# Affiliate Links in non-Commercial threads - what's going on?



## markleake (Dec 4, 2016)

I don't know if anyone else has noticed, but I'm feeling like we are being flooded with undeclared affiliate links in some of the recent Sample Talk (and others) threads. I'm finding it hard to wade through some of these forum threads without running into repeat posts that seem to be more advertisement than real posts. Presumably the people posting these are getting money out of the click-through or purchases they get, or they wouldn't be so keen to post.

For me I find it very annoying. On the plus side, I guess it can make it easier to see who has a vested interest. But for people who are less aware of what these posts are for, they may take them as serious advice/recommendations to purchase something.

It appears to be a mostly new occurrence to get around the new review section rules, or at least wasn't something I noticed much until now.

What are people's opinions on affiliate links like this?

Mods: please feel free to delete if this topic is not allowed!


----------



## mouse (Dec 4, 2016)

This might be the wrong place to put this because "recent posts" and "latest posts" don't show up threads from "Off Topic" so most people using the forum won't actually see this thread and I think its important that we have this discussion. Can we move it to Sample Talk just for visibility?

Personally, I believe we should completely do away with affiliate links unless they're being posted in the "Compensated Reviews" section for a few reasons: 

People using affiliate links are providing a biased review (and never declaring it)
They do not benefit the forum in any way and we're seeing a huge increase in affiliate links since that Sample Logic deals website started up (APB or whatever it is) and its starting to look almost like spam at this point

They're just adding a lot of noise to threads as people are chiming in with stupid comments just to able to post their affiliate link within that comment
I genuinely can't think of a reason why affiliate links should be allowed on the website. They offer absolutely nothing positive to the forum

(Just in case this thread doesn't get moved, I'm taggin a few people who seem to agree but might not see this thread if they only use the "recent posts" and "latest posts" buttons. @musicalweather @Polarity @Lode_Runner @SJSharky @pinki @Mystic @Gabriel Oliveira @koolkeys @mac @creativeforge)


----------



## Polarity (Dec 4, 2016)

I agree.
Actually I didn't really pay much attention to this till it was brought to attention by users in the ISW bundle sale.
So, thanks.


----------



## mouse (Dec 4, 2016)

Also @Frederick Russ it would be good if you would weigh in on this as its your forum and an increasing problem


----------



## koolkeys (Dec 4, 2016)

I'm in agreement with this. I'm not against affiliate links. I've used them on Twitter and my own websites. But in a forum atmosphere, they can so easily be abused, as they are in the ISW deal thread. It hurts the credibility of the forum. People, myself included, come here to get opinions of new products. You can't trust the opinion of people using affiliate links in every other post. But new users may not realize it. It just stinks and doesn't help the community in any way, particularly when they are not disclosed. And even worse, many of the affiliate links are masked behind a bit.ly URL so you can't even know for sure if it is an affiliate link. That's just shady in a post where you claim to be offering an unbiased opinion.

The ISW deal thread has one guy posting useless repeat posts just so he can throw in his affiliate link. So because of this potential for abuse, I'm in favor of banning them completely. Let them be allowed in the compensated reviews section (still with disclosure, since many or most compensated reviewers were compensated with the product itself, not as an affiliate). But not in the primary forums.

Brent


----------



## musicalweather (Dec 4, 2016)

I didn't know anything about affiliates until the ISW Bundle sale. I agree that it erodes credibility and hurts the forum overall. 

Is there a way to distinguish someone with enthusiasm for a product posting a link vs. an affiliate? I recently posted about the 48-hour sale at Pettinhouse, though I'm not an affiliate -- just someone excited about a sale.


----------



## markleake (Dec 4, 2016)

musicalweather said:


> I didn't know anything about affiliates until the ISW Bundle sale. I agree that it erodes credibility and hurts the forum overall.
> 
> Is there a way to distinguish someone with enthusiasm for a product posting a link vs. an affiliate? I recently posted about the 48-hour sale at Pettinhouse, though I'm not an affiliate -- just someone excited about a sale.


I think just straight-up links to a product are fine. No harm with that.

The affiliate links are usually not direct links to the product or vendor. Either the link is masked by a small link URL, or you can tell from examining the link that it is an affiliate as it may link to the product page but have extra info in the URL (ie. like in many of the posts in the ISW deal thread).

I can't see any of these being declared currently, although the guy who does Sample Library Review is always careful to explain how his affiliate links work from his videos, which is a good.


----------



## markleake (Dec 4, 2016)

mouse said:


> This might be the wrong place to put this because "recent posts" and "latest posts" don't show up threads from "Off Topic" so most people using the forum won't actually see this thread and I think its important that we have this discussion. Can we move it to Sample Talk just for visibility?


I did put a link in the ISW thread, but topics like this belong here, as far as I know. Even if they don't get listed in the recent posts list.


----------



## Lode_Runner (Dec 4, 2016)

To be honest the ISW deal thread is really spammy. The deals company (just to be clear not ISW, they're still awesome) should stick to making a commercial announcement and not encourage spammers by offering payment for affiliate links.

That said, like musicalweather said he/she did with Pettinhouse, I recently posted a thread after getting excited after watching a promo video of Wavesfactory's Mercury which I shared. The following day it was released (I didn't know it was imminent). That thread could easily have been misperceived as pre-release hyping from a shill, so the challenge is how do you distinguish insincere spamming shills from genuine sample library fan-boys like myself?


----------



## Mystic (Dec 4, 2016)

I have to agree. Affiliate links are annoying. Facebook pages are loaded with them and there are a few main culprits who do it, most of whom are very bias "reviewers" who remind me way too much of politicians with the amount of positive reviews they do without any real criticism. 

The problem is when one person sees someone post an affiliate link, inevitably all the other bottom feeders who use them will post theirs in hopes of getting hits on it and making cash off unsuspecting consumers.

@mouse hit the nail right on the head with his 3 major points though and I'd like to see them prohibited from being posted on this forum.


----------



## HiEnergy (Dec 5, 2016)

I'm going to ignore users who abuse affiliate links.


----------



## mouse (Dec 5, 2016)

@Frederick Russ seeing as how you run the forum, it would be good if you could weigh in here. Maybe you're reluctant to do anything because they're an advertiser?


----------



## Hannes_F (Dec 5, 2016)

I'm no moderator any more, just passing by. @mouse if you want to ask Frederick something you'll need to PM or mail him or he will most probably not see your posts.


----------



## Frederick Russ (Dec 5, 2016)

Thanks guys. Hannes is right, I don't spend much time here in OT. About the best we can do however since we cannot be in all places of the forum at all times is when you see an affiliate link, report it. It's actually actionable if it continues from certain members who consistently spam the forum.

Please check out #14 of the forum guidelines:
http://vi-control.net/community/threads/guideline-rules-for-vi-control-forum-updated.3/


----------



## synthpunk (Dec 6, 2016)

Just keep in mind some people use tiny URLs for the original reason as well just shorten a long URL just need to make sure we don't go on a link witch hunt


----------



## Tatu (Dec 20, 2016)

Certainly seems like there's at least one (not throwing any names around, you know the name) user, whos sole purpose for being here seems to be quickly produced videos of pretty much every new release with affiliate links.

Same goes for some of the "reviewers" (Is this the 21st century aspirining movie/trailer composer livelihood now? :D), who review just about everything with high praise and list cons as something like "Oh, the font on the UI isn't to my liking, but this doesn't reduce the value of this amazing, absolutely wonderful new product that oozes brilliance and life to your productions, which definitely need this amazing product".



HiEnergy said:


> I'm going to ignore users who abuse affiliate links.


This is propably the best advice. Is there an actual ignore-function on this board?


----------



## markleake (Dec 20, 2016)

Tatu said:


> This is propably the best advice. Is there an actual ignore-function on this board?


Click on the user's profile image, then click Ignore.



Tatu said:


> Same goes for some of the "reviewers" (Is this the 21st century aspirining movie/trailer composer livelihood now? :D), who review just about everything with high praise and list cons as something like "Oh, the font on the UI isn't to my liking, but this doesn't reduce the value of this amazing, absolutely wonderful new product that oozes brilliance and life to your productions, which definitely need this amazing product".


I've only recently cottoned on to this, but am happy to say these guys have never convinced me to buy anything. Occasionally I find they mention something useful, but mostly its just advertising by another name with no additional value. I watch them occasionally because it exposes me to libraries I haven't heard about before (which is I guess what they want), or because they touch on a library I'm interested in getting.

But the reviewers who actually play through a library properly and talk about it as they do so, I don't mind. So long as they spend enough time on it to do the library justice, you can often get a better walk-through than the actual company selling the product provides. The guys who do that type of review seem to be less interested in marketing the stuff.


----------



## Tatu (Dec 20, 2016)

markleake said:


> But the reviewers who actually play through a library properly and talk about it as they do so, I don't mind.


This is almost like a shoutout to @Daniel James who - wether biased or not (after all, he's a dev also) - always takes his time to actually write something with the library in mind and goes through his choices/instrumentation and explains the pros and cons as he sees them in that context. Daniel, if you ever use affiliate links, I don't mind


----------



## mouse (Feb 11, 2017)

Looks like this is getting worse. Thorsten has now got affiliate links posted in Sample Talk, Commercial Announcements and the Reviews section...


----------

