Disable cookie tracking on an embeded form

[Jeff_Bedford]

Would it work to have folks download the Ghostery plugin and block Marketo from loading through the browser that way?

[SanfordWhiteman]

How could that possibly be easier than using the standard and simple Referral Form technique?

[Jeff_Bedford]

I'm not sure what you mean. Ghostery was a bad idea because it blocked the form all together. I would love to know more about said Referral Form Technique - I'm brand new to Marketo.

[SanfordWhiteman]

The basic Referral Form pattern is implemented using the exact code Kenny provided above!

(Ghostery is an even worse idea than you're thinking, because even if you managed to whitelist Marketo forms while blacklisting Munchkin, that doesn't actually prevent the Munchkin cookie from being set on another page and sent along with the form -- it's not really germane to the problem.)

[Jeff_Bedford]

Thank you!

[Jeff_Bedford]

So we implemented the script, and now a small sample of submissions are not passing required fields to our email notifications. Kind of interesting. It does seem like Marketo captured the data though.

[SanfordWhiteman]

The JS doesn't affect which fields are required or not, unless the code was implemented incorrectly and is throwing errors (any code errors can in turn short-circuit validation code that hasn't run yet, but they aren't directly related to each other).

And if the field values were passed to Marketo (visible in the Activity Log detail for the Filled Out Form activity) then they were populated on the lead. The JS can't interfere with that after the fact.

[Jeff_Bedford]

Looking into this a little more this AM - I'm finding it interesting that the form is two steps. So, we have one embedded form that leads to a second embedded form in Wordpress, which in turn triggers the alert to our sales team. Since the script was implemented - 4 out of 25 leads have ended up on form 2 without and reference to form 1 - and because form 2 only contains company information - none of the key person contact info is available without some tedious cross referencing (and a little bit of guessing).

This is more just commentary because I think it's interesting and maybe the two step process is adding a little complexity to the original issue.

[SanfordWhiteman]

This is more just commentary because I think it's interesting and maybe the two step process is adding a little complexity to the original issue.

Yes, of course it would!

The definition of a referral form is that it doesn't associate the Munchkin web session with the lead on whose behalf the form is submitted.

In the two-form workflow you're describing, if the second form doesn't contain the email address field, an associated Munchkin session is required  in order for the two submissions to match up to the same lead.

So there's a clear technical conflict.

You can resolve this by passing the email address from Form 1 to Form 2 in the query string. Then have Email be a hidden field on Form 2, Auto-Filled from query param.

[Jeff_Bedford]

A couple more notes:

1) We asked one of our resources to place the script on the page with step 2 instead of step 1. We are observing that for the time being.

2) I looked into the query parameter - but since it's an external URL I'm getting some errors just trying to work within the interface. I'd be curious if there was a workaround.

I must say - I've been learning a lot from this conversation and am very appreciative of your help!