I don't see a lot of value in this article. I'm aware that the Mozilla review process is slow, but this rant is not the one that's going to fire up people in Mo

I don't see a lot of value in this article. I'm aware that the Mozilla review process is slow, but this rant is not the one that's going to fire up people in Mozilla to fix it. The author cries, "...as an open source project, we’re already stretched thin—it’s a colossal waste of resources to deal with the issues caused by this policy. If we were a for-profit company, we could just make it someone’s job." What does the author think Firefox and Mozilla are? Firefox is open source and Mozilla is a non-profit. That Mozilla as a non-profit has policies to have volunteers do what seems like a good job (especially looking at the AMO review comments in this case) should be lauded. As IvyMike pointed out trusted extensions morphing into malware in Chrome, which is developed by a hugely for-profit company, it seems to me that Google is the one that should be considered hostile to everyone in the community and should also be ashamed. Also, the author does not need to stoop so low saying things like "I can not in good conscience recommend that Ember developers use the Ember Inspector add-on from the Mozilla add-ons page. Either compile it from source yourself and set a reminder every few weeks to update it, or switch to Chrome until this issue is resolved." For heaven's sake, host the extension on your site and provide the link to the XPI file to your users. Firefox can install it from there and your users will click on the "allow site to install extension" dialog. There is no need to host your extension on AMO if you're this upset with Mozilla.