Affiliate Marketing for Amazon

July 20, 2006 9:43 PM

URL mangulation for fun and profit? I posted in AxMe an amazon link and metafilter has automatically mangled it to contain a metafilter referral token. Personally, I think that modifying content that we post is a bit rude; am I alone in this?
posted by polyglot to MetaFilter-related at 9:43 PM (35 comments total)

am I alone in this

Short answer: Yes.
posted by eyeballkid at 9:48 PM on July 20, 2006

Probably. It's in the FAQ and Matt put it to the community here with reasons why he implemented it.
posted by karmaville at 9:48 PM on July 20, 2006

You had your own referral code in there, didn't you.
posted by Zozo at 9:54 PM on July 20, 2006

(not to be rude)
Long answer: There was a time when this site seemed to have more downtime than up. I'm okay with anything that lets Matt put a little more money in the server fund. Since he started the text ads, user purchased ads and other forms of income, the site had become more stable and the features seem to be rolling out once a week now. Hell, music.mefi is worth every bit of cash Matt gets from this site.
posted by eyeballkid at 9:57 PM on July 20, 2006

Actually, I very carefully stripped out everything after the ASIN. But whatever.
posted by polyglot at 9:58 PM on July 20, 2006

Personally, I think that modifying content that we post is a bit rude

Well, if the link still points at the item its supposed to, what harm has been done? Its not like Matt's redirecting links to goatse...
posted by davehat at 10:06 PM on July 20, 2006

So, now that you know the deal and have read the discussion about the gentle way Matt approached the community about the change, polyglot, do you still think mangling Amazon links like this is rude? Or do you understand now? Or agree that it's cool? Or have a counter-argument?

"But whatever" just leaves some key points hanging, I guess is what I'm saying.
posted by mediareport at 10:08 PM on July 20, 2006

mediareport: Having read the link posted by karmaville, I'm a lot less unhappy about it than I was. I certainly agree that mefi should strip posters' referrals but I'm not really sold on adding mefi ones.

As has been pointed out, it's not a direct modification of content, but that's a very slippery slope too... see the huge fuss raised when some company I don't recall (probably MS or Yahoo or a surreptitious plugin for IE) started making links out of text in all webpages viewed by a particular browser. Just because we like mefi so much more than $evilcompany, I don't think that gives it a free ride to silently change content that we submit and put our name to.

I realise that in this specific case of amazon links, there really is no discernible change for the person that clicks the link. However, I think that modifying link structure is a poor thing to start doing: it is dependent on the Amazon implementation behaving in a certain way and it sets a precedent that I'm not comfortable with.

My problem with it is not that mefi will get 20c towards the bandwidth costs but that something I posted (with my name below it) was changed without my authorisation. Even a little notice appearing in Preview with "I'm gonna change your link, how do ya like them apples?" would have been sufficient.

So yeah. "Whatever" [1] :) It's not a major problem for me and now that I know about it I'll probably continue to post the odd Amazon link. I still think it shouldn't occur or that there should be a notification when any substantial modifications take place to a posting.

[1] you're lucky I didn't bust out the ultimate non-committal, "yeah nah"
posted by polyglot at 10:51 PM on July 20, 2006

My problem with it is not that mefi will get 20c towards the bandwidth costs but that something I posted (with my name below it) was changed without my authorisation.

Did it go to the same place that you linked to?
hrm, yes it did. Everybody knows that amazon links get the metafilter code put in them. It's in the FAQ.

Even a little notice appearing in Preview with "I'm gonna change your link, how do ya like them apples?" would have been sufficient.

It's in the FAQ. That's more then enough notice.

And it's been talked about to death in metatalk.
posted by bigmusic at 11:11 PM on July 20, 2006

Did it go to the same place that you linked to?

Well, no. It went to a page that redirected to one that looks the same as the one that I tried to link to. A subtle but critical difference.

Yes I failed to RTFFAQ; my apologies.
posted by polyglot at 11:38 PM on July 20, 2006

polyglot, please be aware that your neural axons will discharge in a manner you had not anticipated because of your reading these words. I wanted to write words that would allow your brain network to chug along as normal but it was just not possible. I did write a book about the expected cogitation disturbances which has been delivered to all homes in the solar system but of course this does not excuse the spike in irregular brainwaves you are presently experiencing. Sorry.
posted by peacay at 11:45 PM on July 20, 2006 [2 favorites]

If it really worries you, polyglot, you're free to point your links to a different online shop. But, really, I seriously doubt we're on a slippery slope where mathowie will surreptitiously start adding links to our posts that point to penis enhancing viagra-flavoured 409 scams.
posted by jack_mo at 12:45 AM on July 21, 2006

Well, no. It went to a page that redirected to one that looks the same as the one that I tried to link to. A subtle but critical difference.

No, it isn't critical. Hopefully, you posted a link to an item on amazon in order answer a question on AskMe.

Your answer remains unchanged. If you want money for answers, do what jack_mo suggests or grow another brain and hang out on answers.google.com
posted by davehat at 1:12 AM on July 21, 2006

There was no change in content. The slippery slope argument is not convincing because we know what the limitations of this policy are. We also know, those of us who pay attention, that Matt is extremely responsive to community concerns, even when that responsiveness affects his income (search out the Suicide Girls debate).

Your complaint comes across as selfish more than anything else. Nothing has been taken from you, not even your reputation, such as it is, and yet your persist in complaining about "critical" differences. Why?
posted by OmieWise at 3:52 AM on July 21, 2006

I use Powells links or links to my own site instead of Amazon links and avoid this problem entirely. We know that not everyone reads the FAQ, but at least it's there for answering questions like this one. I know many folks remember when that was not the case. This was one awkward linking (and perhaps MetaTalk) experience for you, but now in the future for you and possibly others who read this thread, it will never happen again.

I don't think mathowie is likely to use this as some sort of jumping off point to put his referral code in everything, so the slippery slope thing is, I believe, unfounded. Posts are only edited for a short group of reasons mostly having to do with typos or things that break the site.
posted by jessamyn at 5:10 AM on July 21, 2006

I think this is quite okay, myself. mathowie was very clear about including it. You're not supposed to use MeFi for advertising anyway, and if it can extract a little bit more value from the link you post, I don't see any problem with it.

No, it's not precisely what you posted, but it ends up in the same place. The user gets the benefit of your link, and MeFi gets a bit of cash if they buy. You, as the poster, are divorced from direct profit for your link, which reduces the possibility of spam a little.

In an ideal world, he could just let the links pass through unfiltered, but it would probably make the spam problem a lot worse. As MeFi grows, it becomes more and more popular as a target for scumbags. Since the links need to be butchered anyway, might as well do it in a way that benefits the site.
posted by Malor at 5:21 AM on July 21, 2006

Its not like Matt's redirecting links to goatse...

That would be a great April Fools joke!
posted by LarryC at 5:50 AM on July 21, 2006

Will polyglot give up his dream of Amazon links without critical differences? Will Matthowie be incredibly responsive? Tune in to the next exciting episode of As MetaFilter Grows to find out!
posted by Kirth Gerson at 6:16 AM on July 21, 2006

Don't like it? Link to BN.com. Link to Borders.com. Link to ABE.com. Tower.com.

Your comparison of Metafilter to $evilcompany is completely deflated by the fact that you were linking to amazon in the first place.

Tard.
posted by grateful at 6:23 AM on July 21, 2006

wait, what?

How is linking to Amazon any different from linking to Borders or Barnes and Noble? And how does it deflate anything?
posted by crunchland at 6:32 AM on July 21, 2006

Your complaint comes across as selfish more than anything else.

Indeed.

How is linking to Amazon any different from linking to Borders or Barnes and Noble? And how does it deflate anything?

Because linking to Amazon creates a MeFi referral. If you link to one of those others, the whole argument is moot/deflated. Pay attention.
posted by languagehat at 6:43 AM on July 21, 2006

polyglot : "As has been pointed out, it's not a direct modification of content, but that's a very slippery slope too..."

Well, it would appear to be a slippery slope. But a slippery slope is a slope where things slip. I haven't seen anything slipping since matt did the amazon referral change. So it's a regular slope that just looks slippery.
posted by Bugbread at 6:44 AM on July 21, 2006

polyglot writes "Just because we like mefi so much more than $evilcompany, I don't think that gives it a free ride to silently change content that we submit and put our name to."

MAtt's only changing things on his site not every place you visit on the web. A significant difference over Microsoft's smart links or what ever that scheme was.

jack_mo writes "viagra-flavoured"

Viagra has a flavour?

PS: You comment would have been better if you had included the name of the book in your comment instead of just a link to amazon.
posted by Mitheral at 7:34 AM on July 21, 2006

Everybody knows that amazon links get the metafilter code put in them. - bigmusic

Obviously, this is not true. The only reason this post exists is because somebody did not know. And while only one person bothered to say something, in a userbase this large if someone says "I didn't know this" they probably aren't the only one.

Of course, none of that changes the fact that it's in the fact, and it doesn't change the substance of what the poster here was doing.
posted by raedyn at 7:58 AM on July 21, 2006

(in the fact FAQ)
posted by raedyn at 8:01 AM on July 21, 2006

Even a little notice appearing in Preview with "I'm gonna change your link, how do ya like them apples?" would have been sufficient.

This shouldn't be difficult, and it would be a good addition. I'm generally in favour of a MeFi referral code, though.
posted by Chuckles at 8:44 AM on July 21, 2006

mangulation

What's with the attitude?

Personally, I think that modifying content that we post is a bit rude
I don't think that gives it a free ride to silently change content that we submit and put our name to
"I'm gonna change your link, how do ya like them apples?"

Amazon link != content

You are not entitled to anything simply because you can form a link.
posted by prostyle at 9:35 AM on July 21, 2006

In extreme cases, you could use TinyURL or somesuch service to get your clicker to the page you originally intended without any URL munching on the part of MeFi.
posted by blue_beetle at 9:40 AM on July 21, 2006

I think it it sucks to insert the MeFi so, no, you aren't alone. Just don't post links to Amazon thereby avoiding the hassle.
posted by bouncebounce at 9:41 AM on July 21, 2006

Viagra has a flavour?
posted by found missing at 9:42 AM on July 21, 2006

you could use TinyURL - blue_beetle

But people will get bitchy because they like to mouseover and know where the hell they're going. If there's no good reason to TinyURL (personally I can't think of one) then please avoid it.
posted by raedyn at 10:00 AM on July 21, 2006

All of the content of your post or comment is subject to modification at the whim of Matt or Jess. Amazon links just happen to be modified automatically. If you require that your words be set in stone and unmodifiable then posting to Metafilter won't meet your requirements, ever.
posted by mendel at 11:35 AM on July 21, 2006

Issue resolved. Can we get back to calling out AskMe posts as chatfilter?
posted by brain_drain at 12:03 PM on July 21, 2006

Circumventing the referral code is like snatching food from mathowie's baby's mouth. How can you live with ourselves?
posted by timeistight at 1:11 PM on July 21, 2006

ouryourselves
posted by timeistight at 1:13 PM on July 21, 2006