The script used to be readable. People could review it and judge whether to trust it. The latest update replaced that with deliberate obfuscation. That is not cosmetic, it breaks the trust chain.
You claimed obfuscation is needed to stop copying, but the code was open for months. Either copying was never a concern, or you chose to hide it only after people started trusting it. Either way, that weakens your argument.
Security is not about proving malice. When previously transparent code becomes opaque, you treat it as untrusted. Not malicious, just untrusted. The burden is not on users to prove it is safe. It is on you to make it auditable.
Userscripts run with access to the DOM, API tokens, storage, cookies, and external calls. The only safety control we have is the ability to read the code. Remove that, and the trust is gone.
Minified code can still be reviewed. Obfuscated code is designed to block review. When you remove auditability, you lose the right to complain that people do not trust it.
About sourcemaps, they do not restore trust. They are optional, can be changed at any time, and are not bound to the deployed script. You are asking us to trust that the sourcemap is genuine, current, and complete. That takes us right back to blind trust.
If you choose to keep your code closed or obfuscated, that is your call. But that also means it sits outside the trust model of user scripts. People will avoid installing it. That is not hostility. That is caution.
