Skip to content

0.21 LMP With SEREngine

chrispdfchrispdf USA
in Need Help
I am using 50 private proxies from buyproxies.  All tested.  All working.

Emails from seospartans.  All tested.  All working.  No blacklists.

Using Death by Captcha which seems to be solving the captchas perfectly well.  Have also used gsa captcha service, but mainly dbc.

Here are my settings:


image
image
image
I have changed the amount of retries to various numbers and even none.
image
image

Comments

  • chrispdfchrispdf USA
    I should note that my lpm never goes about like 2, regardless of where I am submitting to, what lists I am using, what I have scraped etc.
  • mashafeeqmashafeeq iraq
    use :

    100 threads
    use none block socks
    use proxies for all process and never let ur ip do anything except email checking
    make sure it send 10 captchas simultaneously to gsa cb or dbc


  • chrispdfchrispdf USA
    I have made those changes.

    By "make sure it send 10 captchas simultaneously to gsa cb or dbc" you mean to chose "ask all services to fill captchas", correct? 

    No change as of yet.  Still not making any links.

    image


  • chrispdfchrispdf USA
    I think it is possible that the emails are not sending for verification.  I checked my accounts and there is very little in the way of disk usage.
  • chrispdfchrispdf USA
    But I also think that this could be because nothing is actually submitting as well.
  • chrispdfchrispdf USA
    I also suspect serengines may just be dead and no longer updated.  Looking at the main thread seems to indicate that.  
  • chrispdfchrispdf USA
    I tried the exact same settings on a forum/guestpost/wiki thread and I am up to 0.43 lpm.  Is it serengines or just gsa?  
  • mashafeeqmashafeeq iraq
    no only ser engine, because web 2.0 changes their algorithm fastly so it take one or two days for serengine to update them

    will ofcourse not gsa because i have (LpM +350) and (VpM +120)
  • chrispdfchrispdf USA
    Everyone on the serengine forum seemed to indicate that the product was dead: 


    I will gladly take half of 350.  What can I do to get to 175lpm?  What are we doing differently?
  • chrispdfchrispdf USA
    No form at all means that gsa couldn't figure out how to post on the site correct?

    Because I am getting that in droves with ser engines 
  • chrispdfchrispdf USA
    So with forums, guestbook, etc I am getting around 10lpm but still nothing with the ser engines.
  • vikingviking
    @chrispdf slightly off topic, but I changed over to FCS and don't have any issues. Not sure what you are paying serengines, FCS might be a few dollars more. i tried serengines a year or so ago and could never get it grooved right. i would reconsider if i heard of better success rates. good luck.

    re: your non serengine issue, it is likely your list. not sure why people value lpm or vpm stats though as they are worthless and a waste of time to pursue. i would rather have 10 high quality backlinks to my site a day than any of the garbage that is included in the high lpm results.
  • chrispdfchrispdf USA
    I am actually using fcs for tier 1, was trying to use ser engines for tier 2.  It doesn't seem like their is a great way to sort of automate tier 2 2.0s.

    I appreciate your comment regarding the non-ser issue, and I think you are correct.  I uploaded a list I had scraped earlier and it made a nice difference.  

    Thank you for the thoughtful answer :)
  • vikingviking
    @chrispdf Glad to have helped. FYI - I am sure you know this, but it is really easy to do a tier 2 in FCS. I get the need for diversity of platforms, but stretching out the relevance  at higher tiers would work well in FCS too.

    Highly recommend SB v2.0 for scraping.

    Good luck.
  • chrispdfchrispdf USA
    Yup, I have tried using fcs a little for tier 2 as well.  

    I actually got my lpm up much higher from using scrapebox.  I imported and sorted links which, for some reason, never worked for me in the past, but it finally did yesterday and it shot my lpm way up.
Sign In or Register to comment.