@TheGooner 196592 wrote:
So I do not believe that simply calling this the sponsors section changes anything, and experienced affiliates have known it’s a “sponsors list” anyway. What needs to change is the quality of the entrants.
Yes and no, I agree and I disagree.
I do think that having most any possible program here (with exception of gross offenders like Grand Prive, who refuse to fix things or even talk about them) is beneficial to us. A condition should be (and I don’t know if it is now) that they are willing to communicate and use the space to solve issues and answer questions. This is a useful thing and gives us access. In all these years the programs who ended up cheating me out of money were for the most part not here and not accessible. Of course there will likely be some programs who start out ok and then go rogue (like Grand Prive).
So I don’t have an issue with them being here, I find it useful. IMO the issue lies with aiding newbies with selection of programs. So maybe there could be real levels of membership? Not determined by the size of check but by….. fill in the blanks here.
I can see a system where they can all come in if they pledge to resolve issues and answer questions, but then us affiliates design some sort of “recommended” levels for them.
But how to determine such levels? I don’t think it can be done by generation of revenue, since none of us ever agree and different programs perform differently on different sites and at various times. But maybe we can have categories we check – do they spam, how is the responsiveness to queries, do they pass audits, do they pay with regularity (some room needs to be given here to programs paying into the US because of UIGEA and processor issues) and and and?