Their aff. manager is usually really nice, however this is a concerning issue.
I agree with the minimum reduced commission versus nothing (and not even any tracking data
about this new situation). But even then (with a lower commission) , you would be opening a new "can of worms"..
It could be chaos, with retailers deciding when to apply what commission rate based on data out of the control of their affiliates and such as, in this case
, with affiliates not even being aware of the issue.
The proper solution in this case might have been, to ask all their affiliates to pull that certain code and boot the one's that do not comply rapidly.
To make the matter worth, I've recently notice some none compliant affiliates, for weeks now. This new "lax-ness" is also a little concerning about the SB program, since compliant aff. are hurt by the none compliant ones. After weeks, a compliant affiliate nearly has no choice but to "pull the plug" (which I had to start doing)...
I hope this combination: "lax-ness" + "none commissionable code" is a coincidence
and not a deliberate tactic
to avoid affiliate commissions. Time will tell...