GSA Search Engine Ranker - Extremely Powerful Linkbuilding Software (Free 5 Day Trial)

[Anon752]

s4nt0s,

The new feature for the lists of successful and verified links is awesome, its exactly what I requested. I was wondering if there was a way to get it to go through our already verified links? I would like to get my lists all built quickly, and I have many thousands of verified links that I would love to run through that and get lists from.

 

[hunar]

I've got AMR too, but I don't count me to the advanced users. Perhaps you could tell us your best practises too? Where do you use urls inside the field? How many? What is the best length for title, summary, about and article? What's the minimum and whats the maximum length/word count to get the best out of it? There are so many factors.. (this is only article related, there are a lot other plattforms too). And that's again the reason why I'm voting for a advanced feedback/debug/filter function to analyse this stuff. If we put our knowledge together, we can get the most out of it, without beeing forced to debug this stuff manually for ourselfs and loose a lot of time.

I think this (strong feedback from advanced users) is also "the capital" of SER. There are a lot people giving nice input to improove it. And if it's getting improoved there are new buyers who jump on the SER train. So I think it's the best for sven also.

This is Taken Directly from AMR Support.

1. You chose the wrong category.
2. Your title is in ALL CAPS
3. Your title is all lower case
4. You Did Not Capitalize Every Word In Your Title (Like This)
5. You failed to preview your article before submitting and your Spun Title has errors and Your Title appears as "-error"
6. You title is 5 sentences long
7. You didn't check your article after or during the spin to see if it still makes sense.
8. You submitted you article with a summary
9. You didn't submit your article with a summary
10. Your article was less than 500 words long
11. You article was more than 500 words long
12. Your article was rejected by a niche that doesn't publish articles that you submit (i.e. you write about online investing and submit to a directory that only wants female medical problems articles)
13. The directory no longer exists
14. The directory no longer is accepting articles.
15. The directory has exceeded its bandwidth limitation (happens more and more with automated systems like AMR and others)
16. Your article has links in the body (most only accept in the Author's Resource Box with a maximum of 2)
17. Your resource box only has links and nothing about the author.
18. You have a URL in your Title
19. Your title matches another (duplicate title) - this may just be coincidence or you and the other million people that have tons of Private Label Rights (PLR) articles have submitted identical articles without spinning the titles. I use a duplicate title plug-in to automatically delete.
20. Your title makes absolutely no sense whatsoever (or your summary or your article makes no sense)

Now here are a few suggestions for better acceptance of articles submitted with AMR. This is what I do - Your mileage may vary.

1. Write about 20 different titles and then spin them to create over 100
2. Make sure that the first two sentences in your article are highly spun and use them for the summary also (or write a completely unique summary - also highly spun).
3. Use plenty of adjectives and adverbs -these are easiest to spin
4. Make sure you have at least 5 keywords comma separated
5. Make sure you have about 5 category words comma separated
6. Spin your URLs in your resource box with multiple keywords (use Google Keyword analysis and the URLer - should give you 50-100 keywords and phrases for your one Link)
7. PREVIEW your article and make sure that it is properly spun and makes sense
8. Submit to the AMS sites first without a summary
9. Submit to the remaining sites with a summary.
10. Wait a day or two and do a Live Link report and submit the links to pingfarm.com in bulk.
11. Don't complain that you signed up for "x" number of sites, submitted to "x" number of sites, and only "x" number were accepted. Take the 100, 200, 500 or whatever links that were approved, ping them, and be happy. Move on to the next article.
12. Check AMR about once per week and add new article directories. Directories come and go, so update weekly.
13. Blacklist the directories that you are certain never accept anything from you.
14. Use the built in thesaurus - it is a lifesaver and can provide a bunch of words to assist you in spinning articles. Adjectives and adverbs are the easiest to spin. Don't just pick every word - pick the ones that make sense.
15. When submitting, select Status OK, and Submitted NO. For Live Link Report, Status OK Submitted Yes
16. For Live Links, I do them individually, Author Home Page (fast), and Plain Text. Copy, Paste, and submit to pingfarm.com
17. Take the time to manually spin phrases and complete sentences - not just individual words.
18. Use your preferred keywords/phrases in the article if it makes sense. Don't go hog wild and stuff the article with your main keywords.
19. Hunt around online for some Public Domain material related to whatever it is that you are submitting. .gov sites have tons of material. Just search for Keyword site:.gov
20. Remember. If you are using PLR material, you and half the world may have the exact same articles. Make them as unique as you can for better results in the Article Directories and in the Search Engines.

1) Many article directories require an article that is 500 words or more, although in my experience, most are happy with anything > 400
2) Don't put HTML in your body. That includes UL, EM, B, STRONG, A, and the rest. NO HTML. That is - unless you want more failed submissions
3) Limit your resource links to a max of 2.
4) spin your content using an intelligent spinning solution - most likely your BRAIN - or else expect never to get published.
5) Avoid the following words in any portion of your article, or naturally, any spammy type words: porn, viagra, penis, gamble, roulette, blackjack, swears, flower, etc.
6) flower is ok - but at least you are reading. That being said, things like pharmaceutical names are probably going to result in fail submissions.

For A list of Categories that I always used See this Post

http://www.blackhatworld.com/blackh...software-free-5-day-trial-17.html#post4403101

Here is another Post with Best Practices for Categories and Articles from ExtraWinner http://www.blackhatworld.com/blackhat-seo/black-hat-seo-tools/320030-amr-tips.html

I mainly follow these when I use the article Feature in GSA, but again I hardly ever see any show up in the verified list.

 

[s4nt0s]

And the pie chart is still broken... (shows for every plattfom 1). This isn't important, but I think this is easy to fix.

I told him this and sent the pic and he said it isn't broken. Maybe we're misreading how the pie chart works. I'll talk to him and see if we can get clarification on this.

 

[s4nt0s]

s4nt0s,

The new feature for the lists of successful and verified links is awesome, its exactly what I requested. I was wondering if there was a way to get it to go through our already verified links? I would like to get my lists all built quickly, and I have many thousands of verified links that I would love to run through that and get lists from.

I'll send this request to him.

 

[Bytefaker]

@hunar: Huge thanks to you for these advises. Thx and rep given! Then you don't use any url's in the article field for SER? I tought this was a suggestion by someone else to but 1-2 urls inside it because SER translate it to the right format?

@s4nt0s: When I see a link count of a few thousand and then a pie with plattforms below it and after a few weeks each of them shows a count, then I think we massively understand something wrong if it isn't a bug. Thanks for asking for a clarification

EDIT: @hunar again: How many chars/words are you using in the about box?

 

[hunar]

@hunar: Huge thanks to you for these advises. Thx and rep given! Then you don't use any url's in the article field for SER? I tought this was a suggestion by someone else to but 1-2 urls inside it because SER translate it to the right format?

@s4nt0s: When I see a link count of a few thousand and then a pie with plattforms below it and after a few weeks each of them shows a count, then I think we massively understand something wrong if it isn't a bug. Thanks for asking for a clarification

EDIT: @hunar again: How many chars/words are you using in the about box?

Thanks Byte.

No, I don't use any links in the article field Mainly because a lot of article directories don't allow html in the article. When I used AMR i would put URL's in the article field but that was cause I was mainly using it to post to other people's wordpress sites not so much article directories themselves.

I do however put a extra link in the resource box because GSA inserts 1 Link in there for your automatically than I put another one in there going to a random web 2.0.

In the resource box I try to keep it clean and simple. Not very long at all. Maybe 30 - 40 Words. There is program out there Called Kontent Machine. Works great and it actually scrapes the Resource box of other articles and mashes them all up and spins them together to where it is always 100% unique. I used to do this as well when I'd create articles. I'd take content from the 1st 5-10 pages Spin them according to paragraphs and the article always came back as 100% unique and readable. But I used to do this manually and would always still check it before just to make sure it looked good.

 

[s4nt0s]

Ok here are some responses from Sven (good news and bad news for some of you)

1) To the guy that wanted a "quick mode" for the GSA indexer; Sven said this is a great idea and it will be implemented.

2) I know a lot of people wanted logs for error grouping but it's not looking good. This is what he said, "That's not really possible. For that I would need to know why a submission fails. I just identify a failed submission on some strings but for the program it is just a failed one. Copy that whole log into some editor and search for things might be the easiest solution I can think of. Maybe I will come up with something useful."

3) To the user who requested to "deselect verified URL's", here is Sven's response, "Not really practical. If people don't care about some verified links, why not simply delete them from the main project? This is getting way to complicated if I add another option here and there."

Soon to be in an update: "I plan to add an option for projects to automatically use the "site list files".

Hope that clears up some stuff.

 

[Bytefaker]

Thanks Byte.

No, I don't use any links in the article field Mainly because a lot of article directories don't allow html in the article. When I used AMR i would put URL's in the article field but that was cause I was mainly using it to post to other people's wordpress sites not so much article directories themselves.

I do however put a extra link in the resource box because GSA inserts 1 Link in there for your automatically than I put another one in there going to a random web 2.0.

In the resource box I try to keep it clean and simple. Not very long at all. Maybe 30 - 40 Words. There is program out there Called Kontent Machine. Works great and it actually scrapes the Resource box of other articles and mashes them all up and spins them together to where it is always 100% unique. I used to do this as well when I'd create articles. I'd take content from the 1st 5-10 pages Spin them according to paragraphs and the article always came back as 100% unique and readable. But I used to do this manually and would always still check it before just to make sure it looked good.

Thanks again for your best practises. Very kind of you!

Random web 2.0: Means for you a spintaxed list of url's from one of your web 2.0 properties you built outside of SER, or is there a placeholder you use to do this automatically? (BTW: I hope to get SUCH information from sven that it places automatically links to some fields, I think it's very unclear where this happen and where not).

Kontent Machine: It's usefull, I've tried the demo, but didn't like it enough to pay the expensive subscription. I'm doing this manually too, to get a better result.

 

[hunar]

Thanks again for your best practises. Very kind of you!

Random web 2.0: Means for you a spintaxed list of url's from one of your web 2.0 properties you built outside of SER, or is there a placeholder you use to do this automatically? (BTW: I hope to get SUCH information from sven that it places automatically links to some fields, I think it's very unclear where this happen and where not).

Kontent Machine: It's usefull, I've tried the demo, but didn't like it enough to pay the expensive subscription. I'm doing this manually too, to get a better result.

Yeah, Web 2.0's that I had my VA's Create outside of GSA. I have to use the Spintaxed list of Url's/Anchor Text as I'm not to familiar with the Placeholders quite yet.

 

[Bytefaker]

2) I know a lot of people wanted logs for error grouping but it's not looking good. This is what he said, "That's not really possible. For that I would need to know why a submission fails. I just identify a failed submission on some strings but for the program it is just a failed one. Copy that whole log into some editor and search for things might be the easiest solution I can think of. Maybe I will come up with something useful."

3) To the user who requested to "deselect verified URL's", here is Sven's response, "Not really practical. If people don't care about some verified links, why not simply delete them from the main project? This is getting way to complicated if I add another option here and there."

2) Is a little bit disappointing. What I have in mind is quiet simple. Just auto-parse the log, sort all error by plattform, then by error-count and show every error message only once, but as detailed as possible. This isn't hard to implement, but would give us a lot more feedback. I hope he changes his mind about this because related to other stuff he implemented, this would be quiet easy I think and would give a lot value.

3) Didn't he meant exactly the opposite of this? To prevent posting to the same urls for the tiers as it has posted allready? Then it would be possible to do this over the project specific blacklist (just add the verified list there).

 

[Bytefaker]

Yeah, Web 2.0's that I had my VA's Create outside of GSA. I have to use the Spintaxed list of Url's/Anchor Text as I'm not to familiar with the Placeholders quite yet.

Thought perhaps I've missed a "hidden" auto-linkwheeling function But a suggestion would be perhaps to add something like this: For example recheck verfied urls every day, and a backlink stays for at least one week, it could be auto-added as second link. If it's dropped it stops using it for auto-linkwheeling. With this attemp I think it's a lot of randomness and it's possible to have an auto-growing linkwheel.

 

[Anon752]

Ok here are some responses from Sven (good news and bad news for some of you)

1) To the guy that wanted a "quick mode" for the GSA indexer; Sven said this is a great idea and it will be implemented.

2) I know a lot of people wanted logs for error grouping but it's not looking good. This is what he said, "That's not really possible. For that I would need to know why a submission fails. I just identify a failed submission on some strings but for the program it is just a failed one. Copy that whole log into some editor and search for things might be the easiest solution I can think of. Maybe I will come up with something useful."

3) To the user who requested to "deselect verified URL's", here is Sven's response, "Not really practical. If people don't care about some verified links, why not simply delete them from the main project? This is getting way to complicated if I add another option here and there."

Soon to be in an update: "I plan to add an option for projects to automatically use the "site list files".

Hope that clears up some stuff.

If you remember back to my big suggestion about these "site list files", one thing I really wanted the code to let me do was to get a big list of scraped urls (scrapebox or anything else,) and then have it sort them out into idenfitied ones by platform. So it would be these same style files, but it wouldnt just be the submitted or verified ones from SER. It would allow me to scan a list and output the files.

Since the files that are currently being made come after submission and verification, I wouldnt want anything I scanned to go into those files. It would sort of corrupt them with ones we dont know about yet. I have it set to just do verified and I want it to only do verified ones. So this would need to put them out into another set of files.

He has all the code now at this point. Match the engine, and splitting the files off into individual files. As long as its done modularly, this should be relatively easy to implement and would be a huge boost to how I use the software.

 

[MickMcG]

3) To the user who requested to "deselect verified URL's", here is Sven's response, "Not really practical. If people don't care about some verified links, why not simply delete them from the main project? This is getting way to complicated if I add another option here and there.

thanks for the update and sending the request s4nt0s

actually, the reason i didnt want to delete verified links after re-verifying is that in most cases the reason they dont re-verify is due to the anchor/link moving from the page they were originally posted to/verified on, failed proxy download or some other connection issue, if we simply deleted all these, there would be no way to build a list of good sites to post to in the future, however now with the new 'advanced' feature sven has included to build lists, this may be a good way to overcome the problem.

id still like the ability to deselect certain engine types from having lower tiers (indexer/referers etc) built to them and things like nofollow links and keep things more neat inside less projects, just have to keep doing it manually...

thanks again for trying!

 

[s4nt0s]

If you remember back to my big suggestion about these "site list files", one thing I really wanted the code to let me do was to get a big list of scraped urls (scrapebox or anything else,) and then have it sort them out into idenfitied ones by platform. So it would be these same style files, but it wouldnt just be the submitted or verified ones from SER. It would allow me to scan a list and output the files.

Since the files that are currently being made come after submission and verification, I wouldnt want anything I scanned to go into those files. It would sort of corrupt them with ones we dont know about yet. I have it set to just do verified and I want it to only do verified ones. So this would need to put them out into another set of files.

He has all the code now at this point. Match the engine, and splitting the files off into individual files. As long as its done modularly, this should be relatively easy to implement and would be a huge boost to how I use the software.

Ah yes, this one kind of slipped my mind, but you're right and now that most of the code is there I think this wouldn't be too hard to add. I've already sent 2-3 emails to Sven today with users requests so I'm going to wait until later tonight to hit him with this one lol.

thanks for the update and sending the request s4nt0s

actually, the reason i didnt want to delete verified links after re-verifying is that in most cases the reason they dont re-verify is due to the anchor/link moving from the page they were originally posted to/verified on, failed proxy download or some other connection issue, if we simply deleted all these, there would be no way to build a list of good sites to post to in the future, however now with the new 'advanced' feature sven has included to build lists, this may be a good way to overcome the problem.

id still like the ability to deselect certain engine types from having lower tiers (indexer/referers etc) built to them and things like nofollow links and keep things more neat inside less projects, just have to keep doing it manually...

thanks again for trying!

Ya I understand. I tried .. but some things might actually over complicate the software for new users. He might be able to add something in the future for this. I personally don't use the indexer/referrer/pingbacks in my projects and I know a lot of other people don't as well because you don't get much value from those links. It might be best to just not work with those platforms.

 

[hunar]

Uhh

Where is Lee?

3.52 - new: option to add already verified URLs to site lists
- fix: legend display bug on diagram stats
- new: errors in log if site lists couldn't get saved due to access rights
- fix: spell bugs

 

[hunar]

Can anyone else get this verified links to save to the folder? I've tried it at least 20 diff ways, and can't do anything with it at all. doesn't save verified links or anything.


Ahh nvm, I guess it saves it to several files inside the appdata roaming folder. Each platform has it's own verified links list.

 

[Anon752]

Can anyone else get this verified links to save to the folder? I've tried it at least 20 diff ways, and can't do anything with it at all. doesn't save verified links or anything.


Ahh nvm, I guess it saves it to several files inside the appdata roaming folder. Each platform has it's own verified links list.

Yep, its working great for me.

 

[Bytefaker]

- fix: legend display bug on diagram stats

@hunar: Thanks for letting us know

@s4ntos: The legend is now displayed correctly the most used plattforms (there is not enough space for all). There is only one tiny thing I don't like (sven will hate me ): It doesn't make sense to have a piece per plattform, but for every guestbook type one too. To get really something out of the pie I think it would make sense if to combine per plattform; like the selection of the plattform where project details are displayed.

This will make of course sense, if the data is exported, then it's useful to have such details. But to get anything out of this view, footprints should be definitely grouped per "general platform".

 

[s4nt0s]

Can someone test out the sitelist feature and let me know if you're able to get the files to save in a folder you choose? No matter which folder I pick, it automatically saves the site list to the appdata folder.

I've tried on two machines and it happens the same on both.

If anyone else is having this issue, please let me know so I can let Sven know about the bug.

 

[radikal]

For when new engines are added it would be great to have a "Automatically set newly added engines as active/inactive" setting. Otherwise, it takes forever to go through each project individually to activate them.

An additional suggestion I put in some time ago, but not sure if it is being considered or not, is to add another column to the main project window for "priority" and be able to set the project priority (high, normal, low, lowest) for all projects from one central place (in the same way we click in the column to make projects active/inactive). If this were implemented we'd be able to see the priority settings for all projects at a glance and adjust accordingly. It would also mean it could be removed from an already cluttered project data window to make room for something else. Anyone else need this?