From 847d9785dd6511553c69bcd9d0beaaa2c37b8233 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Raymond Hill <gorhill@users.noreply.github.com>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2017 12:21:25 -0400
Subject: [PATCH] Updated Debunking "uBlock Origin is less efficient than
 Adguard" claims (markdown)

---
 ...-\"uBlock-Origin-is-less-efficient-than-Adguard\"-claims.md" | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git "a/Debunking-\"uBlock-Origin-is-less-efficient-than-Adguard\"-claims.md" "b/Debunking-\"uBlock-Origin-is-less-efficient-than-Adguard\"-claims.md"
index e472b12..d655590 100644
--- "a/Debunking-\"uBlock-Origin-is-less-efficient-than-Adguard\"-claims.md"
+++ "b/Debunking-\"uBlock-Origin-is-less-efficient-than-Adguard\"-claims.md"
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-More specifically, debunking [@christianbute](https://twitter.com/christianbute)'s claim in <https://twitter.com/christianbute/status/893462816270815232>. Two teets quoted verbatim:
+More specifically, debunking [@christianbute](https://twitter.com/christianbute)'s claim in <https://twitter.com/christianbute/status/893462816270815232>. Two tweets quoted verbatim:
 
 > According to my tests, the best ad and malwaretising blocker for @MicrosoftEdge is AdGuard. Anything else just made the performance worse.