1) Propose API changes with blatantly obvious impacts on some of the most popular extensions. Include no explanation of how these extensions can rationally adapt to these new APIs and provide the same or adequately similar functionality.
2) Don't bring any timing data to justify the performance claim that ad blockers are taking an irrational amount of time implementing their content filtering. When others run these same tests they find no performance issues.
3) Characterize any strong reactions to such a suggested change as inappropriate. Feign surprise and dismay at the fact that such reckless API changes, which would drastically change the status quo on the web, are invoking.
4) Condemn those who didn't react the way you expected when you threatened to vastly change their web browsing experience for the worse. This helps diminish user input in the future, by tying everyone with honest opinions to those who express their opinions in an inappropriate or unprofessional way.
5) Act insulted when people point out that your employer, who is in control of the situation, happens to financially benefit from the changes.
The above experience was so distastefully handled across the board, I really think it justifies a unified and community supported "ungoogled-chromium" project without any of their trademarks in the name. That way we the users of the web can determine our relationship with the browser. It's the user's agent, not the browser vendor's agent.
But most importantly, use Firefox with containers and uBlock Origin.
PS. Despite the above, kudos on the port of NoScript. Never give up, never surrender.