u/Consistent_Buddy_698

I’ve been dealing with a pretty frustrating issue lately and wanted to see how others are handling it.

chargebacks are starting to seriously affect my margins, especially as volume grows. it’s not even always about clear fraud. a lot of it ends up being friendly fraud, misunderstandings, or customers bypassing support and going straight to their bank.

what’s been difficult is how unpredictable it all feels. some weeks are totally fine, and then out of nowhere there’s a spike in disputes that don’t really make sense. it ends up pulling time away from actually running and growing the business because you’re constantly reacting instead of building.

right now I’m still handling everything pretty manually. checking notifications, pulling together proof, responding within deadlines, and trying to keep track of what’s been submitted where. it works, but it doesn’t really feel sustainable once volume starts to scale.

feels like one of those problems that quietly becomes a big cost center over time, so would be interested to hear what’s actually working for people right now.

Inherited this environment two years ago. Previous admin nested groups inside groups inside groups. Last month I finally pulled a full membership expansion report.

14 users have access to a finance file share with no obvious reason to be there. Traced it back through four levels of nesting. One group in the chain was a distribution list added to a security group six years ago and never removed. That DL had 40 members. All 40 inherited the file share access.

None of this is visible in AD Users and Computers. You see direct members, not transitive ones. The access looks clean unless you specifically expand the full membership tree.

We run quarterly access reviews. Managers certify their team's access. They're certifying what the tool shows them  and the tool doesn't surface transitive memberships. So the reviews are passing on access nobody knows exists.

Three of the 14 users with unintended finance access have since left the company. Accounts disabled, group memberships never cleaned up. The nesting is still intact for whenever those accounts get reused.

Is there a standard approach for auditing and flattening nested groups in AD without breaking things that depend on the current structure? Specifically wondering whether people tackle this top-down from the resource or bottom-up from the user.

Been deep into geo and aeo research lately because normal seo reporting just isnt telling the full story anymore one of our sites still ranks fine on google, but when i search the same topics inside chatgpt, perplexity or gemini, completely different websites keep getting mentioned thats when i realized ai search visibility is becoming its own thing.

started testing different website analytics tools to figure out where ai traffic is actually coming from and which platforms give useful data instead of generic estimates similarweb tbh surprised me the most because it gives a much broader picture of traffic shifts, referral behavior and audience movement across channels. the digital marketing insights side feels way more useful now that people arent only discovering sites through google search anymore.

i still use semrush and ahrefs daily because theyre good for keyword tracking, competitor gaps and content opportunities, but for geo specifically ive been finding myself checking similarweb more often just to understand how brands are showing up across ai ecosystems and where visibility is growing.

another thing i noticed is that pages getting picked up in ai answers usually arent even the pages with the strongest backlink profiles. its more about structure, topical clarity, updated stats, citations and whether the content answers questions directly. some smaller sites are suddenly getting mentioned everywhere inside ai tools while bigger authority sites barely appear.

also trying to figure out the best way to track llm referrals because analytics platforms still label a lot of that traffic weirdly. feels like everyone is building their own process right now.

Pulled the admin list for our Slack workspace last month as part of a broader access review. 50 workspace admins. We have around 350 employees. I asked around and the pattern is pretty consistent: someone wanted to manage their own channel or invite guests without going through IT, asked whoever was already an admin to just make them an admin too, and that person said yes because it was easier than explaining the difference between workspace admin and channel manager.

Workspace admins in Slack can do a lot more than manage channels. They can see message activity, manage apps and integrations, export messages in some plan tiers, and invite or remove members. A few of our 50 probably know this. Most don't, which is almost worse because they're not being careful about it.

We've had two third-party app integrations approved by workspace admins that IT had no visibility into until they showed up in a security scan. One of them had access to message history across public and private channels. Nobody meant for that to happen, it just did because the person who approved it was clicking through an OAuth prompt without reading it.

I want to get this down to maybe 5 or 6 admins but I know the moment I start removing people I'm going to get pushback from managers who don't understand why their team lead needs to lose access. Has anyone done this cleanly or is it always a political fight?

We have been doing content and GEO work for months. telling clients we have AI search covered then during a live call someone asked me to show them where we show up in AI answers, typed our brand into ChatGPT. nothing. tried Perplexity. nothing. Gemini. Nothing completely invisible. no citations, no mentions, no sentiment to even measure

we had zero systematic tracking. just random prompt checks every few weeks that told us nothing

now i'm trying to find something that actually monitors AI brand visibility across these platforms without me having to run prompts manually and hope for the best

citation tracking, sentiment shifts, share of voice in AI answers. does anything do all of this in one place
anyone gone through this and found something that works.

Dev here running SEO side for agency. Added AEO events like schema checks and AI citation pulls thinking easy win.

one hour in code, shipped but now digging in, it's all gtm triggers, prompt lists from alsoasked, scrunch dashboards. Feels fragile, one ai update and selectors break?

How do you agencies keep AEO from drifting as ai changes?

Devs involved every time or marketing owns it?

curious before I rebuild wrong.

Ran SEO for b2b saas clients and like most was fixating on rank position for ai citations. pushed schema and structured data everywhere thinking more positions equals more wins.

then started segmenting ga4 by page traffic and revenue attribution. turns out 80 percent of ai referral value came from 12 pages that already had 200 plus sessions a month. The rest was noise.

new rule: only touch pages with over 100 monthly sessions or proven close rate above 5 percent. fixed 8 of those first. Three months in citations up 40 percent on those, traditional rankings held steady.

Here's the quick filter i use now:

• Pull top 50 pages by traffic in ga4
• Cross with revenue from form fills or calls
• Score by session volume times
• conversion rate Fix top 20 only

still testing if this kills long tail opportunity but short term revenue from ai traffic doubled.

Anyone running similar filters or am i underweighting something?How do you balance ai fixes vs core seo when client asks for both?