From 221932033dae40a327c3c52e707dde10407dfa29 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: q1800 <95879668+q1800@users.noreply.github.com>
Date: Sat, 12 Feb 2022 14:10:06 -0600
Subject: [PATCH] Implement uBO naming convention

---
 Doesn't-uBlock-Origin-add-overhead-to-page-load?.md | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/Doesn't-uBlock-Origin-add-overhead-to-page-load?.md b/Doesn't-uBlock-Origin-add-overhead-to-page-load?.md
index d73fd12..f3e1cc5 100644
--- a/Doesn't-uBlock-Origin-add-overhead-to-page-load?.md
+++ b/Doesn't-uBlock-Origin-add-overhead-to-page-load?.md
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
 
 ***
 
-Yes, uBlock Origin ("uBO") adds overhead to page load. It's impossible for a content blocker to add zero CPU cycles and/or memory overhead.
+Yes, uBlock Origin (uBO) adds overhead to page load. It's impossible for a content blocker to add zero CPU cycles and/or memory overhead.
 
 **However**, for most web pages nowadays, that extra overhead is paid back many times from all the blocked resources which won't consume CPU cycles and memory.