Good discussion, all. I'll address a few questions but otherwise I want to let the conversation continue without my interruption.
We don't know the amounts, either. But this is not about money, it's about how the money can affect how community members participate.
In general, any plan that allows referral links in some limited capacity (supporters, users, account age, post count, whitelists, blacklists, etc.) will put a significant moderation burden on us, since we have no way to automate the auditing of those links. We would have to manually check all links, and then - based on how we'd 'limit' affiliate links - make judgement calls with respect to whether or not a particular use of a referral link is compliant or not.
(To be clear, this reality on it's own is not a deal-breaker, but I just want to make sure that the 'cost' is adequately conveyed.)
Yes.
As stated above, the concern is that providing a profit motive to post certain links can affect how community members participate.
This solution does introduce a very unusual dynamic. Intellectually one can make the point that [USER=801]@robbee[/USER] makes, but it still feels unusual, and the profit motive on SFF Forum's part to have lots of links posted is undeniable.
Any concerns regarding bias extend to the forum/Minutiae as much as they do to participants. The one distinction we've wondered about (following the suggestion of doing something like this) is whether or not this dilemma of bias is obviated by not allowing Minutiae staff to post affiliate links. But we're not sure if that completely or satisfactorily resolves the issue.
Irrespective of the final solution, we would want there to be disclosure if affiliate links were used in any capacity, anywhere.
