From 5ae4819f80ee858efa1c5e43a352d6a5ba305ca8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: gwarser Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2022 00:38:07 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] restore "example" link --- Per-site-switches.md | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/Per-site-switches.md b/Per-site-switches.md index fecec3d..450bd76 100644 --- a/Per-site-switches.md +++ b/Per-site-switches.md @@ -94,7 +94,7 @@ Cosmetic filtering is always enabled by default. > *** > **Tips** > -> It is often suggested adding a custom static filter such as `@@||example.com^$elemhide` or `@@||example.com^$generichide` to prevent "adblock" detection by specific sites ([example](), [example](https://forum.adblockplus.org/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=43961)). You can accomplish the same goal more simply by just toggling off cosmetic filtering using this switch while on the problematic site. +> It is often suggested adding a custom static filter such as `@@||example.com^$elemhide` or `@@||example.com^$generichide` to prevent "adblock" detection by specific sites ([example](https://adblockplus.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=30763#p124225), [example](https://forum.adblockplus.org/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=43961)). You can accomplish the same goal more simply by just toggling off cosmetic filtering using this switch while on the problematic site. > > This switch can help uBO to further lower its CPU-cycle footprint, which might be beneficial on devices with limited CPU-cycle resources -- and thus helping extend battery life and speed up page load times. The idea is to disable cosmetic filtering everywhere by default and to enable it only for those sites which really benefit from it. > ***