Well, we had some issues this week. There are two ways to look at it, as there always are. On the one hand given the volume and percentage of code that changed, the fact that the problems were confined to one part of PayPerPost.com (taking opportunities) is fantastic. On the other hand, of course, that’s probably one of the most visible and hihgly used parts of the application. We can only apologize for the problems here.
We have thousands of users, with thousands of ways of doing things in the system, some correct, some incorrect. We simply didn’t count on some of the ways many of you get things done. That’s an oversight on our part. For example, there are still problems today with segmentation on opportunities with some bloggers who are ineligable able to opportunities that they should not have access to, and others who should have access finding themselves locked out.
I’ll tackle the latter case first. We use URL Trends to gather information about the blogs in the system and assign their page ranks and Alexa ranks. It’s a partnership which has always been astounding. Recently though URL Trends have had problems of their own and we’ve been working hand in hand with them to resolve these issues as quickly as possible. Joel Strellner, the owner of URL Trends, said it best in an email to me earlier.
“Our entire team sincerely apologize to you and the entire Pay Per Post team and community for the errors. We hope that this issue does not permanently hinder our relationship between our two companies.”
The issues are now fixed and within the next 48 hours (because of the way the ranking updates run) you’ll start to see the results trickle into your blogger dashboards.
The other issue, that of taking opps and bypassing segmentation, is one that we are currently looking into. Thankfully we are a human based system and our last line of defense will always be the excellent team of dedicated reviewers we have. If you are an advertiser and worried that your opportunities are being snagged by bloggers you don’t really want, don’t panic! The reviewing team will catch these and reject them.
At the end of the day we are a company and a system that has grown exponentially in size and complexity in an incredibly short period of time. We’re still in Beta and there will be kinks to iron out. As a development team we have learned a great deal this past week alone about how our community and marketplace operate and we’ll be using that knowledge in the coming weeks to build out a complete set of automated tests to make sure we never again do a deployment with as many issues as this. We’re using this as an opportunity to improve the application, improve the output of the development team and totally shore up the platform for the massive growth that we know our future holds for us.
There have been a lot of comments here on the blog and on the boards, both encouraging and scathing. We welcome both. It take’s passion on a subject to post a passionate comment about it, regardless of whether that comment’s tone is positive or negative. One of the most phenomenal aspects of PayPerPost is our vast and passionate community and I for one am very glad you are all out there to keep us in check and provide us with excellent feedback.
Thanks for bearing with us.
Pete
Labels: release errors


Mahalo for the update Pete. You’ll soothe a lot of anxieties with your calming words. Now get back to bed. Aren’t you supposed to be sick?Mahalo to all for their long hours & hard work!
Thank you SO MUCH for posting this, Pete. That is great news that things are fixed. I hope you are feeling better.
Thanks, Pete. Now go take care of yourself.
I hope you guys do some research into Alexa numbers and realize just how meaningless they are…
Thank you for the update! I hope you see that the comments that were made on the message boards were of frustration and not personal.
Thanks guys. Keep up the good work.
Glad to see that you posted an update Pete, although I didn’t expect one to come from you since we heard you are sick. I hope you are getting better. I’m also glad to hear that the folks at PPP are reading the forums and emails and that our opinions and even critiques are welcome. One issue that I’d love to see addressed here, or in the forums is the issue of advertisers banning bloggers. Right now when an advertiser bans a blogger we get -.5 tack removed from our tack rating, but we don’t get any feedback at all as to what we’ve done wrong. The reviewers go over our posts and if in the end they are accepted I would think that all problems with a post – that an advertiser might have initially seen and based their judgment on- will have been corrected.Taking half a tack off our score is fairly drastic when we don’t know if the advertiser hit the button mistakenly as DID happen in the past when the button was too close to the view post button. It’s also drastic if the advertiser is banning us because of a personal reason – like they don’t like the color of our blog. (needless to say many of us have more than one blog on PPP and different writing styles and topics for each one, but the advertiser bans all those blogs when they ban the blogger).What I think many of the posties would like to see would be at least an anonymous feedback form when we’ve been banned. If we don’t know what we’ve done wrong how can we fix it?Plus are the bannings permanent, or just for a certain period of time such as 90 days or 6 months? If you would discuss this on the forum or in your next blog posting I know many of us would appreciate it.
Pete, my deepest appreciation to you and your team! Thank you very much for taking time to write this post.
I appreciate your hard work. Have a good weekend.
Thanks Pete! Now go get well!
Thanks for sharing with us that you have gained valuable knowledge from this deployment. Sometimes growing is painful, sometimes lessons are hard ones.
Great job you guys. Even with all the issues and people complaining, you did a great job.The only thing I would ask of you Ted and dev team, is to research alexa rankings.The alexa toolbar contains spyware first of all, second, the rankings are easily manipulated. There’s programs on the net people can get to manipulate the rankings.Do you and your advertisers really want to use a tool that people can heat at to improve their scores?If that’s the case, I’ll be sure to download a few programs and get myself in the top 100,000 in no time at all.
I agree with Kat’s comments. Alexa is problematic at best.There’s at least a half dozen programs out there, some of them with spyware as bad as Alexa’s.
Thank you very much! Get well soon!
Pete,Did they really tied you to the chair? LOL! I heard you are sick and you are still writing a looong explanation. Appreciate it a lot!
In response to Tricia’s comment, I thought we were told it was five whole tacks, not one half tack, which is even more drastic.If we take 5 opps and get one ban… if the other advertisers rate us with a 2, 3, 4 and 5; 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 – 5 = 9. Divided by 5 opps = 1.8 tacks. If one hadn’t got the ban, 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 = 14. Divided by 4 opps = 3.5 tacks.Definitely very drastic.
Thanks, Pete. Come on 48 hours!Your truly, Scott
Anne-Lions, it’s indeed -5, like stated on the opps page, with -0.5 there is no way I could get a -1 tack rating with just one ban@PPP team; please take a look at this SOON, it’s very depressing to see a negative tack rating while every new opp requires at least a positive rating by default, this is simply insulting people rather than punishing if you ask me.
Glad to hear that things are going smoothly now. And yes, I too share my concerns about the issue of the ban, I think the current system as it stands now is quite unclear. It would be better if the advertiser bans the blog in question which took his/her Opp and he/she did not like the result, rather than banning the blogger himself/herself.- MENJ
If there is a desire to negatively affect the tack score simply logging a ZERO score when one is banned would bring a persons average down. However, if the advertiser just doesn’t like the blog and for their product, they may not want to punish that blogger! So I believe that tying a tack score to banning is a bit harsh when automatic. PPP is assuming they know the reason that the advertiser wants to ban the blogger.The need for a minus tack score seems is a bit overboard; and the whole process of banning needs to be revamped. I will not disagree with the fact that it’s a useful tool for the advertisers to keep them coming back and make sure they have control over what they’re getting. However, in making board negative impacts on a blogger you are actually tying the hands of the advertisers. How? Now that they know that it gives a -5 and will keep the blogger from getting other advertisers opps, if they just don’t mesh with a certain blogger but don’t think the blog or writing overall is poor, they may be less likely to ban them. So then, the advertiser is forced to accept certain bloggers they may otherwise wish to ban because they decide to be nice and not ban them.There are many angles to the ban issue that weren’t thought about when it was implemented. I hope rethinking this is one of your highest priorities. I hope to hear thoughts on the issue from PPP soon.
I am a little bit confused. There is no mention of posties being kicked out of PPP based on the number of tacks, right? I have faith that all these numbers are also on trial run and PPP will give us a fair and sound judgement. Not like this is a ‘Hangman’ game, right? Huh? Huh?
I thought it was a pretty smooth rollout, given the immense size of the update…
I still think we should know why we have been banned. What is the purpose of it if we can’t make any improvement?
Thanks for the updates and I’m glad to hear the team is admitting mistakes as well as acknowledging the lessons learned. That moves me from skeptical to hopeful.
I can’t wait for my dashboard to reflect my PR! I am so tired pf showing as 0.
In response to what Tricia has commented, I think the advertisers should at least inform us what we have done wrong before banning us. I’m very new in Payperpost (and to blogging as well), having only written 6 (Payperpost) opportunities to date, have four approved and one advertiser banned me. I don’t even know what’s the reason. I made sure I had the best ever grammar, with proper selection of words and followed all the rules of Payperpost – so what went wrong?
If you’re still in beta then perhaps you should only be using beta testers. Once you open something to the public being in “beta” is a pretty weak excuse.
I just want to say I’m all new to blogging and site-building and seriously enjoyed your blog. Probably I’m likely to bookmark your blog . You really have terrific stories. Appreciate it for sharing your blog site.