if some one sends him $150 he "might" put their name in the new book's acknowledgments. At the time I didn't think much of it, now I realize that screams "unprofessional amateur."
Not only is it amateurish but all you get is a "might"? You don't even get any guarantee for your money? Probably because he'd happily take enough contributions that it would require the whole book just be mentions if he could.
Most especially don't try to make it a paying job. First of all, I don't think there's enough money in it. I also think it raises too many conflicts of interest.
I forget where, but I once read something about a trap for activists being where they easily become dependent on the thing they are supposedly against. Do they then genuinely want to see its demise, given that they rely on its existence for their own and for funds to flow to them? So they end up in a kind of symbiotic / parasitic relationship instead.
A lot of government agencies end up like this, never solving the very problems they are supposedly created to solve, often contributing to them instead.
The other easy trap to fall into is not having enough material, or anything new to report on. At that point it's tempting to make things up, and invent things so you can put out content, again, to keep the money coming in. He's already done this, and it only takes a few unjustified claims and allegations to really undermine and weaken other potential charges you make against something.