I basically agree.

all the filters enabled by default

This isn't good (In the default lists, there are multiple lists for a single purpose. For example, both EasyList and AdGuard - Ads target advertisements; if you enable both, conflicts will occur and blocking won't work properly).

Yuki2718, a major contributor to uAssets, EasyList, and AdguardFilters, discusses the issues with BadBlock here:
Yuki2718(@Yuki27183): XCancel

I don't think it's a good idea to enable a ton of extra filters by default.
Users should be the ones to choose which filters they need. Some users might even stop using IronFox without realizing that the additional filters are the problem.

@c2qd

all the filters enabled by default

This isn't good

We don't enable "all the filters" by default, I'm not sure what drew you to that conclusion? Per your example, we do only enable the EasyList variants and not the AdGuard equivalent ones.

Yuki2718, a major contributor to uAssets, EasyList, and AdguardFilters, discusses the issues with BadBlock here...

I just took a look at the thread, and while I'm not fluent in Japanese, I attempted to translate/understand it to the best of my ability. Their concerns come off to me as highly subjective, and in some cases just completely inaccurate (For instance, I don't think I've ever included ||youtu.be^??). Their statements also feel overly broad to me, I wish they provided more specific, actionable points.

In general, I do think it says a lot that instead of this person just filing a bug report and sharing their criticisms/concerns like a normal person/fellow developer would, they chose to make a random Twitter thread where they tell people to blindly stop using the lists entirely, and encourage them to make changes to IronFox that directly harm their privacy and security, over their claims that are, again, at best highly opinionated and at worst complete fabrications. :/

But I will see if there's anything I can genuinely do to improve the lists based on their points, so thanks for sharing.

I don't think it's a good idea to enable a ton of extra filters by default.

Well, we are making an effort to reduce the number of default filterlists we enable - and we have already began making progress in that regard.

Users should be the ones to choose which filters they need.

Not sure I understand your point here - I guess you think uBo shouldn't enable any lists by default then?

Ultimately the goal with our uBo config is to provide users with a comprehensive, effective, yet reasonable/usable set-up for content blocking out of the box. We don't believe users should have to go through settings and manual configuration/research to achieve this experience. It's also problematic from a fingerprinting perspective as well - so if we can reduce the need for people to add/change their selections of lists, I absolutely see that as a win.

But, for the point on providing a config that is reasonable/usable, I think it may be fair to say we're falling short in that regard for ex. folks on lower-end devices impacted by the performance issues - so again, we are making it a priority to improve the config in that regard.

We don't enable "all the filters" by default, I'm not sure what drew you to that conclusion?

I'm speaking in general terms here, not specifically referring to IronFox. I'm referring to the question from the person who opened the issue:

My question is: why not use the default uBO filter list, but having all the filters enabled by default instead a huge selected list as Ironfox's default?

I might not have explained myself clearly enough, sorry about that.

Not sure I understand your point here - I guess you think uBo shouldn't enable any lists by default then?

I meant anything other than uBO's own default assets.