...life can be translucent

Menu

Error messages when posting

Liselle

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 20, 1970
Messages
12,850
Reaction score
2,388
In the last few days, I've gotten unaccustomed error messages while trying to post. Has anyone else had similar problems?

Here's an example of what just happened. I logged in, composed a reply, clicked on "Post Quick Reply," and got the following message:

View attachment 1165

I only clicked on "Post Quick Reply" once! Honest! :)

In this case, it only posted my reply once (along with the above error message), but there have been times when it posted my reply twice and I had to delete the extra one. I'm fairly certain that I never clicked twice on a reply button.

This isn't a big problem - it's obviously easy enough to ignore these error messages and/or to delete duplicate posts, but it's never happened before the last few days.

I'm using Firefox 31.0 (which is the most recent version) and Windows 7 on a laptop.
 
S

sooo

Guest
Yup, get that here too, and if I click 'submit' again, it'll post twice.
 

Liselle

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 20, 1970
Messages
12,850
Reaction score
2,388
Sooo, how long have you been getting the errors? It's only been a few days for me.
 

Liselle

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 20, 1970
Messages
12,850
Reaction score
2,388
And yes, I'm not absolutely positive I didn't click twice when the duplicate posts happened. I guess my point was more that I wasn't clicking twice to purposely double-post - if I clicked twice it was because something odd was happening to make me think I had to. I don't have a screen clip or any documentation of that error.
 

Liselle

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 20, 1970
Messages
12,850
Reaction score
2,388
Ask and ye shall receive, I guess, lol. I have documentation for at least one example of double posting.

I composed a reply, clicked on Post Quick Reply, and got this message:

View attachment 1166

I've had this message before, and have responded to it both ways. This time, I clicked on "Leave Page." Doing that produced the following double post.

View attachment 1167
 

Liselle

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 20, 1970
Messages
12,850
Reaction score
2,388
Oh my word what am I doing wrong with inserting images??? :hissy:

See my first post, at the beginning of the thread, how nicely the screen clip displayed? I did exactly the same thing this time, and instead of images I got links! *tears hair out*
 

Liselle

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 20, 1970
Messages
12,850
Reaction score
2,388
Oh good grief! :rofl: :(

Now the perfectly nice image in the FIRST post has somehow turned to a link. There was an image there all this time, I swear!

*gives up*

*resolves to never insert images ever again*

#EveryoneElseManagesThisWhatIsWrongWithMe

(I will admit it is late at night and I am punchy. Sorry. Also, this has happened a few times before, and I can't figure out what I'm doing wrong.)
 

pocossin

visitor
Joined
Feb 7, 1970
Messages
4,521
Reaction score
181
Perhaps some of these problems would disappear if you always use Go Advanced rather than Quick Reply. I must use Go Advanced because I have been unable to set my subscription to "Instantly, using email." This morning it takes about five seconds for the Clarity server to post a message. If in these five seconds any other key is pressed, I suspect it creates a double posting.
 

Liselle

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 20, 1970
Messages
12,850
Reaction score
2,388
That's a thought, Pocossin - I don't know if using Go Advanced would work or not, and I also don't know if I've ever had these problems while using Go Advanced. It's only been in the last few days that I've had any problems at all, so I'm still working through it. In the past, I've used both Quick Reply and Go Advanced without a glitch.

One thing I do know is that i'm not pressing any other key while the message is posting, for the simple reason that since I've been having problems, I've been keeping my eyes pasted on the screen watching to see what will happen. You get indications that the browser/server is busy doing something, and I've been watching that intently.

I don't know if this means anything, but so far I've had no problems making posts to this thread. I've used Quick Reply here, and posts have gone right through as you'd expect. During the same timeframe, though, I've had problems in Shared Readings.

Edited to add: Never mind the previous paragraph - since then I had a similar problem in this thread, too.
 
Last edited:

hilary

Administrator
Joined
Apr 8, 1970
Messages
19,149
Reaction score
3,418
Just testing... (preparatory to sending those nice screenshots - thank you, Lisa - to Vbulletin support...)

(Ha. No problem that time. But I get the 'data may be lost' message more often than not, too.)
 

Liselle

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 20, 1970
Messages
12,850
Reaction score
2,388
Thanks, Hilary. I'm glad to know I'm not the only one having problems!

Here's something else odd that happens sometimes:

View attachment 1168

When I started getting those messages, I thought it was because even though I was staying logged into Clarity, maybe I'd sat in a particular thread for too long without doing anything, and that's why the page needed to be reloaded. That's what the message seems to say: "reload the window."

However, in this case that can't be it. I had just gotten an email notification about the post you just made, Hilary. In order to read the new post, much less reply to it, I obviously reloaded the page scant moments before, and still got this error.
 

Liselle

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 20, 1970
Messages
12,850
Reaction score
2,388
Okay, is the "Insert Image" function connected to a random number generator, lol? Because now my latest attempt - tried again despite vowing not to - is displaying just fine, at least at this particular moment. Seriously - how does this image thing work? I've seen threads laden with pictures, and yet when I try it's anyone's guess whether it will display an image or a link. I did once look in the Help, and didn't find any rules to explain it. Could have missed something there, of course.
 

Trojina

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 29, 2006
Messages
26,921
Reaction score
4,426

Liselle

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 20, 1970
Messages
12,850
Reaction score
2,388

Oh my goodness, that was three years ago.

The suggestion Hilary made at the time - to refresh the page - might make sense if it had sat in some unacceptable sort of limbo for a while. But in the case I just posted, I had just reloaded. Proof being that I was replying to a new post - can't do that without reloading the page in order to display the new post.

I have never been able to post pictures here ever

That is shocking. You've been here forever - so this isn't a problem I'm having just because I'm new and inept. And yet other people manage it! (Snake alert. It's kind of a cute snake, though.) What on earth, vBulletin.

P.S. Trojina - you can't post pictures, but you can post YouTube videos? I think I remember you doing that from time to time, right? That makes even less sense...you'd think pictures would be simpler than videos...
 

Trojina

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 29, 2006
Messages
26,921
Reaction score
4,426
Oh I have always thought the only reason I can't post pictures is because I'm dim with computers and too lazy to apply myself. Posting videos is easy. It's the 2nd row down 3rd icon from the left in 'go advanced' reply box. Then copy the link in.

Don't worry Lisa I think you will be able to post pictures eventually..most people are better with computers than I am.
 

Liselle

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 20, 1970
Messages
12,850
Reaction score
2,388
Don't worry Lisa I think you will be able to post pictures eventually..most people are better with computers than I am.

There could be two problems, (1) I don't know what I'm doing, and (2) there's something actually wrong, beyond that.

Not knowing how doesn't seem to explain why a picture would display nicely for a while, and then mysteriously change to a link after the post is posted.

The pictures in the first and twelfth posts in this thread both displayed as images at first, but as you can see, they are each a link now instead of an image.

I'll try replicating that on purpose in order to get screen clips. Here is a pretty kitten (not mine):

View attachment 1169
 

Liselle

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 20, 1970
Messages
12,850
Reaction score
2,388
Ah - there is the kitten. Now I'll go away for a while, and see if it mysteriously becomes a link later on.
 

Liselle

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 20, 1970
Messages
12,850
Reaction score
2,388
Also, I guess I'm assuming that everyone else sees what I'm seeing - IOW I'm assuming if it looks like an image or a link to me, it looks like an image or a link to everyone else at the same time. I don't actually know that. But I have screen-clipped the kitten displaying as an image, and if it changes to a link later, I'll screen-clip that also.
 
Last edited:

Liselle

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 20, 1970
Messages
12,850
Reaction score
2,388
Ah - there is the kitten. Now I'll go away for a while, and see if it mysteriously becomes a link later on.

It didn't take long.

I simply reloaded the page, using my browser's reload button, and the kitten disappeared and was replaced by a link. (Edited: It took me a while to put this post together, but this actually happened within minutes.)

Why would reloading the page cause that? I can reload Sooo's snake thread many times, and the pictures stay pictures.

But I do have screen clips, with and without the kitten. I put them here: http://1drv.ms/1rcqtuE

Anyone who cares to comment - how are you seeing this thread? With pictures, or with links?

I've done all of these posts using the Insert Image button in the Quick Reply toolbar. Then selected the Basic Uploader link (the Select Files button doesn't do anything when I click on it), and clicked on the Browse button to add an image from my computer. Then clicked on Upload File(s), after which something like this appears in my post:

Code:
[ATTACH]1170[/ ATTACH]

(I had to add a space between "/" and "ATTACH" to get just the text to appear in the code box rather than an image fragment, which...I guess I thought that was the purpose of the code box, to just display code/tags without executing them?)

Then I clicked on the Post Quick Reply button to submit the posts.
 
S

sooo

Guest
A key to posting an image from the internet is, you must uncheck that little box in the lower left of "Retrieve remote file and reference locally." You can't post pictures from your computer, they must be hosted from the net so that it doesn't use Clarity's bandwidth.
 

Liselle

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 20, 1970
Messages
12,850
Reaction score
2,388
you must uncheck that little box in the lower left of "Retrieve remote file and reference locally." You can't post pictures from your computer, they must be hosted from the net so that it doesn't use Clarity's bandwidth.

I don't want to cause Clarity a bandwidth problem, of course, but I'm confused - what little box in the lower left of what? I just went through the procedure again, that I wrote out above (clicking on the Insert Images button etc.), and I didn't see any checkbox labelled, "Retrieve remote file and reference locally."

And anyway, aren't I uploading the pictures TO Clarity from my computer? There's a thing called "File Upload Manager" here in Clarity, which lists all the pictures I've tried to display here - I get to it from Go Advanced > Additional Options > click on Manage Attachments button, and then it pops up. But I don't see that checkbox there, either.

Is the way I'm doing it wrong? Are your pictures on Flickr or someplace like that? A couple of blogs which I read (one in Blogger and one in Wordpress) store their photos on Flickr, but then the photos in their blogs are clickable - if you click on the photos in their blogs, you are sent to the Flickr website. I just looked at your snake thread again, and those photos are not clickable. So what is it that you're doing? (Whatever you're doing seems to work :D.)

Edited: And I'm also confused as to the problems that are caused to Clarity by using various methods. I don't know how servers and websites work, so I'm wildly guessing, but it seems there would be two issues: bandwidth, and server space. If we upload pictures to Clarity from our computers, they're stored on Clarity's servers and take up space. But if we link to them from some other website like Flickr, it seems that's what would chew up bandwidth, because in order to display the pictures, Clarity's servers have to talk back and forth to Flickr's servers. I'm not sure if that makes sense, or which would be the bigger problem, or which would cause the least pain to Clarity. Undoubtedly Hilary can clear this up for us...I'm beginning to feel like I've let all the goblins out of Pandora's box, though - sorry, Hilary...
 
S

sooo

Guest
Also, when I right click on one of the image links in my posts and use the "Copy Link Location" option, the URL (this is for kitten.jpg in post #17) is this:

http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/friends/attachment.php?attachmentid=1169&d=1408053940

So the image is stored here, uploaded from my computer. It's not still on my computer. (My head hurts :eek:uch:.)

attachment.php


You're almost there. Once you have your image uploaded to a host site, like Flickr or Photobucket (which has become a mess) or Google etc, then right click over the image and left click over "Copy Image Location" (NOT Copy Link Location). Now back here, click on the "Insert Image" icon; two choices are given: to upload from your computer (which this site doesn't support because of the bandwidth issue) or From URL. Choose from URL. That's where the small box will appear already checked. Uncheck that box ( Retrieve remote file and reference locally) and paste the URL Copy Image Location in the URL space box. Click "OK", and voila, your image will then be shown in your post. Sounds more complicated than it is but once you do it a couple times it takes a matter of seconds.

Adorable kitty btw :)
 
S

sooo

Guest
it seems there would be two issues: bandwidth, and server space. If we upload pictures to Clarity from our computers, they're stored on Clarity's servers and take up space. But if we link to them from some other website like Flickr, it seems that's what would chew up bandwidth, because in order to display the pictures, Clarity's servers have to talk back and forth to Flickr's servers. I'm not sure if that makes sense, or which would be the bigger problem, or which would cause the least pain to Clarity.

Bandwidth and server space amount to the same thing, correct. If we upload an image from our hard drive, let's say its file size is 4K, that 4K is then added to this site's allotted space or bandwidth. Multiply that times hundreds or possibly thousands of uploaded images, videos, etc. If on the other hand, it's "pinched" from an already hosted site, it takes up only the bandwidth equivalent of words, which is much, much less space. So Hilary's paid for bandwidth goes unmolested, while we can post as many images as we desire. This has become common practice with most all forums. Storage sites now run paid for advertising, and some charge hosting fees. That would be an option for Hilary too, but it would muddy the water and become really annoying to we users. As it is, some pinched videos now also run commercials when copied to forums. They must have a revenue source so one can hardly blame them.
 
S

sooo

Guest
Oh, one more detail, it appears that now you must be signed in to see the image.
 

Liselle

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 20, 1970
Messages
12,850
Reaction score
2,388
Sooo, thank you for explaining all this! :) I am clueless and apparently had bad misconceptions about almost everything you said.

Now back here, click on the "Insert Image" icon; two choices are given: to upload from your computer (which this site doesn't support because of the bandwidth issue

Maybe that's the reason it doesn't end up working correctly, a la pictures turning to links when the page is refreshed and so forth? But I'm perfectly able to use the "upload from computer" option - it's an option that's presented, you can go through the procedure, that File Upload Manager is functional, etc. There's nothing to indicate that a person shouldn't be doing it that way, either as you're going through the procedure, or in the Help files. Since the pictures were on my computer, and there was an "Upload from computer" option, I just went ahead and used it.

Bandwidth and server space amount to the same thing, correct.
Oh, okay, I didn't know that.

If on the other hand, it's "pinched" from an already hosted site, it takes up only the bandwidth equivalent of words, which is much, much less space.
Am still confused, though...isn't an image the size that it is? How would it change size depending on its storage location? If a .jpg file is 4K, wouldn't it stay 4K, unless a person intentionally resized it in image-editing software?

I understand (I think) that everything is ultimately stored as "words" electronically (I don't know the right terms to use) - but for example, here's the gibberish that represents a teeny icon in HTML:

<link href="" rel="icon" type="image/x-icon" />

I guess I always thought that if an image is 4K, its "text representation" would be 4K worth of "words." (My headache is back :eek:uch: :rofl:)

-----------------------------------------------------------------

14731207180_be2264d07d_q.jpg


I followed the "From URL" procedure you explained (thank you) with this picture of a pretty owl randomly selected from Flickr. I did see the checkbox, and I unchecked it :D.

Edited: The owl is surviving the page being reloaded, hooray! Also, I can see that the photo is not clickable (which is different from the blogs I mentioned), but when I right click and Copy Image Location, I get this: https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3924/14731207180_be2264d07d_q.jpg
 
S

sooo

Guest
Am still confused, though...isn't an image the size that it is? How would it change size depending on its storage location? If a .jpg file is 4K, wouldn't it stay 4K, unless a person intentionally resized it in image-editing software?

I understand (I think) that everything is ultimately stored as "words" electronically (I don't know the right terms to use) - but for example, here's the gibberish that represents a teeny icon in HTML:



I guess I always thought that if an image is 4K, its "text representation" would be 4K worth of "words." (My headache is back :eek:uch: :rofl:)

-----------------------------------------------------------------

14731207180_be2264d07d_q.jpg


I followed the "From URL" procedure you explained (thank you) with this picture of a pretty owl randomly selected from Flickr. I did see the checkbox, and I unchecked it :D.

Edited: The owl is surviving the page being reloaded, hooray! Also, I can see that the photo is not clickable (which is different from the blogs I mentioned), but when I right click and Copy Image Location, I get this: https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3924/14731207180_be2264d07d_q.jpg

Hi Lisa, Glad you have it worked out. I'm not very technically knowledgeable, but I may be able to address a couple questions.

The bandwidth file size of an image is not only determined by it physical width and length, but also by is resolution, whether it's high quality or rough quality, which would appear as more grainy looking. Either case is greatly larger than text would be.

When we view an image hosted from another site, we're actually viewing that other site's image, only linking to it here. So it takes up no space to speak of. If we upload it from our computer, that gobbles up a lot of the site's bandwidth, i.e. an average picture might be actually 40k or so.

What you did in your last example was to actually find the link to the original image and you posted that. That's the same as if you copied it from the host site, you just worked it in reverse. taking it from your posted image.

If you want to make a link from the image, you then click on that little earth with a chain link at the bottom icon, then type in what you wish it to link to and click OK. Make sure to delete the http in the window first, it'll already be included in your link.

First type the link to the image, then highlight it, and click that global link icon and paste in what you want it to link to. I'll find an article on kittens to use.



tadaa! :)
 

Liselle

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 20, 1970
Messages
12,850
Reaction score
2,388
I'm sure I'm trying your patience...but thank you :)

The bandwidth file size of an image is not only determined by it physical width and length, but also by is resolution, whether it's high quality or rough quality, which would appear as more grainy looking. Either case is greatly larger than text would be.
That makes sense...my camera can take pictures at various resolutions, all of which could probably be made to have the same physical dimensions (width and length). If pictures at different resolutions were all made to have the same physical dimensions (1024x768 pixels, for example), the lower resolution photos would be grainier and not display as nicely. Each of those photos would have a different size from the others in kilobytes or megabytes, and take up different amounts of storage space, despite having the same width and length in pixels. I understand that so far, I think.

When we view an image hosted from another site, we're actually viewing that other site's image, only linking to it here. So it takes up no space to speak of. If we upload it from our computer, that gobbles up a lot of the site's bandwidth, i.e. an average picture might be actually 40k or so.

This is the part I don't understand. Say a photo's size, as you say, is 40K. It's on Flickr, and it's taking up 40K's worth of space on Flickr's servers. If I downloaded it to my computer, it would take up 40K on my hard drive, too. I understand that if we use the "From URL" option to display that photo on Clarity, it's not taking up any space on Clarity's server's hard drive. But what still confuses me is that in order for the photo to be displayed here in posts, doesn't there have to be 40K's worth of communication between Clarity and Flickr? That is what I meant by storage space (hard drive) vs. bandwidth (internet chatter). Uploading a photo to Clarity's server takes up 40K on Clarity's hard drive. Displaying it "From URL" requires 40K's worth of chatter between Clarity and Flickr (I'd think?). Isn't it still the same 40K, just in a different form? Or am I barking up the wrong tree?

It may still be that 40K in one form is less painful to Clarity than 40K in the other form?

If you want to make a link from the image, you then click on that little earth with a chain link at the bottom icon, then type in what you wish it to link to and click OK. Make sure to delete the http in the window first, it'll already be included in your link.

Oh, I see. Just like putting a hyperlink to a web page's URL in a post. Thanks! :D That way a person can decide if they want people to be able to click through to their Flickr account, or not.

Thank you, Sooo :)
 

Clarity,
Office 17622,
PO Box 6945,
London.
W1A 6US
United Kingdom

Phone/ Voicemail:
+44 (0)20 3287 3053 (UK)
+1 (561) 459-4758 (US).

Top