Yeah, that tiny blurb was all I could find, which doesn't really tell me anything.

> The evidence presented is Amazon dot com affiliates walk on eggshells to avoid breaking Toss that Honey completely tramples on so at the very least honey is not subject to the same tos as everybody. However, Amazon dot com is very aware of honey evidenced by advisory warnings on Amazon dot com website from a few years ago.

I don't get this, if Amazon really thought that Honey was "trampling on Amazon's TOS" surely they would just ban Honeys affiliate status? If anything this implies to me that someone had a grudge.

It could also mean Amazon dot com has decided that it was not possible to kill honey and it was better to join them rather than trying to and failing to kill honey.

I think it is already proven that honey does not automatically show the best coupons for its users. So how and when does honey decide to hold back? The conspiracy theory is honey decides to hold back when there is an agreement with the vendor. Now logically, why would honey intentionally give its users a poorer experience? It makes sense to me that honey will only do so intentionally if honey is getting paid to do so.

> I think it is already proven that honey does not automatically show the best coupons for its users.

I think so, however I'm not sure how you would prove that they do this knowingly, mostly what's been proven are affiate link hijacks, because thats directly impacted sites.

And why would companies offer coupons, they then spend money not showing?