"The all new, multi-purpose REORDERING IMAGES thread."

[Silversleeves]

Taking my own suggestion, I've decided to do the very thing rougefemale used to insist upon: to start and maintain a single thread for an ongoing or recurring issue/problem/grievance/gripe. This doesn't rate "sticky" status as yet, because there's a very good chance the tech/s will be able to "cure what ails" the gallery software in this area very soon. But while it persists, there should still be a single thread for the issue, imo.

But let's try and keep the arrow pointing forward on this topic, and everyone sufficiently informed.
If you have had problems reordering images in galleries, please make note in your posts of:
1. The browser name and version you're using to do the reordering
(plus any notable "blocker" add-ons such as NoScript or AdBlockPlus)
2. The time of day (either in your timezone or as UDT/GMT)
3. The number of images in the gallery.
[4. - OPTIONAL - How recently the gallery was made or pictures were added to the gallery]


Mods: if you think this should be moved to Help & Support, do so.

BZT
Edit: Quite a bitflip for someone who originally called reordering "apologizing for a stupid idea in one feature with yet another feature", don't you think?

[rougefemale]

no, its fine here. this is more a site stuff than a help and support thread. and i think its a good idea to start posting that information on a users browser. it seems that a lot of the problem comes from the browser side... with some coding that isnt compatible with the most popular browsers

and, add a link to the most popular post on the subject: viewtopic.php?f=14&t=3453

[Silversleeves]

and, add a link to the most popular post on the subject: viewtopic.php?f=14&t=3453

To which my last two posts seem to take an Einstein turn to this "Newtonian" notion that it's a client (ie, browser, version, type and plugins) side problem.

I'm not so dense that I should count out time-of-day as a factor. Assuming it is, whatever code that drives the reordering feature is pretty particular as to response times and should be adjusted to put up with a little more server lag to the client.

I tried to make the OP as neutral as possible on that score.

I see the "Want to see who's online?" on the main site is working again, off and on. I think it would be a good idea if, instead of/along with including time of day in their details, folks posting to this thread checked that and gave the number of members shown at the top of that page, saying as it's presumably only members who can reorder the pics in their galleries. I doubt if "anonymous" posters can do so, but I don't know that for sure.

Something else I just noticed. During those times when reordering works, no matter what the browser, it will suddenly seem to not work if your gallery is open in a tab. Treat the gallery as you would the Uploader by giving it its own window, and it catches again. Again, though, this only applies to those times when it's working anyhow.

We'll see if people step out of their usual habits and start adding their 33⅓¢ to just this thread. I doubt it; for altogether too many that "New Topic" button seems to have the same appeal as if it said "Click here to have an orgasm."

BZT

[Silversleeves]

No new posts as yet. Well, we know it's not as big a problem as ads (or as spelled in the Ultimate ImageFap Glossary, "ADDS" ) or the chat server, which is probably a good thing.

I just repeated part of the procedure I described in this post on another gallery, excepting SM 2.0 and Chrome, which I plan to try shortly. I also did a search on the whole Forum to see in how many posts the words "reorder" and "cookies" were mentioned. Turns out it was exactly one post: LuvStockings' from around February 18th. At any rate, as my other post bears out, it appears cookies are not particularly relevant to the problem. Which puts a shade of doubt and contention over whether the type of browser used makes much difference either. That leaves us with time of day -- and the script/code "holes" that should be "patched" to accommodate greater and lesser lag -- and number of images, which I now think, having successfully re-ordered both a gallery with only 10 pictures in it as well as my 300+ picture Nude-at-Computers gallery, is likewise a non-starter.

Given all of that, I'm even more convinced it's a problem that starts and ends on the ImageFap side of things. The Admin did mention an "upgrade" in the support announcement from October of last year. Call me single-minded, but imo it's long overdue.

BZT
Edit: Google Chrome bollixed it, even clear of any cookies collected from anywhere in the last 5 days or so. SM 2.0, not six minutes later, with 980 members logged in, and no IF cookies, worked.

[rougefemale]

so, is this about re-ordering images or is it about everything?

[Silversleeves]

so, is this about re-ordering images or is it about everything?

Reordering. The thread I mentioned from LuvStockings is the one where he linked the "announcements" thread and cut & paste particular lines having to do with the reorder images feature, reformatting them in bigger-than-original type. I wasn't inclined to go quite that far. What makes it difficult is that it was one item out of several in a single post, and unfortunately, unlike web pages or blog entries, one can't "jump" link to any one part. Maybe I should have at least cited the item in question, though. I see that now.

About everything? Not quite. I'd like to point out, as reordering is a feature on the main site, not the forums or chat or movies, it's bound to, sooner or later, be affected by anything that goes right or wrong on that part of the site. So it's about an awful lot, but not everything.

BZT

[Silversleeves]

At any rate, as my other post bears out, it appears cookies are not particularly relevant to the problem.

I may be in the process of proving myself wrong on that. In SeaMonkeys 1 and 2, clearing all cookies before attempting to reorder seems to make the reorder "stick".

I'll be able to tell later whether it's so for FF and the "oddballs" (Opera and Chrome). FTTB though, I've got some other stuff that's screaming for my attention. Keep a sharp eye, all.

Edit: Pans out -- clearing all cookies works across the board. Still, keep in mind that the other precautions apply (giving the gallery whose thumbs you want to re-arrange its own window etc.). Here's hoping I'm not working under the "cloud" of a few good hours on the IF side; it's still a distinct possibility that problems with this feature are 50/50 (all right, 80/20) client-side/server-side. Seems a severe step to take, trashing all cookies just to do one task, but if you think about it, it really involves a lot less time and effort than "girding" one's browser with the "armor" to avoid ads popping up arbitrarily. And the results are equally, if not more, rewarding.

BZT

[Silversleeves]

Turns out we were having, as Mike Barnicle of the Boston Globe said about being Irish, one of those "occasional bouts of good fortune."

From a post in the Suggestions thread:

I noticed something curious yesterday. After successfully re-ordering pics in one gallery via SeaMonkey 2.0.x, I tried adding a Description to a pic in another gallery using my usual "running jump" method (type, copy to clipboard, click Add button, reload page, click "add description" link, let page reload with edit block visible under thumbnail, paste, click Add button, hit Back button, click Add button, etc etc at least five times) which usually works at least once per login session.

Now it seems, at least between me and my monitor, that the reverse has happened. I add one lousy little comment to one pic, and now, even with all cookies cleared, re-ordering's back to not "catching" in two browsers (SM 2.0 and Opera -- the latter allegedly a 'safer bet' for it to work).

Ah well. Such is life on the Net. Script/code failures happen.

BZT

[Silversleeves]

Another little interesting bit of "huh?" and a possible workaround.

I think it was either DrewFarnmoore or Pr0nGlutton in another thread on this topic who remarked that the #1 worst thumb to try to move is the very first one in the gallery. Here, though, you can take advantage of the flaw (some called it a modification, but we all know better, don't we?) in the gallery software where it does put the thumbs for new images up in random places. I'd estimate maybe between one out of four and one out of three times, it does so by placing a newly-uploaded pic in that first position.

Between last night and this morning, I was pulling my hair out trying to get a thumb in that first (call it A-1) slot moved down one row and maybe five columns. Then it dawned on me: if it's a "first," it's least likely of all of them to move. Solution: it can't be the "first" anymore -- upload one more pic and cross your fingers. Sure enough, the gallery software "fell for the ploy," and put up the one new pic (since deleted since it broke its share of IF and BZT rules) in that A-1 slot. The one I had been trying like a bugger to move went to A-2, and when I tried to move it one-by-five, it actually moved.

So keep in mind that picture thumbs in that very first slot pretty much will not move unless and until they're bumped.

This seems to be turning into "BZT's Gallery Woes" blog, category "Reordering". Is anyone actually reading these later posts?
I have no way of knowing, as the "read" count is cumulative to the whole thread (the nature of phpBB and other forum softs).

BZT

[Silversleeves]

Well, from the 26th of April to the 1st of May, it worked in any cookie-free browser you'd care to name, old SeaMonkey 1.1.1.8 included.

This morning, after this remarkable streak, it finally broke. I suspect either Sunday blahs and lag, or the Who's Online counter is trying to make a comeback all on its ownsome. Then again, and more likely, it's just another script failure that will cycle itself out.

BZT