Why do we accept shaving?

[teentime]

Originally Posted by hardcoreblogger

i fail to see how anyone could implement an affiliate "protection" application.

I guess we have very different vision. I see no problem in implementing such a system. Most of which would be piggy backed on top of existing systems. Sure there will be a lot of details to work out and certainly all the cheats won't be covered the first time around. Part of the affiliates front end fee would go to continuous development, the same way I pay Symantec every year for an anti-virus subscription.

All it really takes is a clever programmer to see the potential dollars in it and there are dollars a plenty.

[12clicks]

Originally Posted by Chimera

For the new persons reading this thread do a search there are 100s (well maybe 10s) of the same thing.
Someone will get brave and say: I know sponsors cheat. Yes, we all some or many do but we are not brave so we STFU
Someone else will hop in and say: All sponsors are good guys. This statement is a necessary part of this shaving thread cycle - the new or sorta new person sponsor defender.
A bit of discussion will go on over whether or not sponsors cheat with all parties knowing full well that it certainly does occur.
LB and or 12 Clicks will appear and say "WTF are you stupid? Very few sponsors cheat and if they do - prove it." The notable part of this thread was that step was predicted early on.
If for some reason some foolish one persists in insisting that sponsors cheat then the aformentioned sponsor advocates will jump in and state "You are obviously new and you know nothing about how this works, and in my experience the only persons that complain have no traffic. Until you have proof STFU."
Now this is not to say the sponsor advocates have a bad point all the time, but their stepping in is an expected part of these threads and they know they have endgame here. Proof is nearly impossible to obtain outside your personal stats which I doubt anyone is going to give up just like that.
Hardcoreblogger, therein lies the answer to your question. If it can't be proved with screenshots, written affadavits, and a sworn and notarized statement then it of course goes on with some programs. There is no incentive not to. They have no checks and balances, only the sponsor defenders who don't want to be smeared just because some people cheat. Better to defend them all than to be tarred and feathered with them - because people are like that they will do it.
The thread will totter on for a bit more and die.
Facts will remain the same. We will all know what we know. Nothing changes.

Blah blah blah. I simply stop by to ridicule the uninformed like yourself who are just passing thru this biz on their way to whatever real job they'll eventually land.
does shaving go on? Yeah. We've all seen examples. However, most suspected cases of shaving happen because the affiliate is cluelessly jumping to the wrong conclusion

[hardcoreblogger]

Originally Posted by teentime

I guess we have very different vision. I see no problem in implementing such a system. Most of which would be piggy backed on top of existing systems. Sure there will be a lot of details to work out and certainly all the cheats won't be covered the first time around. Part of the affiliates front end fee would go to continuous development, the same way I pay Symantec every year for an anti-virus subscription.

All it really takes is a clever programmer to see the potential dollars in it and there are dollars a plenty.

piggybacking on top of existing systems - do you mean all the program owners, TMM/NATS, ccbill and others that would be happy to provide an API with access to all their data for that clever programmer?

[teentime]

Originally Posted by hardcoreblogger

piggybacking on top of existing systems - do you mean all the program owners, TMM/NATS, ccbill and others that would be happy to provide an API with access to all their data for that clever programmer?

A payment processing/affiliate management system (PPAM) that could take profit from both the back end and every sale at the front end is like a license to print money.
In return for a small service of course.

PPAM systems that protect the interests of the affiliate will become the way we do business in the future.
It may take awhile for this idea to sink in but it's the next step in the evolution of adult "business" and it will then flow out to mainstream
affiliate programs.
Why you might ask?
Simply because there is money to be made doing it.
The revenue stream available from taking a couple of points off the top of every front-end transaction is enormous.
At some point someone, somewhere will notice this and act to implement such a system, because as we all know, nothing motivates better then a huge pile of money.

Chances are it will be an outgrowth or division of, one of the already existing large companies. The system will be proprietary and stand-alone.

No one has to port their data out to a stranger. The "clever programmer" is a euphemism. One has to look at the situation from the top down not the bottom up.

[hardcoreblogger]

Originally Posted by Greg B

I would allow the data to accumulate in relation to my traffic and other data and then present that when necessary to initiate an audit. State, Federal or in case of a foreign owned company, their district or province etc.

this might work with US-based sponsors but most programs are headquartered elsewhere. do you believe that companies located in Gibraltar, Panama, Liechtenstein, Cyprus, etc will do an audit because of your American lawyer?

[hardcoreblogger]

Originally Posted by teentime

A payment processing/affiliate management system (PPAM) that could take profit from both the back end and every sale at the front end is like a license to print money.
In return for a small service of course.

first you were talking about piggybacking on existing systems (which will not happen), now you talk about a completely new system. payment processors already make good profits on every sale. the interests of most of the main customers of any such system (affiliate programs) are against such affiliate protection, they're quite happy with their current systems. sorry, i would actually like to see this happening, but i don't.

why don't you prove me wrong, hire a smart programmer and DO IT?

[teentime]

Originally Posted by hardcoreblogger

first you were talking about piggybacking on existing systems (which will not happen), now you talk about a completely new system. payment processors already make good profits on every sale. the interests of most of the main customers of any such system (affiliate programs) are against such affiliate protection, they're quite happy with their current systems. sorry, i would actually like to see this happening, but i don't.

Evidently we interpret the word "piggy-backing" differently. And yes, once one incorporates a front-end process into and already existing back-end process (piggybacking it, as they say) it becomes a new system.
Don't get bogged down in the semantics of the thing. I'm sure if we took the time, we could come up with a standardized definition that would please everybody. At this stage of the game it's conceptual and the vocabulary used to discuss the idea should be interpreted figuratively and not literally.

Affiliate program owners (sponsors) are driven by the market place. It takes a few early adopters and the rest tumble like dominos, as a new standard of fairness is set.

As I had mentioned in my first post on this subject One can come up with 101 reasons not to do this and you have offered up a few. However there are a million good rea$on$ to build it. Now it's only a matter of time until someone taps into that river of money.