Results 1 to 10 of 10
March 7th, 2006, 09:46 AM #1Merchants who do not allow cloaking?
Is this reasonable? Can a merchant prevent an affilaite from cloaking the links, or does that scream...?
"Use of unethical means of driving traffic such as hidden frames, cloaking, hidden links and site redirection are strictly prohibited. Diamonds-USA reserves the right to remove any web sites implementing these methods from our affiliate program and withhold payments to such affiliates"
My guess is that they are specifically interested in piracy if they prohibit cloaking.. wanna weigh in on that?[SIZE=2][FONT=Tahoma][COLOR=RoyalBlue]He who asks is a fool for five minutes...but he who does not ask is a fool forever.[/COLOR][/FONT][/SIZE] :rolleyes:
March 7th, 2006, 09:50 AM #2
I find that rule to be a bit extreme. Can they demand this? Yes, it's their program. The "play my way, or don't play at all" tactic on using "legitimate redirect scripts" is disturbing.
Hmmmmm .... I'd say "don't play then".
March 7th, 2006, 10:00 AM #3
I think they're talking about a different type of cloaking.
You're thinking of cloaking/redirecting links for your own tracking.
I'm fairly sure they're talking about cloaking pages so the search engines see one thing (typically keyword-stuffed pages) and real visitors see something entirely different.
March 7th, 2006, 10:00 AM #4
To me, it's beyond reasonable, to the good side. It's a sign that they just might tuned in to the trickster affiliates and want no part of it. If I had related traffic, I'd be signing up with them to see how it converts.
March 7th, 2006, 10:01 AM #5Originally Posted by DesignerWiz
I dont need to be hit over the head[SIZE=2][FONT=Tahoma][COLOR=RoyalBlue]He who asks is a fool for five minutes...but he who does not ask is a fool forever.[/COLOR][/FONT][/SIZE] :rolleyes:
March 7th, 2006, 10:04 AM #6Originally Posted by Donuts
"The URL you should be using to link to our Web Site
is as follows:
http://www.diamonds-usa.com/index.asp?refid=XXX"[SIZE=2][FONT=Tahoma][COLOR=RoyalBlue]He who asks is a fool for five minutes...but he who does not ask is a fool forever.[/COLOR][/FONT][/SIZE] :rolleyes:
March 7th, 2006, 10:11 AM #7
"should"... if I had related traffic, I'd be emailing them and asking for specifics and sharing exactly what I planned to do. If they got anal and refused cuz they're can't separate ethical from not cuz they're techno challenged, I'd split. But it's possible they're being completely reasonable here and in fact, intending to protect their affiliates from poaching types.
March 7th, 2006, 02:13 PM #8Originally Posted by DesignerWiz
March 7th, 2006, 02:25 PM #9
I agree with Michael. I think they're talking about a different kind of cloaking. You should have no problem linking to them with redirects. All of the big shopping sites do this and there's nothing underhanded about it.
- ScottHatred stirs up strife, But love covers all transgressions.
March 7th, 2006, 04:20 PM #10
unethical means of driving traffic such as hidden frames, cloaking, hidden links and site redirection
- Join Date
- January 18th, 2005
- Los Angeles
They're talking about methods of what's generally considered to be spamming the search engines. In that context, cloaking means delivering different content to human visitors and search engine bots, either through user agent delivery (not good) or IP delivery (the usual, far safer way, which is how the "professionals" do it), which detects the IP numbers of "visitors" and delivers a page depending on what's detected.
By kassemEzz in forum Newbie Affiliate FAQs & Helpful ArticlesReplies: 6Last Post: March 21st, 2013, 02:50 PM
By grace555 in forum WebMerge (Fourthworld.com)Replies: 1Last Post: June 3rd, 2007, 04:31 AM
By reaper in forum Programming / Datafeeds / ToolsReplies: 5Last Post: April 8th, 2006, 11:31 PM
By MikeH in forum Programming / Datafeeds / ToolsReplies: 2Last Post: September 27th, 2005, 06:17 PM
By dalesellers in forum Newbie Affiliate FAQs & Helpful ArticlesReplies: 0Last Post: May 13th, 2004, 05:10 AM