Skip to content

Cloud Based Verified Site List

edited January 2013 in Feature Requests
I sent this one through the software before I discovered the forum, but I thought it might be good to have it here to encourage discussion on it (perhaps others can think of ways to make it better). Half the time you do a feature request, and Sven does it over night (genius)... but I don't think this will be one of those. It's a biggy.

There's kind of 2 parts to it. The first part has been discussed on another thread, so I won't go into it here. Here is the link:

https://forum.gsa-online.de/discussion/1786/custom-global-lists#Item_4.

It basically says to save more details about the links in the global site lists (PR, engine, # links on site, do follow, etc), so that they don't need to be crawled every time you do a new project. Though I would like to add to that removal of sites from verified when they stop working.

The second part is where it gets interesting. I'd like to see an option to share global verified site lists with the cloud. This way, you get the benefit of hundreds (or thousands?) of computers crawling all over the net finding good sites to post on. Not only that, but they are verified, so you know they work, and you know all the details without even needing to crawl them. I could see this quickly getting to the point where you could build thousands of PR4, 5 or higher back links in minutes!

The way I see it, it could be opt in or out. You can choose not to participate, fine, but if you do participate, then it is both ways... your links are sent to the cloud, and you get the benefit of the cloud knowledge.

Thoughts anyone?

Comments

  • AlexRAlexR Cape Town
    I really like option 1, but I'm not interested in option 2. Sharing lists has been discussed a few times. Any lists that get's public, loses all value. 

    Maybe a cloud option to store solved captchas, or text captchas. This way there is a common database that people can use and we can have a great resource. 

    How neat would it be to have 100 000 mollum captchas with the correct filenames, then it's a good sample to set the Brute Force CB onto. Or for other captchas, it will offer it a very large database to get accurate solve rates on. 

    Whereas, sitelists, get abused when shared. 
  • GG, I don't really get how the shared captchas would work, but please don't explain it here, it's not really relevant to this thread. I personally don't agree with the sharing lists losing value. The most value there is with high PR sites, and these don't get affected. There are litterally millions of people post to sites like YouTube, Twitter, eZineArticles, etc, etc... but they don't lose their value from having so many posts... in fact they get extra value, because they have more pages, and more domain backlinks.

    Hey, not everyone is going to want to participate, and that's fine, that's why I added the last paragraph... I totally think people should be allowed to opt out of sharing.
  • OzzOzz
    edited January 2013
    what about high PR wikis, blogs, etc?
    once they are in the database everyone bombs it to death in seconds with links you don't want to be neighbor of or the site will be shut down. i don't like this idea either.

    if you want to share your lists in private than its up to you, but i wouldn't recommend this either unless you know your sharing partner very well.
  • GSA is so efficient at finding them, that everyone is bombing them anyway... it just takes time and resources to find them first. Why not save the time and resources. And I still maintain lots of people posting to them is not a bad thing.

    Again, I stress... I appreciate not everyone will want to share their links, and that's fine, but I find it hard to believe that I am the only one. Like GG said "Sharing lists has been discussed a few times"... it wouldn't have been discussed if no one was interested in it.
  • Sharing list is really NOT a good idea. I have seen it in article submission apps like AMR for example, the "PUBLIC AMR List" was so spammed by the user base that 90% of those article directories DOES NOT accpet submissions anymore.

    "GSA is so efficient at finding them, that everyone is bombing them anyway"

    Not really, remember that GSA uses keywords to scrape a footprint of an article so NOT everyone will grab the same site.

    However, if you shared a site list then literally everyone can bomb the heck out of that site list regardless of the keywords.
  • I'm against sharing lists as well.
  • I would be heavily against it as well.  So much so that if it was force (prolly won't be just saying)  I would no longer use GSA.
  • Well, this idea is super popular isn't it
    :-O
  • ronron SERLists.com

    @cre8iveq - In all honesty, your sites will get the great rankings with your own list generating at SER's own pace.

    Unlike some others here, I really don't use my own site lists for other projects, and I am 100% happy with the number of links I create each day (40k-50k each day). I'm not gunning for a world record, and have limits on most projects.

    I'm able to honestly report that you can get on page 1 for 50,000+ local exact match in a few months just using SER - even without using site lists.

    The concept of sharing lists comes up on every software forum. And the truth is, that list gets spammed to kingdom come. You just don't need it, trust me.

  • BrandonBrandon Reputation Management Pro
    I'm against sharing lists. I spend considerable time finding new sites and my time spent is for my projects and clients.
  • Well, I did say i wanted to encourage discussion. It's clearly not a wanted feature, and that's probably because the people that think it's a bad idea know more about SEO than I do (That is not tongue in cheek, I mean it).

    Sounds like there is certainly better things Sven can be spending his valuable time on.
  • But I think the idea still has merit. Is it debatable that we would all benefit from only sharing some specific engine types? Articles for example.
  • edited January 2013
    Sharing lists is a really bad idea. Once those lists are public, they will be used in other applications and shared everywhere. As @sootedninjas pointed out, those AMR lists worked great for a moment, now they're useless. Can you imagine how abused a list of PR properties would get in just a few days?
  • AlexRAlexR Cape Town
    What about a central cloud repository to store captcha answers? We get a few people together to pay people to answer these and rename the files. 

    This way, Sven can have a large answered and correct captcha database of all kinds of platforms to run the CB Brute Force on...and it can improve solve rates. I think the time must be in initially inputting all the correct captcha answers? Imagine each platform has 5000 sample captchas correctly labelled...CB could then really tweak the settings/filters to get max solve rate. :-)
  • GG. I don't mean to be rude, and I don't want to pick a fight, but perhaps it would be better both for your new topic, and the topic under discussion in this thread, if the new one were in a new thread. Just a thought.
  • AlexRAlexR Cape Town
    OK. 
  • thought and asked about part 2 now. Understood why it is not a goood idea to share verified lists.
Sign In or Register to comment.