Website Change Approval Process — BluePoint ATM

Overview

A formal two-step approval process was established for all BluePoint ATM website changes following a recurring pattern of unapproved or incorrect edits going live — including wrong phone numbers, truncated banner headlines, and copy that had never been reviewed by the client. The process is now enforced by Karly Oykhman (Asymmetric) and applies to all website updates without exception.

Background & Problem

Prior to this process being formalized, BluePoint experienced multiple incidents where:

Website copy was updated without client knowledge or approval
Edits were saved in an incomplete or broken state (sentences cut off, incorrect contact numbers)
No clear accountability existed for who made the changes or why

Wade Zirkle raised the issue directly, noting it had occurred three or four times and that requests for accountability had gone unanswered. The suspected root cause was developers working in staging backups and pushing changes before they were complete or reviewed.

"There's got to be some accountability because if our website keeps getting sabotaged accidentally by carelessness and no one knows why it's happening or who's doing it, that's super concerning."
— Wade Zirkle

The Two-Step Approval Process

All website changes must pass through two written approvals before going live:

Step 1 — Copy Approval

Draft the proposed copy in a Word document (or Google Doc equivalent)
Send to the client (Mike Stebbins / Wade Zirkle) for review
Client provides written approval or edits before any work begins on the live site

Step 2 — Page Approval

Implement the approved copy on a staging page
Send the staging URL to the client for a final review
Client provides written sign-off before the page is pushed live

No page goes live without both approvals in writing.

Ownership & Enforcement

Karly Oykhman (Asymmetric) is personally responsible for overseeing all website updates and enforcing this process
If a document has no client comments or notes, it has not yet been reviewed — do not proceed
Client-side convention: Mike and Wade will leave notes directly in the document when they have reviewed it; silence means it has not been seen

This process was discussed in the same meeting where the ^[2] agenda covered the NY campaign launch and HubSpot integration issues. The landing pages for the NY cashless ban campaign were specifically called out as examples of copy that had gone live without proper review.

The Coverage Areas page and 10 state pages pending launch at the time of this meeting are subject to this same process — Wade agreed to review them before they are pushed.

Applicability

While this process was formalized in the context of BluePoint ATM, the two-step copy-then-page approval model is a sound default for any client website work. See ^[3] if a generalized version of this workflow is documented.