> the add-ons most willing to pay good good money for placement are probably ones that you shouldn't install and Firefox should not promote. Think tracking, ads

> the add-ons most willing to pay good good money for placement are probably ones that you shouldn't install and Firefox should not promote. Think tracking, ads, .... Or commercial ad blockers trying to always appear above Ublock Origin. The whole point is for people to pay to have their add-on manually vetted by Firefox staff to verify that it meets the recommendation standards. As the article says, this process is repeated regularly to account for updates. > I'm tentatively supportive, IF they provide free reviews for non-commercial open source extensions and are strict with the promotions they allow. No mention of this in the announcement though... This is already how it works, every recommended add-on has been manually reviewed. The article says that they will use this to expand the reviewing process, not to replace it. They also say, "During the pilot program, these services will be provided to a small number of participants without cost." The extent of the two promotional "levels" are clearly outlined as well. This is just a way for companies to get their add-ons on the fast track to wide adoption by having them reviewed for policy compliance and, if they choose to pay more, added to a promotional section to increase visibility. The Twitter-style hot take to find a flaw right away is not warranted.