Reporting issues for filter lists vs using complete mode

[culinko]

I know that it is preferred to report issues with filter lists as opposed to using custom cosmetic filters (for ads, breakages, etc.) so that everyone would enjoy these fixes. However I would like to ask how does this compare to using complete mode for that site instead.

When reporting a filter list issue via uBOL's popup menu, one of the mandatory checkmarks has the following text: "I have verified that the issue still exists after using the Optimal or Complete filtering mode." Does this mean that if the issue is fixed when switching to complete mode, it should not be reported at all? I am asking mainly because if this issue was fixed in a filter list with a site specific cosmetic filter instead, then everyone wouldn't need to switch to complete mode for this site anymore (afaik complete mode uses more resources as it loads all the generic cosmetic filters as well).

Let me explain with a specific example. After visiting https://opensubtitles.org/en/search/subs in optimal mode, you will see the whitespace under "Why use OpenSubtitles.org?" header, which can be hidden either by using complete mode or by adding #ad1-placeholder site specific cosmetic filter. Wouldn't this be more beneficial if this was added to a filter list? I have found only a few other similar examples so far and would like some guidance regarding this. Thanks a lot :)

[gorhill]

Wouldn't this be more beneficial if this was added to a filter list?

It is already added to filter lists, hence why it disappears in complete mode. The normal way to use uBO Lite is to set it to optimal by default, and toggle to complete mode on a per-site basis only if needed.

If complete mode doesn't fix such issues, then use "Report an issue" so that filters can be added by volunteers.

---

To further explain, filters such as #ad1-placeholder are generic because they might be a match for 1000s of sites, and it would not be practical to create 1000s of filters just for that one placeholders (keep in mind there are 1000s of generic filters). Generic filters are more resource-intensive to enforce, hence why complete mode should be used on a per-site basis only when needed. That is the optimal way to use uBOL.

[culinko]

I think you pretty much answered all of my questions. There is just one more thing that I would like to clarify, if I understood correctly.

Would opensubtitles.org###ad1-placeholder still be considered a generic filter even if it is added for a specific domain? Or is it simply generic because an element like this can be present on 1000s of sites like you mentioned and therefore it's not suitable to be added for every site in the filter lists.

[gothic-bum]

opensubtitles.org###ad1-placeholder is a specific cosmetic filter. It applies to opensubtitles.org.

###ad1-placeholder is a generic cosmetic filter. It applies to all sites.

[culinko]

Okay, so that clears the terminology for me then. Also you are correct, the full syntax of the generic filter is ###ad1-placeholder. I previously mentioned #ad1-placeholder without the first 2 hashtags as that part was displayed in the uBOL picker. So just to recap:

Since ###ad1-placeholder (generic cosmetic filter) is already present in filter lists and fixes the visual issue with opensubtitles.org by switching to complete mode for this site, which fixes the issue for the user, there is generally no need to report it to filter list maintainers. They could theoretically add opensubtitles.org###ad1-placeholder (specific cosmetic filter) to have this issue fixed in optimal mode, however as there are many such sites that use this element in similar way, creating the same specific cosmetic filter for every site would just make it really hard for list maintainers. Am I understanding this correctly?

[gothic-bum]

Yes, your understanding is correct.

[Yuki2718]

I personally think if an issue stands out or is very annoying and if it's on mega sites, adding specific filter(s) will make sense even if that's covered by generic filters. Though I don't use uBOL, toggling switches is not something I'm happy to do in personal browsing. But I'm not sure if opensubtitles.org can be counted as a mega site with 10M traffic (cnn.com is 471M).

[gorhill]

Yes, I agree with this. For instance this was already done even for uBO because of annoying layout shift, because generic filters take effect slightly later than specific ones.

In the end it's at the discretion of maintainers and common sense should prevail.

---

As for uBOL, I think eventually people will get used (and even appreciate) the ability to not have generic filters enforced by default. This is a new way of working for a blocker, and people will get used to this new way and end up expecting this from a content blocker.