"Charging For Teaching" is not inherently a "Red Flag"

Being able to learn something "for free" does not mean the information and tools that you can get for free in order to learn that skill or knowledge set is always or automatically quality information.

Being able to learn something "for free" does not mean that you have the prerequisite (or additional) skills or knowledge that may be required to even parse it correctly on your own without guidance.

Being able to learn something "for free" does not mean that people with the appropriate amount of age, experience, and skills to do so, should no longer be "allowed" to teach that skill or knowledge set to others- especially for money, if they deem it necessary or pertinent to their continued ability to teach.

Being able to learn something "for free" does not mean that those who do teach that skill or knowledge set for money are automatically scamming the people they are teaching- nor are only interested in their money and have no good intentions for teaching.

In some Traditions you actively cannot even learn about their various practices and beliefs without an appropriate teacher from within the tradition. And oftentimes those teachers will charge for their time and energy depending on the Tradition and their own insider teachings surrounding the exchange of money for such purposes. This must be acknowledged- and respected, even.

Positioning all teachers as "scammers", or the very act of "charging for teaching" as an automatic and inherent Red Flag- especially if you're doing so with some kind of a financial cap to the amount they're "allowed to charge" which determines its moral appropriateness in your eyes ... It's religiously ignorant at best- and actively malicious to a variety of Traditions at worst (especially POC ones, since many ADRs are among those that charge significant sums for both their teaching and their initiations).

Yes, some teachers who charge are scammers. Yes, some teachers who charge do charge exorbitant and unreasonable fees for basic information- which, yes, in a lot of cases is inherently exploitative. This is something which does need to be actively watched out for and you should be vetting every teacher you work under ... But there are still a million other things that are far more important- and are actual, legitimate Red Flags- to look for / at, when vetting Teachers (and other people in positions of power and authority), than whether or not they're "charging for their teaching" in the first place.

• Things like where they get their sources (Are they out of date? Did they just make it up? Are they clear about when things are UPG vs fact?);
• Who they trained under (Arin Murphey-Hiscock is a member of Silver RavenWolf's tradition. This matters- especially if you claim to hate Silver RavenWolf);
• Whether or not they're affiliated with known nationalists or other known horrible individuals (Like, Hello ??? This is a much more important Red Flag ??? Are you kidding ???);
• Is their scheduling reliable and consistent (do they send out materials when they say they do, or slack off and leave you hanging?);
• What external criticism of them exists (what do others say about their experiences with them, and about the validity or quality of their teachings?);
• How they handle any criticism of them or their teaching (do they and their followers gang up on and attack any naysayers- either publicly and privately?);
• And far more.

The fact of the matter is that the difference between a true Red Flag, a Yellow flag, and a Green Flag isn't your own personally subjective and easily biased perspective, opinion, lack of belief, or lack of understanding of a subject and its history and use (etc) ... It's in the actual inherent and legitimate danger possibly presented to the individual by the action that's being flagged.