Your change would break uBO. Use a JSON linter before modifying assets.json.

Fixed.

Thanks.

@gorhill I was going to open a separate thread but might as well ask here. uBO currently supports some Adguard filter syntax while some important syntax such as script blocking etc. are left out. These are extremely useful for nefarious websites which are increasing everyday.

I noticed that enabling the Russian Adguard Filter (which is based on RU Adlist) in uBO itself still let many ads through on the aforementioned nefarious websites due to the fact that uBO does not support the syntax of some filters.

So, I would like to ask you this do you plan to support further Adguard syntax? It would prove really useful for users.

I don't want filter list authors to be able to inject arbitrary javascript into web pages, the only scriptlets injected by uBO will be the ones vouched for by the project.

Adguard's approach is not going to be accepted for AMO, they might have to go uBO's way, in which case sharing efforts would make sense.

Russian Adguard Filter (which is based on RU Adlist)

I don't think this is true. If you enable only both these lists in uBO, there is little overlap:

RUS: Adguard Russian Filter​: ​​​​18,024 used out of 18,063
RUS: RU AdList: 19,326 used out of 21,724

@gorhill I was already thinking that the JS injections might not be considered appropriate but we can't deny they are effective.

Adguard's approach is not going to be accepted for AMO

But they already have their extension approved there. Did some policies change?

I don't think this is true. If you enable only both these lists in uBO, there is little overlap

Interesting, I guess it was initially based on RU Adlist but not anymore 😕. Any insight @Alex-302?

Did some policies change?

I can only say that on my side, this is what happened: 126110c.

@gotitbro

Russian Adguard Filter (which is based on RU Adlist)

it is not based on RU Adlist. It was a long time ago(more than 5-7 years ago) and not true at the moment:) Now our Russian filter and RuAdList - two different filters. Our filter at least not worse than RuAdList.

@gorhill also you may consider moving BitBlock List to Annoyances because its goal is to remove annoyances and it includes rules not only for Russian websites.

I think I will remove BitBlock, especially after you added the instruction URL for "RU AdList", this means the list still has good visibility for Russian users.

@gorhill I agree, because of this in BitBlock description:

! Subscription is for those who do not want to see all this and
! NOT RECOMMENDED for the default installation.

And because it has only 10% own rules, other 90% are present in Fanboy's Annoyance List.

@mikhaelkh Can you tell me what the instruction URL contains? Thanks.

@gorhill But why remove it completely? We already have a Chinese annoyance list wouldn't it be better to just rename the list BitBlock Annoyance list?

I think uBO is a great resource for people to discover lists that have already been vetted by the community. Makes sense if we have good lists listed here.

@gotitbro use the power of Google Translate :)

@gorhill you should list that BitBlock had been removed in Releases. (Done)

use the power of Google Translate :)

@mikhaelkh If only that would've helped not getting understandable translation.

@gotitbro TL;DR mainly for Russian websites.
RU AdList + CSS Fixes - ads + malware
RU AdList JS Fixes - userscript
Counters - counters
BitBlock - social + annoyances
Anti-adblock - Adblock Warning Removal List