To my understanding the sales page is for SEREngines V1 and SEREngines V2 is the one in beta and both services are offered with a subsciption to SEREngines V1?
Yes the sales page is for SEREngines V1 , but when you register and sign up you get SEREngines V2 (Beta )
When signing up there are no option V1 or V2, you are simply send a email with your API and a separate email with member area login- Member area is basically unchanged from 2 - 3 years ago.
This is no big deal for me as know about the changes, but it leaves room for confusion for new people that sign up and potential legal claims, because they are not told it is in beta and the engines they receive is not same as on the sales page.
Also the GSA SER Button for the Homepage is going to V1, even with V2 installed
I was told there will eventually be a new website for V2 --- might be a good idea to start redirecting people to it instead o shoring the old page.
As i said -- it is no big deal, but should be updated in good time
@royalmice - Basically what @shaun said, but I agree that things can be a bit confusing and James does have a new website that they'll be putting up soon. I let him know your concerns and I agree, hopefully he can make it go live here soon so things aren't so confusing for the new users.
@Anth20 - Yes you can use macros but you'll want to make sure your the name aren't too long and or registrations might fail.
Regarding errrors, James said, "this happens if the element can't be found on the page.. it happens when the page isn't loaded correctly (proxy, internet issue) or the web page has changed. My suggestion is to make sure you are using scheduled posting so things retry."
Is it possible to create a set of accounts and post content as needed for different link sets? Or even to upload existing accounts and post content to them?
@splendour - you would probably want to make separate projects for different niches. It would be kinda hard to manage posting different link sets on one Web 2.0 due to the way SER works.
@AttaRamzan - 11 unique Web 2.0s. With scheduled posting you can create multiple accounts, posts, etc
@Metster - I'm not sure where the thread to SERengines v1. The idea was I would help with threads for v2 and he would just worry about the coding. We have a trello open where all these issues are reported and he is responsive there. Also, you can submit support tickets directly through the site and he should respond there.
I sent the info to James with a link to your thread.
@everyone - If you're having a lot of problems, you can feel free to cancel. When things are working 100%, I'll make videos and also report here that its been fixed if you want to try again.
@truthealer07 - I had the about me issue on onesmablog and amped, but not on BCZ and Edublogs. From what James had told me before, it was a proxy issue, but maybe something on those 2 engines have changed. I'll let him know.
@Anth20 - There is no temp fix for it as of right now, sorry. You can try deleting and reinstalling the plugin, but not sure that would really help.
@Metster - I sent james your questions and I'll respond back when he answers.
@Anth20 - That bug isn't happening to most people from what I've seen. For example on my lastest SER campaign I've got 142 verified links from the web 2.0's in one campaign. If its unusable for you, I would just cancel for now until that problem is fixed, sorry.
@Metster - Ya I completely understand your frustration and everyone elses. Personally, I haven't made a $1 from this and didn't want to start promoting it anywhere until its 100% working and everything is running smooth.
I wanted this to be successful so badly, but as you know the bugs have set back James and his team quite a bit. They're constantly testing new updates on one of my servers and have loggers running and a bunch of other stuff so they're definitely trying to nail it all down, its just taking a lot more time than I could have ever imagined.
If you have advice for James or want to speak with him directly, I'd advise opening a ticket up on the website. (that goes for any SERengines customers)
James said, "I am not doing anything different with Pen.io than any other script.
[login] type=login must be filled=1 hint=The login for websites that need an account. Use numbers and letters only. min length=12 upcase=0
[password] type=password must be filled=1 hint=A password used for websites that need an account. Use numbers and letters only. min length=8 static=1
In REGISTER* STEP
page_name=%login% password=%password%
All login and passwords are then generated randomly by SER. Sven only confirms that it isn't saving within account data on your thread, no where does he say it isn't using a random password for each web2.0 registration. So there is no "HUGE FOOTPRINT".
Logins and passwords in all scripts are handled randomly within SER itself.
I have sent the pen.io script to Sven to see why it isn't saving to account data."
Also, that script isn't in SERengines 2, that's v1.
@Anth20 - When your projects go blue, can you go into SER and click the help button > create bug report and put SERengines in the description. This way James can follow up with Sven to see what is happening there.
Also, can you let me know your CPU/Memory and amount of threads you're running? James thinks you might be running out of ram when this error occurs so you might have to turn things down.
@metster Thanks for being on top of the issues for us users! I am adding my two cents here. I set up a fresh project yesterday. I was able to get a decent amount of posts out, around 300. I unticked edublogs as I get 100% failure rate on that, even doing the captcha manually. But I did get Webgarden, Wordpress, FC2, Iamsport posts successfully. I have pretty much stopped using the software though in part thanks to your comments about footprints, and also because posting on only four platforms is also a huge footprint. I think lack of diversity is the biggest issue going forward. If the other available platforms aren't added, then this is pretty much useless, unless you want to paint a huge bullseye on your site. And 100% agree with you that passwords need to be randomized.
@Metster - James said he looked into it and it was using a new user/password every time. However, he just pushed an update to pen.io to fix the account saving problem.
I'm not sure how you're only getting 1 successful account. Are you using private proxies or still using public proxies like you were in the past?
@viking - The passwords and usernames are randomized. You can test this by simply right clicking on your project > export > account data. You'll see all the usernames/passwords are unique. This is an export of the account data from one of my latest campaigns (URLS blocked out) http://i.imgur.com/eUGHO8N.png
My campaign last night got links from
edublogs
fc2
wikidot
iamspot
unblog
bcz
wordpress
rediff
webgarden
onesmablog
I'm not sure how you guys are only getting a few successful engines - I'm still using private proxies and mail.ru accounts along with 2captcha. Nothing has changed on my end.
I agree that more web 2.0's need to be added for more diversity which would have already happened if the big bugs didn't occur. They've been working on that 100% instead of adding new engines, but I messaged James to let him know he should also try to add new engines in the meantime.
Just my thoughts for what it's worth - intended to be constructive ...
The problem for serengines is that for months and months on end they had their current subscribers on the hook with the promise that V2 was coming soon when the V1 product was past the point of no return. Money aside, they burnt through a lot of trust from users during that phase.
Now they release a BETA version of V2 and 3 months down the line it's buggy as hell with a low number of engines and unfortunately for them because of past actions it's not like they've got a lot of credit in the bank. This time around users are going to get more pissed off a lot faster than before. I mean realisitically serengines hasn't worked as intended for what like 18 months if not more?
Seems to me that if they want to be in it for the long haul that James would be better jumping on here and talking to people directly instead of using Santos as a mouthpeice. And, if he's finding the project too hot to handle on his own then it's not like there hasn't been offers of help. We all have a vested interest in seeing this work but the clock is well and truly ticking and from an outsiders point of view it seems more likely to get abandoned than be functional any time soon.
@Johan - This is why I've mentioned to go ahead and cancel instead of wait if you don't like the results you're getting. I don't want people to think they're being strung along so that's why I've mentioned it multiple times. I don't want a repeat of SERengines v1 either and I wouldn't even be a part of this if I though that was going to happen. We've definitely had a rough start. I was going to handle the customer side of things and he was going to work on programming.
I know the progress has been slow, but they are working on it and he had his developers working on it during Christmas and New Years. They were rewriting parts of the DLL in Delphi 2007 using the same UTF-8 libraries that Sven uses in SER to make sure there is no conflict. People here have offered help, but this stuff is not something that customers can really help with.
Pretty much all of my responses here are coming straight from James. (except this one) When its something technical then its coming from James with our Trello discussion. He isn't going to tell you anything different then what I've already said here, but I'll definitely relay your message to him.
I'd actually prefer people cancel until its working 100% or I can even close this thread and shut it down until its working 100% if that's what people want.
@s4nt0s - Thanks. It's a well thought out response and is appreciated.
The one final thing I would say is that beta testing is fine but IMO it's better that you restrict it to a handful of users and you don't charge them, the payment they make is in providing input and improving the product. Once you open it up to everyone and charge them the same price as they were paying previously then it's less of a beta release and more of a general release.
I'll leave it at that, I don't want to hijack the thread. Thanks again for your response.
@Johan - Yes I agree 100%. One thing to mention is there were still people subscribed to SERengines v1 and originally this v2 beta was for them since they were already still subscribed. For people that wanted to join the beta, they could sign up for that and join in. But I agree that beta should really be free and with a select number of members.
There are a few long term SEREngines v1 users that do have a free SERengines v2 license right now. @Metster is one of them.
Anyways, I'll run the idea by James to close this thread for now. When its up and running 100%, open it back up and issue out some free beta keys and let those people give feedback on performance, once everyone is confident its running well, open it back up for new subscribers.
@s4nt0s thanks for all of the responses. Greatly appreciated. To be constructive, I think rather than just saying the thread is 'closed' and leaving us hanging, maybe you can have a chat with James and determine a hard date for adding more platforms. That is what we are looking for...an actual date. Then we, the subscribers, can determine if we want to wait or not. If the thread is closed and no target date is given, then obviously I will move on to another service as the clock is ticking. Saying 'that is fine' is not the response I would be looking for.
On my side, a few platforms are actually working fine, but as I already mentioned, using the service right now is very risky as it creates a major footprint.
I hope you can give some good news asap with an update. I think this could be a great service if James came through with several more platforms.
Sorry you are stuck in the middle here, but we are paying customers and simply want/expect some detailed answers. We have no other resource to go to. Thank you.
Comments
@AttaRamzan - 11 unique Web 2.0s. With scheduled posting you can create multiple accounts, posts, etc
02:31:05: [-] 39/61 registration failed ([name=\"about_me\"] couldn't be found) - http://ampedpages.com/my-profile
02:31:36: [-] 42/61 registration failed (#jm-complete-to-dash-holder couldn't be found) - http://edublogs.org/#join-network
04:06:58: [-] 26/30 registration failed ([name=\"about_me\"] couldn't be found) - http://onesmablog.com/my-profile
04:06:13: [-] 20/43 registration failed ([href*=\"/register/\"] couldn't be found) - http://bcz.com/hmnv/?r=http://bcz.com/
The other engines are running ok, it's just the above ones that are running into issues.
[login]
type=login
must be filled=1
hint=The login for websites that need an account. Use numbers and letters only.
min length=12
upcase=0
[password]
type=password
must be filled=1
hint=A password used for websites that need an account. Use numbers and letters only.
min length=8
static=1
In REGISTER* STEP
page_name=%login%
password=%password%
All login and passwords are then generated randomly by SER. Sven only confirms that it isn't saving within account data on your thread, no where does he say it isn't using a random password for each web2.0 registration. So there is no "HUGE FOOTPRINT".
Logins and passwords in all scripts are handled randomly within SER itself.
I have sent the pen.io script to Sven to see why it isn't saving to account data."
Also, that script isn't in SERengines 2, that's v1.
@Anth20 - When your projects go blue, can you go into SER and click the help button > create bug report and put SERengines in the description. This way James can follow up with Sven to see what is happening there.
The problem for serengines is that for months and months on end they had their current subscribers on the hook with the promise that V2 was coming soon when the V1 product was past the point of no return. Money aside, they burnt through a lot of trust from users during that phase.
Now they release a BETA version of V2 and 3 months down the line it's buggy as hell with a low number of engines and unfortunately for them because of past actions it's not like they've got a lot of credit in the bank. This time around users are going to get more pissed off a lot faster than before. I mean realisitically serengines hasn't worked as intended for what like 18 months if not more?
Seems to me that if they want to be in it for the long haul that James would be better jumping on here and talking to people directly instead of using Santos as a mouthpeice. And, if he's finding the project too hot to handle on his own then it's not like there hasn't been offers of help. We all have a vested interest in seeing this work but the clock is well and truly ticking and from an outsiders point of view it seems more likely to get abandoned than be functional any time soon.
The one final thing I would say is that beta testing is fine but IMO it's better that you restrict it to a handful of users and you don't charge them, the payment they make is in providing input and improving the product. Once you open it up to everyone and charge them the same price as they were paying previously then it's less of a beta release and more of a general release.
I'll leave it at that, I don't want to hijack the thread. Thanks again for your response.