Permanently Closed Marketplace Sales Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
From what I can tell, @kismet doesn't just block based on IP, they also block based on either url or domain of the backlinks. So we have more than just IP to worry about.

I still advise running with proxies of some sort....always....that's just common sense.

And yes, PB proxies will get blocked by @kismet if they're taxed, but like I say, I don't think it's just IP's that they are banning.

I'm still trying to ascertain to a certainty @ what level they ban sites - url specific (e.g. I drop backlink for www dot mycrapautoblog dot com/longdeeplink, do they bad that url or they do ban everything for www dot mycrapautoblog dot com?).

I know they probably have a lot of ways to ban, but I changed every variable to total whitehat mode, except the proxies.

That's why I'm wondering what proxy solution has the best akismet avoidance lately. I know how to make good comments that will stick on my niche after I buy the right proxy service.

It'd be nice to have a feature that will test if Akismet is blocking your current comment/proxy combo (maybe when you do a Test Comments).

Akismet does have an API (haven't at all looked at it):
http://akismet.com/development/api/
http://akismet.com/development/
 
Oh man we definitely need to incorporate this into the comment checker while spinning through proxies. I might have to do this myself in PHP with a big array of proxies to see if I can find one that's not humiliated.

http://akismet.com/development/api/#comment-check

That way, we can also see how badly you're banned, Greg
 
I read your entire post. I responded. And Yukinari posted a followup to my comment that was very instructive and accurate.

When you turned off proxies to "test", you burnt your real IP address into the collective memories of certain companies that rhyme with Boogle. And @kismet. And Mahoo. And God knows who else.

This thread and the many of the members posting to it are here to help, but if you would take the time to read through previous posts about proxies, you would know this - if you run without protection, scraping the SE's or commenting on scores of blogs with your real IP address, you're gonna get blocked. Hard. Once you are blocked, you are screwed.

There's nothing you can do about it, and it's not a fault or problem with the tool you are using. The providers who have taken their ban hammer to your IP will, eventually, hopefully, with any luck remove the block on your IP. But there is jack and shit you can do now, and jack just left town.

Reading is fundamental.

I appreciate you taking time to reply gregstereo, and indeed I have seen you posting a lot of information all over BHW. However, you seem to have mis-understood what I said. Maybe I have poor communication skills - so let me address the issues as follows:

1) I can post to the same sites from the same IP addresses (with or without proxies) when using "Ultimate Wordpress Comment Spammer".
2) I just ran Scrapebox from a friends house. It did not work there either.
3) My IP address is not banned (it works fine with all other programs), I ran the test on a very small number of sites. I have been into IM for a long while, and understand very well how to protect my assets.
4) "Switching Off" proxies is a time honoured method of testing if you have bad proxies or a problem with a program. Many 'Blackhat' programs have this feature precisely for this purpose. Limit the test to a very small batch and everything will be fine.
5) I do not work without proxies...never have - never will. I use private proxies from PacketFlip.
6) All of the above suggests that for some reason I am having problems with Scrapebox. This issue maybe a problem with my PC, or it maybe a problem I am having with Scrapebox itself.


I'm really hoping someone here can help, as Scrapebox is a fantastic piece of software. I will quickly re-iterate the problem I am having:

Trouble I am having with Scrapebox:
1) I successfully scrape a bunch of URLs for Wordpress.

2) I create custom highly spun comments.

3) Using private proxies from PacketFlip, I run the Comment Posting - making sure I choose the Wordpress option.

4) Commenting fails on nearly all posts, I get a success rate of around 1 in 150.

5) If I use alternative commenting software I get a very high success rate with posting to the same URLs (whilst using the same highly spun comments, backlinks, names, e-mail address and proxies).

Does anyone have any suggestions as to what the problem could be?
 
Last edited:
Trouble I am having with Scrapebox:
1) I successfully scrape a bunch of URLs for Wordpress.

3) Using private proxies from PacketFlip, I run the Comment Posting - making sure I choose the Wordpress option.

4) Commenting fails on nearly all posts, I get a success rate of around 1 in 150.

The problem is number #3 PacketFlip has blocked submitting POST request to wp-comment-post.php server side.

Setup a proxy in Internet Explorer and comment to a Wordpress blog in your browser, tell me what happens?

Why is it happening when you remove proxies? They maybe getting cached on your system, remove the proxies and shut SB down, start it up load the blogs and then do your comments.

What happens?
 
and the proxies i posted up for a test have been up in the
forum 36hrs of course there banned..everyone on the
forum took them and burned them..why do u think i
only posted 20 as a sample..

go into the main proxie section that same test list was
posted there as well.. hence the reason on my forum
there locked away for payed members because noobies
will burn them out..and then when other people try them
its - oh - they dont work - a little common sence please

they were put up for 1 reason feed back
Scrape box working with socks - same list

Yesterday, 09:59 AM 23rdf
sciborg
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 73
wow..These work great..I just tested them and it worked very very well
I think I need to take a look at your forum and possibly become a member..
Thanks

also post anoter sample of these on the 17th 5 days later a few still worked
02-17-2010, 04:15 PM
a member even replied on the 22nd
02-22-2010, 10:07 AM
deemos
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 108
I tried the few that worked, where did you get these ?
 
Last edited:
The problem is number #3 PacketFlip has blocked submitting POST request to wp-comment-post.php server side.

Setup a proxy in Internet Explorer and comment to a Wordpress blog in your browser, tell me what happens?

Why is it happening when you remove proxies? They maybe getting cached on your system, remove the proxies and shut SB down, start it up load the blogs and then do your comments.


What happens?

Thanks for the reply Sweetfunny.

1) Without proxies I can post manually in IE.

2) In Scrapebox, I removed proxies and closed the program. I then reloaded. I posted comments without proxies. I get the following error tagged to the end of each URL: "Failed - Protected?"
 
@Kendra

If it really works with Ultimate Wordpress Spammer the only difference to SB I can see would maybe be the UserAgent. UWS has the ability to fake the Useragent at each try.
I dont know what SB is doing but I think its possible that the Useragent SB is using is banned somehow. I dont know why else UWS should work.
 
@Kendra

If it really works with Ultimate Wordpress Spammer the only difference to SB I can see would maybe be the UserAgent. UWS has the ability to fake the Useragent at each try.
I dont know what SB is doing but I think its possible that the Useragent SB is using is banned somehow. I dont know why else UWS should work.

Thanks Sebastian. Actually though, after testing this some more, it would seem I can't get UWS working correctly either. The majority of the URLs are getting a HTTP/1.1 500 error. However the success rate is a little higher - I get around 16/150 success.

I'm not sure what has happened. It's been about 2 months since I fully used either of these programs - and they both used to work fine. Clearly it is a problem on my PC somehow. No idea what though...
 
I hope this isnt a stupid question... Ive looked everywhere and cant find the answer.

question ---

Is there a way to increase the # of connections when I harvest url's? the Settings/adjust max connections doesnt have this option.

I normally get 4 connections, 1 for each search engine.

Thanks all!
 
I hope this isnt a stupid question... Ive looked everywhere and cant find the answer.

question ---

Is there a way to increase the # of connections when I harvest url's? the Settings/adjust max connections doesnt have this option.

I normally get 4 connections, 1 for each search engine.

Thanks all!

I beleive that is in the SB ini file:

[Harvester]
Custom=1
WordPress=0
MovableType=0
BlogEngine=0
[Engines]
Google=0
Yahoo=0
Bing=0
Proxies=1
Threads=25

Notice I have mine set at 25 ... I do a lot of other things while on normal scraping and commenting, so I went from 1 to 25... instead of the 100 suggested by other peeps.

If you use 4 SE's, thats 100 threads ...


jaybird
 
@jaybird

I tried your suggestion and have set threads to 25 and threadcount to 25 but I only have one connection per searchengine at a time...
 
Last edited:
@SF

It seems that Checklinks sometimes have problems with url-lists with pr attached. Its strange to me why because when I use such url in my browser it gets an 404. Without pr the site loads. But the strange thing is that some blogs work with pr attached.
So I think the link checker needs to be fixed so that the checklink is stripped from pr...
 
@Kendra

If it really works with Ultimate Wordpress Spammer the only difference to SB I can see would maybe be the UserAgent. UWS has the ability to fake the Useragent at each try.
I dont know what SB is doing but I think its possible that the Useragent SB is using is banned somehow. I dont know why else UWS should work.

ScrapeBox has an internal bank of the most common useragents on the planet, covering all major browsers and operating systems and every request ScrapeBox does utilizes a random useragent selected from the list. It's been like this since day one.

If ScrapeBox's useragents get blocked, well 3/4 of the internet will have major problems. Try it.

Thanks Sebastian. Actually though, after testing this some more, it would seem I can't get UWS working correctly either. The majority of the URLs are getting a HTTP/1.1 500 error. However the success rate is a little higher - I get around 16/150 success.

I'm not sure what has happened. It's been about 2 months since I fully used either of these programs - and they both used to work fine. Clearly it is a problem on my PC somehow. No idea what though...

Odd indeed, i believe both tools class a "success" differently so regardless what percentages were printed on the screen the outcome in a packet monitor would be the same due to the method used.

Do you have a router/firewall or anything else which would effect the TCP stack? Try resetting your router, and disabling your firewall for a small test. There's really not much that can go wrong using the fast commenter method, but some security apps have a heart attack when flooded with connections such as this.
 
>ScrapeBox has an internal bank of the most common useragents on the planet, covering all major browsers and operating systems and every request ScrapeBox does utilizes a random useragent selected from the list. It's been like this since day one.

Thats good news. So the Agent is randomly.

>Odd indeed, i believe both tools class a "success" differently so regardless

Only a notice: I dont use the fast commenter anymore because the success-checking isnt working right. The result was that I had, in conjunction to thorough mode I have blogs where 6! comments of mine are posted. And a lot more with more than one comments. One after another.
The reason I presume is that the check of successful posting isnt working right. It thinks it didnt posted and posts again. Which means three posts with thorough mode. And because I repost the failed lists after some days it happens that there are more than 3 posts.

At the moment I only want to use accurate mode and only repost at blogs where my link arent found with linkchecker after some days.
 
@jaybird

I tried your suggestion and have set threads to 25 and threadcount to 25 but I only have one connection per searchengine at a time...

Did you close and restart SB?


NM: ... I see that dosent change the harvest threads :eek:
 
Last edited:
Quick Review:

I purchased last night and was activated within 5 minutes.

I didn't watch any videos or read any manuals.

I pulled in 8K blogs and set it to post before I went to bed. Other than 3 security popups that held it up until I closed them, the slow mode has about a 60% success rate. I'll check in a few days to see how many are approved and live.

I'm VERY happy with the software.

One question that I didn't see while reading through the thread last night...

Is it possible to tokenize the name? I'd like to be able to drop the first name into a comment as a closing (i.e. {FNAME}). I'm guessing it's already possible, but didn't see it spelled out.

Finally, please update the price shown within your first post. When I clicked the "add to cart" button, it showed $47 right above it. The program is well worth $57, but the discrepancy stood out.

-O
 
I hope this isnt a stupid question... Ive looked everywhere and cant find the answer.

question ---

Is there a way to increase the # of connections when I harvest url's? the Settings/adjust max connections doesnt have this option.

I normally get 4 connections, 1 for each search engine.

Thanks all!



Anybody else know how to increase the # of connections(Listed in lower left corner of scrapebox) when harvesting?

When Im doing a google specific harvest its 1 connection at a time. Doesnt scrapebox allow multiple threads per search engine using the proxies when harvesting?

Thanks all!
 
Its $47 or $57. It says $47 on your post , but on paypal it says $57. whats going on?

Thanks
 
Odd indeed, i believe both tools class a "success" differently so regardless what percentages were printed on the screen the outcome in a packet monitor would be the same due to the method used.

Do you have a router/firewall or anything else which would effect the TCP stack? Try resetting your router, and disabling your firewall for a small test. There's really not much that can go wrong using the fast commenter method, but some security apps have a heart attack when flooded with connections such as this.

It was user error!!

I checked the e-mails file and all the e-mails had @@ instead of a single @.

Thanks for all the replies trying to help stupid old me out. :)

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top