Why do we have to play "guess what's wrong" to pass the review phase?

[Bjorn Stromberg]

Extension id: kdjmiebhgaleboaamnehjbamlghkoedf 

I have received the same rejection more than 6 times:

Your item did not comply with the following section of our Program Policies:
"Spam and Placement in the Store"

• Do not use irrelevant, misleading, or excessive keywords in item descriptions, titles, or metadata.

• Please ensure that your item has a description that clearly and directly relates to its functionality.

I keep asking what is wrong with the extension and all I get in response is these form mails that do not clearly indicate why the extension is not passing the review.

If there's something wrong with the title, description or metadata it would be helpful to indicate what text is problematic so that I can address it.

As it stands, I have no idea what the reviewers are objecting to.

Is something irrelevant?

Is something misleading?

Are there excessive keywords?

Is there something wrong with the description?

Or is it the title?

Or is it the metadata?

Is the description not clear?

Does the description not directly relate to it's functionality?

What is the actual problem?

Why can't you just tell me what is wrong with the extension?

As a comparison, the exact same extension with the same title, description, and metadata was submitted to the Mozilla Add-On site and was approved without any objection.

Why do we have to guess what the reviewers are objecting to? Why can't they communicate clearly and effectively?

[PhistucK]

First, I agree. The situation is completely ridiculous and it seems like their plans is not to make it much better (you will still have to ask for a clarification, instead of getting it with the original rejection, huh?!).

Second, to solve your specific issue, they do not like it when you list many domains in the description, as they can be considered as spammy keywords and similar.

Instead, write a few (3) and link to a page that has the entire list, if needed.

To be honest, your description is not very clear to me, especially with the image you have there that shows an unlikely scenario (it seems like a redirection popup on top of Google, which I have never seen. Maybe a G Suite thing with which I am not familiar?).

So you might want to be more descriptive to make sure people understand what this does.

Is it skipping skipping the "https://www.google.com/url" redirection when you click on a search result on Google, for example?

If so, maybe give that example (or maybe a different example is preferred, see the side note).

A side note - I think the job of this Google redirection is (at least) twofold -

1. To go through the SafeBrowsing filter and stop you before you go to a malicious website if it happens to be one.

2. To hide your search term from the target URL (which kind of counters your claim of less tracking).

It might also be tracking the user, but they have many other ways of doing that - using the ping attribute, or using navigator.sendBeacon (and similar) on click, or a service worker (I think).

So it is possible that skipping this specific redirection is a disservice to your users.

To be clear, I am not affiliated with Google.

☆PhistucK

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chromium Extensions" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to chromium-extens...@chromium.org.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/chromium-extensions/a5e66b6e-c43f-4283-ad88-d689d5d8720b%40chromium.org.

[Simeon Vincent]

Bjorn,

Let's start with the rejection then get into the why of it all. As PhistucK suggested, the core problem is the list of domains the extension works on. I wholeheartedly +1 their recommendations regarding keywords.

Why do we have to guess what the reviewers are objecting to? Why can't they communicate clearly and effectively? - Bjorn

First, I agree. The situation is completely ridiculous and it seems like their plans is not to make it much better (you will still have to ask for a clarification, instead of getting it with the original rejection, huh?!). - PhistucK

I agree that our communications are obtuse and frustrating.  For context, the current approach to rejection feedback is rooted in a mindset where any information we shared about a rejection could be used by a malicious actor to circumvent or exploit Chrome Web Store review. IMO that approach was taken too far; after all, how can you correct a violation if you don't know what you did wrong in the first place?

While I understand why PhistucK doesn't think our current plans go far enough (I also want to know exactly what I did wrong in the first email), I think it will be a significant improvement. For context, we're currently planning to create a team that will respond to escalations with more meaningful information about a rejection. There are still a lot of details to work out here, but I'm excited about working with them to improve the developer experience. I also make no secret about the fact that I hope this is a stepping stone to getting more detailed information in the initial rejection email, though that's definitely a (very?) long term goal.

Cheers,

Simeon - @dotproto

Extensions Developer Advocate

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/chromium-extensions/CABc02_Lmt7G1n2xfKfsnrJ%2BJctVf01g7gSF41SiP_zj-25Fe0g%40mail.gmail.com.

[Bjorn Stromberg]

I updated the description to read:

This extension will automatically redirect you away from tracking redirects on supported sites.
For a list of supported domains see https://github.com/bjornstar/intercept-redirect

I resubmitted and was rejected again with the same message:

"Spam and Placement in the Store"

• Do not use irrelevant, misleading, or excessive keywords in item descriptions, titles, or metadata.
• Please ensure that your item has a description that clearly and directly relates to its functionality.

I'm beyond frustrated here. I make my extensions public so that people can use them for free. I don't need to be treated like a malicious actor who doesn't deserve clear feedback.

At this point it's not worth the effort to attempt to use the Chrome Web Store.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to chromium-extensions+unsub...@chromium.org.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/chromium-extensions/a5e66b6e-c43f-4283-ad88-d689d5d8720b%40chromium.org.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chromium Extensions" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to chromium-extensions+unsub...@chromium.org.

[PhistucK]

I think that agrees with my assessment that your description (even the new one) is not clear about what it actually does.

☆PhistucK

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to chromium-extens...@chromium.org.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/chromium-extensions/a5e66b6e-c43f-4283-ad88-d689d5d8720b%40chromium.org.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chromium Extensions" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to chromium-extens...@chromium.org.

[Emmanuel]

Simeon,

Why are not all developers have the same treatment?

I've seen some extensions without any Privacy Policy... and one comes from a very very well known e-commerce company, and with updates in April (so recently that this was already mandatory).

I'm still stuck with the impossibility to set a different privacy policy for each of my published extension.
Is it allowed to set the Privacy Policy URL to a page in which the user choose the privacy policy corresponding to the extension he is interested about? Will it pass review, or will my account be disabled?

That new process is really frightening for us... I fear each update review, really... although I really appreciate your efforts for making the extensions environment more secured for users (as we are also users of others' extensions).

Cheers,
Emmanuel

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to chromium-extensions+unsub...@chromium.org.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/chromium-extensions/a5e66b6e-c43f-4283-ad88-d689d5d8720b%40chromium.org.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chromium Extensions" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to chromium-extensions+unsub...@chromium.org.

[Bjorn Stromberg]

Why do we need to guess what's wrong with it?

The extension is already published with a list of 20 domains and a basic description.

I added support for a new domain and submitted it last month. The update was repeatedly rejected with unclear, non-specific, form mail and I gave up after a week of getting nowhere.

I updated the extension to add another domain and attempted to publish again this month only to be met with the same cryptic form mail. I have to resort to posting on this mailing list just to get a response saying "the core problem is the list of domains the extension works on". I remove the list of domains which is the "core problem" and I get the exact same rejection form mail.

As it is, the extension is 2 versions behind and I just want to be able to use the new version without using developer mode.

The source code is public, it's clearly not malicious, and it's absurd to run into so many problems trying to publish a minor update to a basic extension.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to chromium-extensions+unsub...@chromium.org.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/chromium-extensions/a5e66b6e-c43f-4283-ad88-d689d5d8720b%40chromium.org.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chromium Extensions" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to chromium-extensions+unsub...@chromium.org.

[Hr Gwea]

By looking at the extension's description as it currently is in the store, I would say that the domain list is the least of the problems. Actually that list is the most important part of the description.

The problem to me is in the explanation of what it does and in the screenshot.

The screenshot is not even a screenshot of your extension. It's a screenshot of a browser window with a huge red arrow pointing to a user review... what?!

It's confusing.

The description "Skip tracking redirects that serve no purpose other than to waste your valuable time.".

Everything in red is just opinion, and so, unnecessary.

So, as it stands, you description consists of 3 words: "Skip tracking redirects".

Improve the WHAT of you extension. Forget about the WHY. Let the user decide WHY they want to use your extension. Your job is to be perfectly clear about the WHAT.

Keep the domain list, that's an important part of WHAT your extension does.

Improve the screenshot. It's confusing.

And explain what it does with more that 3 words.

[Simeon Vincent]

Bjorn, I just a look at your most recent submission and I believe you've addressed the problem. As such, I have requested a second opinion on your most recent verdict.

Why are not all developers have the same treatment? - Emmanuel

They should. If you know of any violations I'll gladly pass them to the review team.

I'm still stuck with the impossibility to set a different privacy policy for each of my published extension. - Emmanuel

At the moment Chrome Web Store only allows you to provide a privacy policy on your developer account. As such, the only officially supported way of setting different privacy policies on your extensions is to maintain multiple developer accounts. I just verified that we have a feature request for this on the backlog.

Is it allowed to set the Privacy Policy URL to a page in which the user choose the privacy policy corresponding to the extension he is interested about? Will it pass review, or will my account be disabled?

Good question. My gut feeling is that should be okay, but I haven't floated this by anyone in review so I'm not certain.

 

Keep the domain list, that's an important part of WHAT your extension does. - Hr

DO NOT keep the domain list. We recently updated the spam policy and updated our guidance in the FAQ on what we consider excessive use of keywords. The currently published list will be rejected.

Cheers,

Simeon - @dotproto

Extensions Developer Advocate

[Hr Gwea]

On Thursday, April 30, 2020 at 10:44:55 PM UTC-4, Simeon Vincent wrote:

DO NOT keep the domain list. We recently updated the spam policy and updated our guidance in the FAQ on what we consider excessive use of keywords. The currently published list will be rejected.

Thanks for clarifying.

Here is the relevant part of spam policy:

When listing supported websites or brands in the description, do not list more than five. To provide a longer list of brands or websites, provide a link that users can refer to or embed the list in one of the extension's promotional screenshots.

[PoziWorld]

Hello Simeon,

Can you help me figure out what I'm missing, please?

ID: nhglpabogkpplpcemgiaopjoehcpajdk

Rejected 6 times for "Spam and Placement in the Store" since April 19, 2020.

I removed all brand names and their URLs.
I made sure the title and summary are not repeated.
I added a description that doesn't use the same words as the summary.
The screenshots show before and after scenarios, so users can see what the extension does.

I've reviewed the FAQ you linked, but still don't understand what might be wrong.

Title:
Print Waste Minimizer

Summary:
Save ink and paper when printing return shipping labels

Detailed Description:

Removes unnecessary information, such as mailing instructions, due dates, logos, etc.

How it works

--------

1) Open a page with a label.

If it's supported*, you will see a Print Waste Minimizer button in the top right corner of the page.

2) Click the button.

3) Print the page.

* Please see https://github.com/PoziWorld/Print-Waste-Minimizer#supported-url-masks for details.

Disclaimer

--------

Each of the supported websites has various types and providers of labels, and not all of them are supported yet.

Email us at pwm-s...@poziworld.com with a screenshot of a page with a label that doesn't seem to be supported and we'll see what we can do.

Privacy

--------

This extension does not read, change, store, or transmit any of your personal data (e.g., logins, passwords, messages, contacts) from any of the sites or your computer in absolutely any form.

Free open-source extension. Code available for your review at https://github.com/PoziWorld/Print-Waste-Minimizer

[Bjorn Stromberg]

I have once again received the exact same "Spam and Placement in the Store" rejection notification that I have gotten for the past 2 months.

I cannot tell what is wrong. The repeated form mail rejection notifications are worse than helpful.

This whole experience has been extremely frustrating and nothing I do seems to have any effect. It makes me want to remove my extensions from the Chrome Web Store.

[Simeon Vincent]

Bjorn,

For the moment please hold off on editing your draft or submitting another version. I believe the changes you've already made have addressed the violation. Review may be able to publish a previously rejected version so long as the draft hasn't changed since the last rejection.

Cheers,

Simeon - @dotproto

Extensions Developer Advocate

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chromium Extensions" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to chromium-extens...@chromium.org.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/chromium-extensions/3dfe4c85-8fb4-4991-b57d-6b3670826bfd%40chromium.org.

[PoziWorld]

I trimmed the description, but the extension still got rejected again:

“Removes unnecessary information, such as mailing instructions, due dates, logos, etc.

How it works

--------

1) Open a page with a label.

If it's supported*, you will see a button in the top right corner of the page.

2) Click the button.

3) Print the page.

* Please see https://github.com/PoziWorld/Print-Waste-Minimizer#supported-url-masks for details.

Privacy

--------

This extension does not read, change, store, or transmit any of your personal data from any of the sites or your computer in absolutely any form.

Free open-source extension.”


I replied to the rejection email asking “Can you specify what exactly is not in compliance?”

And got this: “Do not use irrelevant, misleading, or excessive keywords in app descriptions, titles, or metadata.”

What am I missing?

What is excessive in the description above?

Simeon, can you help me figure it out, please?

[Bjorn Stromberg]

In case anyone is wondering what happened, at some point in the last 3 days the update was approved. After not hearing anything, I logged into my dashboard last night to check up on it and saw that it was public. An hour and a half halter I received an e-mail from the Chrome Web Store saying that it was "reinstated".

I have to say, this whole process has been disappointing. I don't appreciate being treated like a spammer and having updates for my extension held back for months because Google decided they no longer like my extension description but wouldn't clearly explain why.

Thank you Simeon for helping detail what the problem was, but it shouldn't have been necessary to begin with.

[Paul Draper]

A month later....any update?

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to chromium-extensions+unsub...@chromium.org.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/chromium-extensions/a5e66b6e-c43f-4283-ad88-d689d5d8720b%40chromium.org.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chromium Extensions" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to chromium-extensions+unsub...@chromium.org.