Does the content of my article seem dishonest?
I agree affiliate content should be read skeptically but you also have to be realistic: why would anyone go to all this work if not for some financial incentive?
Especially when you underscore the incentive issues with your closing question: if the only reason you can imagine going to the effort of a substantial review is financial incentive, that in itself is a pretty good criticism.
I’m suggesting a more productive argument would criticize the substance of my article — not my incentives.
Now, I'm gonna criticize you for a) not understanding the point up thread and b) taking the general comment too personally.
One is a good person. One is a bad person.
BOTH people are distorted by the wrong incentives.
It is NOT a question of being pedantic. They're literally not criticizing you when they criticize your incentives. I think this critique is from a board with relatively high percentage of systems-type thinkers.
Your evaluation criteria was downright silly (1), you didn’t actually try most of these tools, and your “top pick” has the highest affiliate payout (and longest affiliate window) on the list.
In fact, I have no idea how this article hasn’t been flagged since low quality affiliate listicles generally don’t make the front page here.
(1) Strict pricing models and not supporting web fonts like Inter are features, not bugs. Cheap platforms have crap quality shared IPs and 70%+ of inboxes (including most Gmail/outlook clients) don’t support web fonts at all. You’re designing something nobody will see correctly: https://www.caniemail.com/features/css-at-font-face/
I don’t want an email marking tool that:
• Charged overage fees • Uses dark patterns to charge me more
People die for altruistic causes. I don't think its unheard of for people to run websites for fun or fame.
If not, then you also would not put in a bunch of work on anything simply for fun or fame
We recommend software products too but don't hide behind euphemisms and hide our commissions.
