Thanks for your perspective.
I don’t think that the issues you raised apply here, given that the extension is running in the user’s browser context, where it can access all the information I can access. Therefore, Airtable’s domain is unlikely to be blacklisted because the extension is accessing the web resource from the user’s IP address.
I’m unclear what TOS I might be violating if I copy content from a webpage, even if it’s restricted access. I can always save a webpage to my harddrive, or copy the text manually and put it into an Airtable base myself… what difference does it make if I use a tool for that purpose? The law has already made it clear that websites can’t deny web scrapers… (see arstechnica dot com/tech-policy/2019/09/web-scraping-doesnt-violate-anti-hacking-law-appeals-court-rules/).
The Airtable extension is simply automating me having to copy and paste content that I can already see, so I don’t see how there’s any additional security concerns here. The data is going to get into my base one way or another; of course it would be best if the scraper ran locally and then uploaded the data directly to Airtable, and so presuming that, I’m not immediately seeing how your concerns apply.
Perhaps to clarify my point: the SimpleScraper functionality should run on the client side without requiring any requests from Airtable to the page being scraped.