dotproto: after you’ve talked with the review team and anyone else involved, how about posting a detailed postmortem explaining what happened and why? T
by troydavis 7y ago
Simeon/dotproto: after you’ve talked with the review team and anyone else involved, how about posting a detailed postmortem explaining what happened and why? The actual explanation can't be any worse than what everyone will assume if no explanation is published.
It could be a Chrome blog post or a submission to HN and Reddit r/chrome.
Also, thank you for your transparency in comments like https://www.reddit.com/r/chrome/comments/dgoymg/warning_ubo_ublock_origin_will_possibly_be/#f3h66fl https://www.reddit.com/r/chrome/comments/dgoymg/warning_ubo_....
- zamadatix 7y ago> The actual explanation can't be any worse than what everyone will assume if no explanation is published. Sure it can. I mean the best case scenario is them confirming, yet again, they plan to neuter ad blockers in forthcoming updates and getting more bad press around that. The worst case is all of the backlash for banning ad blockers comes out at once while when blockers are still at peak ability/usage instead of when they have been slowly chipped away at. Attention goes away quicker if they don't say anything at all. The only reason they are saying this much this time is because it's too soon for something like this to happen and it'd generate too much backlash so they are killing the news cycle while it's still just "assumptions on the possibility it'll be removed in the future".