For extensions, users can unpack it with a few clicks to add into their browser even without going through their stores. But will definitely try to write a neutral description to pass the screening.

For plugin for web devs will be a very different approach, as this product idea is allow us to discuss content on New York Times, Apple.com, on any websites. 

 💯agree apple, yt will not add this. Smaller sites would be first. Perhaps extension complements the website dev approach. 

On the description, consider adding that nostr is a FOSS protocol, and is not run by any single company. 

 Well, I’ll certainly avoid words like censorship resistance, freedom of speech. 
Will run though the screening description with yall. 

 Gpt prompt: “write me a nostr summary for the mozilla extension store that is in line with mozilla’s terms of service, and will not offend anyone in silicon valley. Do not mention censorship resistance, freedom of speech, zaps, or any other concepts that might trigger the censorship class, and the extension store bureaucrats.”