See … the issue is that this is a pretty ‘canned’ response that you can find almost anywhere.
I have read your policies, and I find them lacking.
I wont go into that just now … but lets start by pointing to history.
In this way we can get a feel for what has been promised, what has been done, and so even assuming the above response is honestly intended, we can find a realistic ‘track record’.
The first thing I can easily point to is the whitelisting of facebook domains:
Thats a random publication on the subject … but the code itself, as well as the way github issues tagged against it were handled, leaves a bit to desired.
This would be less problematic if it were the first or last time.
See also scenarios like this:
I also find it quite interesting that many of the things I would like to mention are … conspicuously missing from github now. The links go nowhere.
To give an example, here is one that is still alive, and one that has become obfuscated:
I cannot stress enough how little trust I would have in an operation after I witnessed all of those things, regardless of whatever state the software is currently in.
Not to again mention that I have a hard time marrying the advertisements, documentation, and actions together into some cohesion of assured benevolence.
(PS - referencing yourself does not help … and while I think Trintity College is quite beautiful, I dont know that either Douglas or the ‘massaged’ samples are to be automatically taken as gospel - why not include actual privacy-focused browsers to compare against instead of stock firefox, stock chrome, stock safari? seems like skewed results …)
I thank you for taking the time to respond … but I dare say you have not provided any substantive clarification.