<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Why is OldTwitter rejected? in Discussions</title>
    <link>https://connect.mozilla.org/t5/discussions/why-is-oldtwitter-rejected/m-p/60471#M21189</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN class=""&gt;&lt;SPAN class=""&gt;&lt;SPAN class=""&gt;There is an add-on called OldTwitter that restores Twitter's ugly layout to its former, easy-to-use layout.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN class=""&gt;&lt;SPAN class=""&gt;&lt;SPAN class=""&gt;There is also a Firefox version of this add-on, but it has been removed by Mozilla and cannot be installed from the add-on store at this time.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN class=""&gt;&lt;SPAN class=""&gt;&lt;SPAN class=""&gt;The author has complained about this on Twitter (now X) that he has been removed multiple times and that his explanations of the code have not been accepted.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN class=""&gt;&lt;SPAN class=""&gt;&lt;SPAN class=""&gt;&lt;A href="https://twitter.com/d1mden/status/1796493340302835732" target="_blank" rel="noopener"&gt;https://twitter.com/d1mden/status/1796493340302835732&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN class=""&gt;&lt;SPAN class=""&gt;&lt;SPAN class=""&gt;This add-on has not been rejected by the Google Chrome Web Store and has even received a Featured badge, so I don't understand Mozilla's response.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN class=""&gt;&lt;SPAN class=""&gt;&lt;SPAN class=""&gt;If Mozilla is simply rejecting add-ons that are inconvenient for the company, like Apple, then such self-righteous behavior has led to Firefox's dire situation, with less than a 10% market share, and Firefox users should be aware that no one wants such behavior.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 21 Jun 2024 09:12:58 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>tesmite</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2024-06-21T09:12:58Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Why is OldTwitter rejected?</title>
      <link>https://connect.mozilla.org/t5/discussions/why-is-oldtwitter-rejected/m-p/60471#M21189</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN class=""&gt;&lt;SPAN class=""&gt;&lt;SPAN class=""&gt;There is an add-on called OldTwitter that restores Twitter's ugly layout to its former, easy-to-use layout.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN class=""&gt;&lt;SPAN class=""&gt;&lt;SPAN class=""&gt;There is also a Firefox version of this add-on, but it has been removed by Mozilla and cannot be installed from the add-on store at this time.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN class=""&gt;&lt;SPAN class=""&gt;&lt;SPAN class=""&gt;The author has complained about this on Twitter (now X) that he has been removed multiple times and that his explanations of the code have not been accepted.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN class=""&gt;&lt;SPAN class=""&gt;&lt;SPAN class=""&gt;&lt;A href="https://twitter.com/d1mden/status/1796493340302835732" target="_blank" rel="noopener"&gt;https://twitter.com/d1mden/status/1796493340302835732&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN class=""&gt;&lt;SPAN class=""&gt;&lt;SPAN class=""&gt;This add-on has not been rejected by the Google Chrome Web Store and has even received a Featured badge, so I don't understand Mozilla's response.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN class=""&gt;&lt;SPAN class=""&gt;&lt;SPAN class=""&gt;If Mozilla is simply rejecting add-ons that are inconvenient for the company, like Apple, then such self-righteous behavior has led to Firefox's dire situation, with less than a 10% market share, and Firefox users should be aware that no one wants such behavior.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 21 Jun 2024 09:12:58 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://connect.mozilla.org/t5/discussions/why-is-oldtwitter-rejected/m-p/60471#M21189</guid>
      <dc:creator>tesmite</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-06-21T09:12:58Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Why is OldTwitter rejected?</title>
      <link>https://connect.mozilla.org/t5/discussions/why-is-oldtwitter-rejected/m-p/60549#M21215</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Bump. This is a add-on I love near and dear to my heart and seeing it being completely killed off from being able to be on the Firefox marketplace hurts my heart.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 22 Jun 2024 02:56:40 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://connect.mozilla.org/t5/discussions/why-is-oldtwitter-rejected/m-p/60549#M21215</guid>
      <dc:creator>scot</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-06-22T02:56:40Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Why is OldTwitter rejected?</title>
      <link>https://connect.mozilla.org/t5/discussions/why-is-oldtwitter-rejected/m-p/60618#M21234</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I don't have access to the correspondence between the author and the reviewer, so it's really impossible to know whether there is a solution to get the extension re-approved. This Reddit thread also didn't have the critical details: &lt;A href="https://old.reddit.com/r/browsers/comments/1cty4lh/mozilla_removes_old_twitter_layout_addon_from/" target="_blank"&gt;https://old.reddit.com/r/browsers/comments/1cty4lh/mozilla_removes_old_twitter_layout_addon_from/&lt;/A&gt;.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I am concerned by reports on the author's Github that X has been banning some users of the extension (for example, &lt;A href="https://github.com/dimdenGD/OldTwitter/issues/828" target="_blank"&gt;https://github.com/dimdenGD/OldTwitter/issues/828&lt;/A&gt;). I don't know whether that has been resolved in the latest releases (these are not signed, so can only be run using one of the temporary workarounds:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;UL&gt;&lt;LI&gt;&lt;A href="https://github.com/dimdenGD/OldTwitter/releases" target="_blank"&gt;https://github.com/dimdenGD/OldTwitter/releases&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;&lt;A href="https://github.com/dimdenGD/OldTwitter?tab=readme-ov-file#chromium" target="_blank"&gt;https://github.com/dimdenGD/OldTwitter?tab=readme-ov-file#chromium&lt;/A&gt; (scroll down a bit to Firefox; see also &lt;A href="https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Tools/about:debugging#loading_a_temporary_extension" target="_blank"&gt;https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Tools/about:debugging#loading_a_temporary_extension&lt;/A&gt;)&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;/UL&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 22 Jun 2024 21:18:37 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://connect.mozilla.org/t5/discussions/why-is-oldtwitter-rejected/m-p/60618#M21234</guid>
      <dc:creator>jscher2000</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-06-22T21:18:37Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

