OK, I'm concerned then about the content of your post. If you're not willing to present a code/recipe that someone could follow to build the same solution, then it sounds like you're trying to get freelance work from the incomplete post... which would be a violation of Community rules against promo'ing one's own services or products.   If you want me to privately review your code that might be possible, send me an email. ... View more

Must it be a trigger? Can it not be an hourly batch for people whose Updated At is within the past hour?   ... View more

Hi,    reCAPTCHA isn't enabled on that form. While I see you have some reCAPTCHA-related code (it's minimized, so hard to vouch for) defined in GTM, that tag doesn't actually trigger on the URL you provided. So I'd be doubtful that reCAPTCHA is actually the thing that changed.   Also, I've gotta say, something is up with the reliance on setTimeout in a lot of your code, that's really fragile and isn't necessary in a clearly event-driven setup. For example, you call checkPermissions() in two cases, and in both cases the document.hash has just been set.  Setting the hash is a synchronous action in all browsers: it's not possible for the hash not to be readable at the start of the next function call.   ... View more

Well, yes and no.... A 301 redirect with a long TTL, depending on how long it was in the wild, definitely wouldn't be good! It won't cure itself for those people who are affected, and you can't force it to. (Same with a long-lived but broken HSTS policy that was user-facing for more than a few minutes.)   Of course, as you say, if it truly only affects a couple of people that's fine. But hard to measure the impact in a martech context — you won't have people calling the Help Desk if an LP doesn't work! ... View more

That seems reasonable. I don't like to use actual localhost anyway. ... View more

It's not you, it's the... questionable (I'm being nice)... policies of CloudFlare when they flag traffic as not regular-end-user-ish.   In this case probably because of the Referer. Also happens when using a debugging proxy, which they seem to fingerprint using other means. It's absolutely frustrating but the policy is controlled centrally. ... View more

That page is secure, and all of its assets are secure as well. So you set it up correctly. That leaves open whether other people are actually navidating to the page as it currently stands. Is it possible that there was an old redirect rule that they have cached in their browser, for example, so they're being taken somewhere else?  Have you done a screenshare with any of them?     ... View more

You need to turn off all the GTM tags you have that affect forms in order to test this with a clean slate. I doubt it has to do with the vanilla forms embed — but you need to have a vanilla form to compare. ... View more

D'you have the code for this in a public repo? ... View more

You'll have to provide your URL. ... View more

.mktoForm .mktoLabel[for="optIn"] { font-weight: normal; }   Don't know what you mean by "directly to the right." ... View more

Inspect the <form> element in Dev Tools, copy the outer HTML.  What are you planning to do with the HTML, though? Is this just for styling guidance? ... View more

Hmm, no, !normal isn't a thing. 🙂   I also have some doubt that the id of the field is actually Opt Out (with the space).  What's your URL? ... View more

This is where you'd use the In Past Before operator. ... View more

Hi,   Depends on the process for generating, and later verifying, the codes.   If they need to be taken from a pre-generated list, then you'll need a webhook to "pop" the next unused one off a stack stored in a file.   If it's a more casual situation where you're not worried about the code being generated securely/verifiably, you can generate an alphanumeric code in JavaScript (in the browser) and add that to the form as a hidden field. Only allow that field, call it PromoCodeEvent1982, to be set one time by blocking updates in Admin » Field Management. Let's say a sample PromoCodeEvent1982 value might be "BEBZ".     Then you can use that to assemble a final unique code. Concatenate   {{lead.Marketo Unique Code}} +  a static value that represents this particular event, in this case "E1982" +  {lead.PromoCodeEvent1982}}   That'll give a final code like   XYZPDQ-E1982-BEBZ   It's obviously forgeable because they could hack the "BEBZ" part, but they wouldn't know the rest in advance.    Again, though, depends on what you actually need to do w/these codes. More typically I see codes with real monetary value, and they need to be assigned from a list of valid codes. ... View more

Use a Program Member Bulk Import Job, specifiying the field names from https://developers.marketo.com/rest-api/endpoint-reference/lead-database-endpoint-reference/#!/Leads/describeProgramMemberUsingGET. ... View more

It depends.   If you want a true round-robin (Jess, Sam, Jess, Sam, Jess, Sam) it's not possible without help from an external service (called as a webhook).   If you want 50% distribution averaged over time, use Random Sample.     ... View more

Definitely not a Wait step!   But yes, you can (and absolutely should) order your campaigns using Request Campaign.  A campaign that has the Campaign is Requested trigger can be called by other campaigns, putting in complete control of firing order. Highly recommended. ... View more

I assume you mean Number of Employees (SOAP API/Forms API name NumberOfEmployees).   There are 2 ways to make such changes:   (1) A true, permanent change to the Marketo form descriptor using  the Asset API for Forms. It takes some learning.   (2) A temporary change to the availble <option>s using JavaScript. In this particular case, Marketo will allow you to make direct changes to the DOM without any problems. You just need to wait for MktoForms2.whenReady() and modify the select.   In general, the cumbersome nature of such changes is why having only a few shared/global forms is recommended, not a profusion of individual forms. ... View more

Only thing I'd change here is have a second triggered Smart Campaign that handles Person is Created with the filter Is Member of SFDC Campaign, instead of adding the filter to the existing SC.   That remote campaign member lookup is resource-intensive and it's redundant to do it when the trigger is on Added to SFDC Campaign. (There may be a short-circuiting optimization in there but I wouldn't count on it.) ... View more