Don't see why you're being down-voted. That seems like a perfectly reasonable approach. Assuming, of course, the decision on compatibility is yours to make.
Paradoxically, it's consistent with part of the strategy google used to promote Chrome in the first place: make the dev tools good, to encourage developers to use chrome, so they'll optimise for it, so it'll become popular.
Privacy-advocating developers optimising for the browser(s) they believe are most privacy-respecting seems entirely appropriate. It's not anti-chrome, any more than those using chrome as their primary tool are anti-firefox (or whatever).
--
EDIT: noted that taking this decision requires the authority to do so.
It's no matter; I'm not here for the points. Personally I find it hilarious to be down-voted for stating plain facts about my own (demonstrably effective) development process.
Paradoxically, it's consistent with part of the strategy google used to promote Chrome in the first place: make the dev tools good, to encourage developers to use chrome, so they'll optimise for it, so it'll become popular.
Privacy-advocating developers optimising for the browser(s) they believe are most privacy-respecting seems entirely appropriate. It's not anti-chrome, any more than those using chrome as their primary tool are anti-firefox (or whatever).
--
EDIT: noted that taking this decision requires the authority to do so.