I posted my original review after Betsy begged me to post a review because she received a very poor review from another client. After having significant problems with the back-end development of the site I had to discard all of that work and rebuild the site from ground zero. However, I maintained the graphic design in its original state. Therefore, I believe an updated review is in order. Recently, the site was completely rebuilt. The letter below was summarily rejected by Betsy. So, I am posting it verbatim......buyer beware. Good morning Betsy, As you know, I have experienced two occasions where my website was offline for months without my knowledge. As a result, I have had to employ other consultants to research and bring the site back online. In addition, the links to the clips continuously broke. This look, where clips do not work, promoted a feeble perception to the person reading the site and resulted in a poor perception of me as a professional. I had complained to you before that with my limited ability to see, WP was a mess. I asked you several times to clean it up..which you said you did...but on further review by these professionals, they saw many unrelated pieces in WP that were also available for outsiders to see that had no relationship with my messaging and gave unwanted opportunities to other sites to communicate with my site. Finally, within your development architecture, there was no consideration given to installing any security or notification measures that would provide protection and warnings against unwanted events from occurring. Your source in India does not have adequate skills to work for you. It is also clear that you have no technical quality control to ensure that you are delivering a site built for today. Shuffling e-mails from your designer to your client and from your developer to your client has nothing to do with delivering a solid product since you are doing nothing to add to the solution. It took months for me to understand and engage a consultant that could build a reliable site...another embarrassment since I could not direct prospects to my website during the timeframe for the research and rebuild. I have paid a high price for incompetent site development work. However, I will distinguish that from the graphic design (including text), presently retained in its original form. I had to take action, and I engaged services to bring the site back online and then completely redesign the development into a simple, swift, reliable site rhonig.com. The attached spreadsheet and supporting documents show that I paid AWS $2,266 to mitigate the problems and rebuild the site. Thus, I paid you approximately $1,600 without regard to the cost that I incurred for the months the site was offline and while online the shabby perception the malfunctioning site had on the readers and therefore their perception of me. So, bottom line, I am willing to pay for the graphic design at the cost of $800. For the remaining $800, I expect to receive a refund sent to me by Venmo by Friday, September 10, 2021. Please keep in mind; I am absorbing $622 ($1,600 + $622 = $2,266) without regard to the other costs which I incurred. Should I not receive that money on time, I will publish this letter in as many avenues for review that I can find. I will begin that effort over this coming weekend. I will look forward to receiving the $800 and putting this entire debacle to rest. Thank you, Ross
