Google keeps rejecting it for dubious reasons. The first rejection was claim it was "spam". When I appealed, the review came back that it contained "additional functionality" because it uses "modifies network traffic". Well of course it does! When I asked the reviewer how I could achieve the stated functionality of blocking ads without the use of "declarativeNetRequest" I simply received the same canned response.
I submit a totally new update that simplified the code and included comments, and references to other open source projecs that use the exact same mechanisms. Again it was rejected. On this appeal I asked if it could be escalated to a senior reviewer who could possibly reply with more context. Same canned response and rejection.
I can't help but think Google has some internal policy to give adblockers a runaround. It is obvious to me the stated rejections are not valid (Note that I'm also not new to this - I have several extensions that have been published for years with thousands of users) but have never encountered such gate-keeping before.
It's a sad state of affairs even if not totally unpredictable. To be honest I'm surprised Google hasn't made it an official policy to prohibit adblockers. But they haven't - obviously there are other adblockers published to the store, and that's what makes this so frustrating.
Anyway, fellow developers. Anyone run into a similar situation? And how did you resolve it? Thanks!
Publish it as a Firefox add-on instead.
apparently, as demonstrated by this post, they care about ad-blockers too..
Ding ding ding. Stop using chrome!
Of course they are going to do this
When you submit, assume every time that you're going up against someone who's going to miss context from the prior submissions.
One path I haven't seen mentioned: the official chromium-extensions Google Group. Googlers from the Chrome Extensions team actually reply there, and a clear public post with your item ID gets a human eye the appeal form never does.
https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/chromium-extensio...
Good luck, genuinely.