Is a Microsoft MVP required to disclose affiliation?

Stack Overflow isn't built for recommendations or architecture designs. You shouldn't see too many questions that look like "What tool X by company Y can I use to build Z" (in fact, most of these would be explicitly offtopic!).

Questions on SO are supposed to be specific usecases - "my code is supposed to do X but I get Y" or "how can I do X under circumstances A, B and C". Most such questions are already tied to the specific technology you're using, so there's no place to promote other technologies. In fact, I guess most such attempts would be flagged and removed as offtopic (or even spam) anyway, regardless of whether the poster was a regular John Doe, a Microsoft MVP or Satya Nadella.

And if we do decide that Microsoft MVPs must disclose their affiliation (although I find it hard to think of someone that wouldn't want to disclose this on his or her profile), where do we stop?
Most large tech companies have some sort of community programs - should we single Microsoft out? What about professional certifications? Should we require people to list all the certifications they've achieved? What about open source contributions? I have a single patch merged to the Spring framework. Should I mention it every time I answer a question about Spring?

Please don't do this.

MVP status is in my profile where it belongs. I disclose affiliation when I link to my OSS project (when relevant; usually in disposable comments), because managing the open-source project you're linking to is an affiliation. Being MVP isn't.

This is what MVP is:

We recognize and value your exceptional contributions and commitment to technical communities worldwide. By sharing your real world expertise and technical skills, you demonstrate outstanding technical community leadership. Thank you.

That's all.

Remember when seeing an answer from a 10K+ rep user made you go "oh wow, this guy knows his stuff"? Vote for the content, not the user, right? I can't see myself putting a disclaimer at the bottom of every one of my excelvba answers that links anywhere Microsoft...and just amplifying that wrong impression that my words carry more weight or truth than anybody else's. My impostor's syndrome couldn't take it!

I like to think I earn my upvotes with the quality of my answers, not because of my rep score, and definitely not because my answers look like they're somehow endorsed by Microsoft.

There's actually a clause in the MVP legalese about how Microsoft MVP awardees aren't allowed to use the term "MVP", or the MVP logo, to make it look like Microsoft is endorsing a product or a statement: I simply wouldn't feel comfortable at all doing this.

MVP awardees speak for themselves, not for Microsoft.

When linking to an article, be it hosted by Microsoft or by WordPress or anyone else, IMO the only thing that warrants disclosure is when you authored that article - whether you're an MVP or not: MVP status makes no difference.

Why stop at MVPs? Why not include GDEs? Should we have people disclose if they have certain certifications from major corporations as well? Should we require people to disclose if they're contributors to a project or employees of a company?

What is it you're trying to solve for here? Is there a problem with the system where questions or answers are getting unfairly upvoted/downvoted?

Most MVPs I've encountered are pretty vocal about their membership. But most also tend to give good advice in their product speciality (hence their status). At the end of the day, if I'm looking for advice or assistance with SQL Server or Office or some other MS product, I don't care if it's from a MVP or a MCSE or a GDE or a PhD or whatever. This site rewards answers that are helpful, and it does it pretty well. Never mind that it would be pretty impractical to enforce such a requirement (especially as these statuses tend to expire or change over time, and it may be difficult to link a particular SO user to their real identity if their status is even published anywhere).