No problem. I understand the hardships of the service you are offering and i'm sure that the results will be there in the end. What you're attempting to achieve with your service is a game changer for many SEO service providers and can really help extend the power of the services agencies offer.
I just have to stress that you should spend time securing the stability of your infrastructure. I'm happy to accept some hiccups and interruptions in service but the blogs really need to be submitted when scheduled. Yesterdays scheduled submissions didn't go out, hopefully today's will
Agreed. I signed up two days ago and postings were heavily delayed, and still some of them were not posted and still remain in queue. I got a VA to create around 40 accounts on the supported web 2.0 sites but out of around the 40 accounts, it seems so far only 18 show as successfully posted (with still 4 in queue, though). So maximum we're looking at is around 22 out of the 40 scheduled posts.
However, some are showing as 'invalid' and I need to investigate those. My VA made them manually and they're brand new accounts, so I don't suspect any issues. But I will look in to it and see if I can come up with anything.
The service looks great and so far seems to be performing to an acceptable level. But reading this thread, it seems it has been plagued with many delays / issues posting, but I understand the service is still expanding and being developed. This is probably the best SEO related product/idea/service that I have come across in a long time. It is a tough service to automate and I can understand the issues which are occurring. Wishing you guys all the best and I hope we can get a near perfect posting rate.
I think I speak for the majority here, it would be better to support less web 2.0's but ensure that account posting works flawlessly. Your current supported 100 sites is a big number and pretty damn awesome, but I know it would take a ton of time to test and ensure posting is always working on that many sites. Maybe cutting it down to 50 would leave customers with an almost perfect posting rate, since you could dedicate time to a smaller network.
Anyway, this is unlikely to be implemented since you guys have went for 100 sites already: but I think quality is more important than quantity in this case.
Over all, good work. Back end is nice!
EDIT: If I factor in the 'invalid accounts' (whether they are accurately labelled as invalid or not) and assuming the final 4 submissions are successful, the success rate in the system shows as approx. 81%. Not too bad. However, opening up some of the 'posted' properties, it looks like in some cases the title was just posted and not the article - but I'll have to look in to this, it could be my or the web 2.0 to blame.
So currently it's not looking bad with success rates on my smallish test of sites!