[tablespoon]

> I don't think Mozilla has a choice here. Chrome just has the sheer market power at the moment. If Mozilla went down a different path, extension developers would likely just favor Chrome (and MV3) as that's where unfortunately most users are.

That's be true for some extensions, but it would be a big, big selling point for Mozilla to be able to say: our ad-blockers are better than yours.

There's also some incorrect binary thinking here. Why must Mozilla support only one extension standard? Mindless application of some software engineering principle? It would make total sense for them to support two: one with the features they want, and another for Chrome compatibility.