Something I think will make SER better

Dunce

@Sven and everyone

I was thinking about choosing indexing services of higher success rate, something just came into my mind and I asked myself: is there a easier way to do this. So, I know SER keep logs for ping/indexing as for every other things happened within the software, what if make SER count the logs and shows us the results directly? such as a built-in interface/dialog shows how many submission/success/fail quests for each indexing service, that would save everyone's time in analyzing log file.

a pic explains what I mean (add the red part to explain this feature)

 

Same thing could be applied to platforms for submitting, search engines for scraping via different footprints, etc.

or it could be like this

If these features can be added, a reset statistic button should be added as well, in case sometimes let's say, bad connection/proxies impact the result and with this button we can clear the inaccurate stats then do it again.

Since SER has basically everything to make a good autopilot link building software, next step for making it better is by analyzing which  tickbox/setting gives better result, so I think directly show the result statistics  will definitely bring this killer tool into next stage, IMO

davbel

Do you know you can do this by importing your stats into excel and doing a vlookup?

Dunce

@davbel yes I do. it will save everybody's time if the software can do this directly, as I said, it's about more convenient, faster, that's the point of tools like this. Submit one link just takes a few clicks, if we need to do it repeatedly a lot, we need to automatize it, same here. SER has come to the stage that we need do the result analyze over and over again(everyone of us), so, less clicks may save everyone's time. That's just my thought. 

Also aware of these changes may take Sven some time and it's not so easy to re-code it as just "add some red chars in a screenshot"

nicerice

The more tricks in the guts of gsa the less effective it will become at posting as it spends more time doing tricks rather than posting imo.

Hunar

+1  I would love to see a feature like this.  Makes a lot more sense than quite a few of the other fluff things people have asked for. 

Doesn't seem like a lot of time if you guys are running maybe 1-2 copies of SER,  but when you add in 9-12 different ones.  It adds up. 

Another thing maybe that could be added is if a engine is less than a certain percentage than it will not use that engine.

LeeG

Don't speak for everybody Dunce

I personally don't use the ping feature. Every ping is time wasted that could be better spent using ser to do whats its designed for and that building links imo

More bloat is the final outcome

Hunar

I don't use the ping either.  But  I think that other feature he suggested could save everyone time. 

Startrip

+1hunar.

davbel

I've got to agree with @LeeG

bloat = bad

Dunce

@nicerice it could make SER really bloat, slow, OR faster, efficient, if you know what I am saying. All depend on how you define bloat. if posting is the goal, verify links could be bloat, enable log is bloat, keep it rolling/write it into file is bloat, analyzing it doesn't make sense at all. by "run in debug mode" my 132GB hardrive space could be crammed with html files within hours, that's fxxking bloat if you say so, so as many other things. think this feature as another log, or another debug mode, it's good for long-term run. well, at least for me:D

apparently I forgot to mention these kind of stuff should have a on/off switch, like the others.

the idea was for making SER faster in getting real results. by real I mean spend more time & resource in something really works, more verified links & they got indexed for example. things like account creating, link submitting are procedures not results.

2 directions I think could help getting more results: 1. ruling out procedures doesn't lead to results; 2. fix procedures doesn't lead to results.

both way, sometimes we may need check logs, or pull some data and go through them. logs/data are like raw statistics, they are good(seriously I love them), but it take times to get to a conclusion, so, they can be better. what if SER process these data and tells the results directly? what if:

1. for scraping, SER told you how many [identifiable] urls have been got from each footprint, will be easy to tell which ones are high efficiency and which ones are waste of time. Is "powered by drupal" getting more results than inurl:"/node/1"? direct answer.

2. for link submission, it shows how many submissions are marked as successful, how many are marked as failed. among these failed ones, how many of them are caused by register step/login/form filling/wrong captchas. then you can decide spend 1 hour trying extract the right login info to get 10 more sites submitted successfully, or half an hour try to chage one variable to get 500 more. maybe 30mins first, to get a clue where to start?:)

3. for verifacation...

4. xxx...

all above is just for example, don't consider that seriously.

and again, i know: these can be done at present, with more clicks and more time; it's way much more complicating to code than rave.

@Hunar thanks for the support. glad you got that. but i 'd rather have SER show me the results than make that kind of decision for me, when connection speed is unstable(barely happened though), all platforms could get un-ticked.

@LeeG well, I should speak for myself only. the pinging analyse is a typical example. what i am trying to say is if SER use/analyse logs in some more fields or go deeper into it, I can be more "lazy". less clicks + faster results = why i use automation software. AND I LOVE IT

nicerice

ok ... i will +1 anything with an off switch
that way you can bloat all you like by choice or not

Dunce

@Sven glad you see this topic, and made the sitelist compare function alive in 6.07 ;;) thanks

spunko2010

To those people who don't use Pings at all - what is the reasoning here?

Dunce

@spunko2010 they use some other indendent indexing tools for that.