You think not getting caught in a lie is the same thing as telling the truth?
"Three Days of Condor", (1975)
Of course, you know what an affiliate link is. When someone follows the ref link you gave him and signs up somewhere, you get some nice reward. Usually, it costs nothing to that signed-up guy, the reward comes at that somewhere's owner's expense. It's not a charity either, that owner guy expects to get some benefits from his newly acquired client. But normally it's kinda "win-win" deal.
It's so widespread nowadays that the government monkeys even issued "regulations" for such kind of things. Well, it might be for good when an "influencer" who pushes some shit to his readers also tells them that he's paid for doing so. However, I doubt that an ordinary URL with a ref tag really needs all that "disclaimers" bullshit. And many don't bother with "disclaimers", anyway.
Some years ago there was an outbreak of "affiliatephobia" in my area. Many guys didn't just click a link they found at internet forums or somewhere. They first inspected the link on being "affiliate", and if it was (or looked like one), they carefully removed the ref tag and proceeded with the "clear" URL. Why? I don't know. Maybe it was some kind of envy? I also don't know if it was a global worldwide pandemic or only a local outbreak.
Personally, I don't care much about if an URL is "affiliate" or not. If I don't like the project I signed up through someone's ref link, I simply don't use that project anymore, so my ref will hardly profit from me anyway. If I like the project -- I don't mind to reward the person who pointed me on it, especially when the reward comes at someone else's expense. Recently I've joined (AFFILIATE LINK AHEAD!!!1) Betfury with some guy's ref link and up to now the project has been going quite well, I'm really grateful to that guy for persuading me to join.
Sometimes (rather often) I too put my own ref links into my articles. Sometimes people join under my links (thank you, guys!), sometimes nobody does. But I'm far from making teh drama out of it, and mostly too lazy to bother with proper "disclaimers" in accordance with all the latest US/EU/EEA/ASEAN/etc directives.
However, I see many guys do bother with disclaimers and stuff. They put warnings, provide "clean" links, use bold italicized indications, and all that jazz. The guys follow the directives, and some of them probably think it's the way to respect "the affiliate's ethics".
Recently I've seen an article about (NOT an affiliate link) Blockchain.com wallet, and that it offers interest on BTC, USDT, ETH accounts. The article contained properly labeled and disclaimed ref links. As usual, I didn't bother and joined under that link -- only to learn what that guy didn't tell in his article... Blockchain.com does indeed offer interest on BTC/ETH/USDT -- if you're from an "eligible" country (e.g. the US is not), if you pass their KYC, and if you deposit at least $100 (or even $300 in case of BTC).
Merriam-Webster defines the word to lie as 1) to make an untrue statement with intent to deceive; 2) to create a false or misleading impression.
Not getting caught in a lie is not the same as telling the truth. Not telling the whole truth is not the same as telling half (or 25%, or 69%) of the truth, it's the same as creating a false or misleading impression. In other words, "half-truth" is simply a lie...
What I'm trying to tell is that respecting "affiliate's ethics" is not about following the EU directives on properly labeled disclaimers (even if the gov monkeys tell you otherwise). It's about telling the truth (at least, as you know it at the moment).
While I don't mind to follow anyone's ref links, even improperly (or even completely un-) labeled, I do mind when anyone tries to dupe me with cheap "half-truth" tricks only to get my referred sign-up...
Disclaimer: Holy shit, again...
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta