Removed, will update once the matter is updated.
Are you trying to shame the AMO Editor in public? If so you put a ton of effort into it.
And there really isn’t anything for us to tell you the he already didn’t. He already told you what needs doing.
If public shaming isn’t your goal, I’m not sure what you are expecting us to reply with…
To make matters worse, the reviewer completely disabled my add-on from the entire AMO store, including the versions which were already approved
It has been restored now, but the update is still rejected.
@noitidart no I am not trying to shame no one, I am trying to get my add-on reviewed correctly.
The guys a senior editor, he definitely reviewed it correctly. If it got approved in past, they did it wrong.
Being senior does not mean that he is right. I’d appreciate if you could refrain from replying again if you don’t *intend to focus on the subject that is at hand; the fact that the reasons to reject the add-on are not valid.
The subject on hand is helping you get your addon approved. I don’t want to upset you by replying. I’m trying to help you. So this is last one, I just want to make clear that I’m not trying to offend you. If someone doesn’t agree with you, it doesn’t mean we’re off-subject.
I’m trying to explain to you what you seem to not be understanding. The editor is recommending improvements for safety. (I recall a previous editor also recommended the same) In the time it took you to write this you could have took the advice of senior editor/programmer and not only got your addon accepted, you would have improved your addon. It would also be improved on other browsers as well.
You’re asking the editor to teach you how to hack. We aren’t Google Chrome here, we care about our users safety. The editor will not show you how hack the browser. He told you its vulnerable, just because you don’t know it, doesn’t mean its not true.
So to be super on topic, you said the goal of this topic was to get your addon approved. The editor told you what to do to get it approved.