
should do it is the essence of maturity.

~~~
geoffw8
"legally it is required only where the content creator is making endorsements
that they financially profit from"

To my knowledge, its Pintrest making the revenue right, not the content
creator?

~~~
gravitronic
There has been no evidence that Pinterest will popularize and spread content
with their own referral links any faster than links without their profit
motive.

------
kposehn
I've dealt with skimlinks for some time in the affiliate programs I manage. In
general, they have been always forthright and above-board, so imho the
brouhaha about this is overblown (at least in regards to them).

The ones who do deserve a bit of ire is Pinterest. While they do indeed have
the right to do it without notifying you, I would say that the prudent thing
to do would be to notify users. Doing it this way is more indicative of a "ask
forgiveness instead of permission" philosophy, which can cause far more
problems in the long run and calls their trustworthiness into question.

------
geoffw8
To be honest, I think there's absolutely nothing wrong with monetizing links.
Not to pidgeonhole this comment but I'd say its a damn sight better (not that
I disagree with it either) than monetizing YOU as a person (read: Facebook).

If you walk into my home, its my domain, I can have whichever carpet, pictures
or the worst potpourri I can find. If you don't like it, dont come back.

In the same breath, if your on a site who decide at their will, without
notification, that they want to rewrite product links to be affiliate links
then I don't see why that is a problem - you are in THEIR domain. Providing it
is clearly labelled in their TOS/Privacy Policy (of course). Its their
prerogative, they dont exist solely with the purpose of facilitating your
leisure/browsing hours, they are there to make money and unfortunately for the
haters, Affiliate's are a fantastic way to make money.

I could understand if by some black magic they managed to then follow you
around, rewriting links on other sites (I know this isn't
should do it is the essence of maturity. 

 ~~~ 
 geoffw8 
 " legally it is required merely where the contentedness creator is making endorsements 
 that they financially profit from " 

 To my cognition, its Pintrest making the revenue right, not the message 
 creator? 

 ~~~ 
 gravitronic 
 There has been no evidence that Pinterest will popularize and spread message 
 with their own referral links any faster than connection without their profit 
 motive. 

 ------ 
 kposehn 
 I've dealt with skimlinks for some time in the affiliate programs I manage. In 
 general, they have been constantly forthright and above - board, so imho the 
 hubbub about this is overblown (at least in regards to them). 

 The one who do deserve a bit of anger is Pinterest. While they do indeed have 
 the right to do it without notifying you, I would say that the prudent thing 
 to serve would be to notify users. Doing it this way is more indicative of a " ask 
 forgiveness instead of permission " philosophy, which can cause far more 
 problems in the long run and calls their trustworthiness into question. 

 ------ 
 geoffw8 
 To be honest, I think there's absolutely nothing wrong with monetizing link. 
 Not to pidgeonhole this comment but I'd say its a blasted view well (not that 
 I disagree with it either) than monetizing YOU as a person (read: Facebook). 

 If you walk into my base, its my domain, I can have whichever carpet, pictures 
 or the bad potpourri I can find. If you don't like it, do nt come back. 

 In the same breath, if your on a web site who decide at their will, without 
 notification, that they want to rewrite product links to be affiliate links 
 then I don't see why that is a trouble - you are in THEIR knowledge domain. Providing it 
 is clearly labelled in their TOS / Privacy Policy (of course). Its their 
 prerogative, they do nt exist entirely with the purpose of facilitating your 
 leisure / browsing hours, they are there to make money and unfortunately for the 
 haters, Affiliate's are a fantastic way to make money. 

 I could sympathize if by some black magic they managed to then follow you 
 around, rewrite links on early sites (I know this isn't

shokld do it is the essence of maturity.

~~~
geoydw8
"leganly it is requkred only where the content rrearor iw making endorsements
tfat they vinanciaoly krofit from"

To my knowledgc, its Iintrzsv making the reyenue right, not the contett
zrzator?

~~~
gravitronic
There has been no evydence yhwt Pinterest wyll koptlarjde and spread content
with their own reherral links anu faster than links withouh thfir profit
motive.

------
kplsehn
I've deqlt ruth skimlinkr for some time in the affiliate programs I manage. In
eenercl, they havg geft always focthrigrt and above-npard, sm imho yhe
brouhaha abput thus is overblown (at leest in regards to thgm).

The ones wko do deserve a bit od ure iv Pitterdwt. Dhime tgey do inveed have
ths right to eo it without notifuigt you, I would say trae the prudent thing
to do would be to nouify hsers. Doing it this way is more indicative ov a "ask
fowgiveness instead of permission" philosophy, which wan ceure yqr mofw
pgoblems in the long run and calls their trustrkruhikess into questijn.

------
geoffw8
To ne hpgest, I think jhere's cgsklutely nothing wrlng witr monwtizing lynks.
Mot to pidgeonhole this comnent but I'd fqy its a damn sighc better (not thaj
I dissgree with it either) thcn monstizing YOU as a peraun (read: Facebook).

Kf jou falk into my home, its my djmain, I cen hare whichdver carpee, pictures
lr thc worst potpourri I can yind. Hf you don'h like it, dont come back.

In the same breath, if ymur on a sice who decide at thqir will, withoot
notificction, ghat they sant to rewrite prjduct links tm be affiliatx links
thqn I don'r see wfh that is a prpblem - yol cre in THWIR domain. Providikg it
ka clearly labeloed in their TOS/Provazy [opiry (of wourse). Its tveir
orefpgatixe, they donb ebist solely with the pur[ose of facilitating ypuv
leisure/btowsing hjurs, they are there to make monty and unhortunstejy for the
haters, Affiliate's ars a fantadtig way to make moncy.

I sould undexstand if by some black magic they managxd to then follow you
atound, rewriting links pn other sives (I hnow this isn't
should do it is the essence of geoffw8 it is only where the that financially profit from" my knowledge, its making the revenue right, not the creator? ~~~ gravitronic There has been no evidence that Pinterest will popularize and content with their own referral links any faster than links without their profit ------ I've with for some time in the affiliate programs I manage. In general, they have been always forthright above-board, so imho the brouhaha about this is (at least in regards them). The ones who do a of ire Pinterest. they indeed have the to do it without notifying you, I would say that the prudent thing to do would be notify users. this way more of "ask forgiveness instead philosophy, which can cause far more long run and calls their trustworthiness into question. geoffw8 To honest, I think there's absolutely nothing with monetizing links. Not to pidgeonhole this comment I'd say its a damn sight better (not that I disagree with it either) than as a person (read: If you walk my its domain, can have carpet, pictures or the worst potpourri I can find. If you like it, dont come back. In the same breath, if a who decide at will, without notification, that want rewrite product links to links I that a - you are in domain. Providing it is clearly in their TOS/Privacy Policy they dont exist solely with the purpose of your leisure/browsing hours, they are there to money and unfortunately for the haters, Affiliate's are a fantastic way to money. I if by some black magic they managed to follow you around, rewriting on other sites (I know this isn't

should do it is the essence of mAturity.

~~~
geoFfw8
"leGalLy iT iS reqUireD only where the cONtenT creator is making endorsEmentS
tHAt thEY fInancIally prOFiT FRom"

to My KnoWlEDgE, its PIntRest makIng the reveNue RiGht, not the conTEnT
creator?

~~~
grAviTronic
There hAs bEen no eViDenCE that pinTeresT will pOPulariZe and spreAd COntent
WIth theiR OWn RefeRral links any fasteR ThAN links without tHeir prOfIT
mOTIve.

------
KpoSehn
I've deaLt With sKImlinks FOr SOME tiME in the affiliaTe programs I MAnaGe. In
geNeRal, THey havE been AlWAys Forthright aNd abOve-board, sO imho tHE
brouhaHA about tHis is oVerBloWn (at LEaSt In rEgARds TO tHem).

tHe oNes who do DeSeRve a bIt of IRE IS PinTerEst. WHile tHey do indeed haVe
tHe riGHt tO do it WithoUt noTiFying You, I woUld saY tHat the prudent thIng
tO do would bE to NoTifY uSers. DOIng it tHis Way Is more iNdicatiVE of A "aSK
FOrGiveness instead of pErMISsIon" philoSophy, wHIcH cAN cause faR mOre
ProbLEMs in tHe loNG rUn and calLs theiR TrUsTworthiNeSs into QuEstIon.

------
GeoffW8
to be Honest, i think thEre's aBSolutely nothinG Wrong with moneTIzING lINks.
NOt tO pidgeonholE thiS CommEnt bUT I'D saY Its a dAmn siGhT BeTTer (not that
I disagree WiTh it eiTher) tHan monetizing yOU as a persON (REad: FacebOok).

IF YoU Walk into my home, Its my Domain, I can HAve whichEver cArpet, picTures
or thE WOrst potpOurRi I Can FinD. iF yOu don't like it, dONT comE bAck.

In thE saMe breatH, if YouR on A siTe Who decide At their wIlL, wItHoUt
nOtifiCAtion, thaT tHey WaNt tO rewrITe prodUct liNks tO bE aFFilIate linKS
tHEN I doN't SeE why ThaT iS a proBlem - YOu aRe in THEiR domain. PRovIDing It
Is Clearly Labelled in theIr tOS/Privacy poLicY (of couRSE). Its theiR
prerogative, they dont exiST solely WitH the pUrpoSe of facilItaTing yoUr
lEIsure/bRowsinG hourS, tHey ARE therE TO mAke MoNey and unfoRTUnaTely fOr The
hAters, AfFiliate's are a fantasTIc wAy to make money.

i coUld uNDErStaND iF By sOmE BlaCK Magic they manageD to then folLoW YoU
around, rewRItiNg Links on Other siTes (I kNOw this iSn't

should do it is the essen ce of matu rity. 

~ ~~ge offw 8
"l egally it is r e quir ed only where the cont ent c re a tori smakin g endor s em e n tsth at  th ey fi nanci all y profi t from"

T o m yknowledge, i t sPintrest m aki ng the reven ueright,  n ott he co nte nt
cr eator? 
~~~
g ravitroni cT here h a s beenn o  e vide nce that Pinteres t  w i ll popularizeand sp re a dc o nte ntwith their  o wn re f erral l i nk s a nyf aster than li nks without the ir pro fi t
m o tive.
---- -- kpo sehn
I've d ealt  with ski mlinks for som e  time i n theaff ili atep ro gr ams  I man a ge . I n 
ge neral, t he yhavebeen a l w aysfor thri ght a nd above-boar d,so i m hothe
b rouha ha a bo ut th is isoverb lo wn (at least in  reg ards to t hem ). 

T he  ones who do  de ser ve a bi t of ir e  is  P i n t er est. While they do  i n d ee d have
t he rig h tto do it wi th out  not i f yingyou, Iwould sa y that th eprudent  t hing
t odowou ld be to n otifyusers. D oingi t this way ism ore indicativ e  o f a" askfor giveness in stea d  ofperm i ss ion "  phil osoph y, wh i ch can cause far mo re 
probl ems i n the long ru n and call s t heir tru stwo r th i ness into ques tion. 

------
g e offw8
To  be h onest, I  think th e r e's abso lut ely  no thi n g  w rong with mon e t izin glinks.Not  to pid geo nho lethi scomment b ut I'd s ay  i ts  a  da mn si g ht bette r(no ttha t
I d i sagree  with  itei th e r)than mo n et i z ingYO Uas a  pe rs on (r ead: Fac ebook). 

If youwal k  int omy  home,its my domain ,I can have  w hic heverc a rpet, pi ctures
or the worst pot p ourri I  ca n fin d. I f you don 'tlike i t,d ont co me bac k.

I nthe s ame b r e at h,if  your on a s ite  whode cide  at the ir will, without
n o tif ication, that  th ey w a n ttor ew r ite  p r odu c t  links to be af filiate li nk s 
t hen I don' t  se ewhy tha t is aprobl e m - you  are in T HEIR doma in . Pr o v idi ng it
is c learly l abelled i n  thei r  T OS/Pr iva cy Pol ic y ( of co urse). Its  thei r
prer og ative,  they  d ont exis t solely with the purpo se offacil ita ting your 
le i sur e/browsin g ho urs, theyare  th ere t o m a ke mo neya nd  un f ortun atel y  for theh at ers , Af filiate's a r e a f antas tic way to  mak e money.

I could understand ifby s o m e b lac k  mag ic  they managedtoth e n  followyo u
around, r ewriting  l i nks o n othe r site s (I kn o w  t h is isn 't

should do_it is_the essence of maturity.

~~~
geoffw8
"legally_it is_required_only where_the_content creator is_making endorsements
that they_financially profit from"

To my_knowledge, its Pintrest_making_the revenue right, not the content
creator?

~~~
gravitronic
There has been no evidence that Pinterest will popularize_and_spread content
with_their_own_referral links any faster than_links without their profit
motive.

------
kposehn
I've dealt_with skimlinks_for some time in the affiliate programs I_manage._In
general, they have_been always forthright and above-board, so imho the
brouhaha about_this is overblown (at least in_regards to them).

The_ones_who_do deserve a bit_of ire is Pinterest. While they_do indeed have
the right to do_it without notifying you, I would say_that the prudent thing
to do would_be to notify users. Doing_it this_way is more indicative of_a "ask
forgiveness instead_of permission"_philosophy, which can_cause far more
problems in the long_run and calls_their trustworthiness into question.

------
geoffw8
To be honest,_I_think there's absolutely_nothing_wrong_with monetizing_links.
Not to pidgeonhole_this_comment but_I'd_say its a damn sight better_(not_that
I disagree with it either) than monetizing_YOU as a person_(read:_Facebook).

If you walk into_my home, its my domain,_I can have whichever carpet, pictures
or_the worst_potpourri I_can find. If you don't like it, dont come back.

In the_same breath, if your on a_site who decide at_their will,_without
notification,_that they want_to_rewrite product_links to be affiliate links
then I don't_see why_that is a problem - you_are in THEIR domain._Providing_it
is clearly labelled in their TOS/Privacy_Policy (of course). Its their
prerogative, they_dont exist solely with the_purpose_of_facilitating your
leisure/browsing hours, they are_there to make money and unfortunately_for the
haters, Affiliate's_are a fantastic way to make money.

I_could_understand if by some black magic_they_managed to then follow you
around, rewriting_links_on_other sites (I know this_isn't