• The site has now migrated to Xenforo 2. If you see any issues with the forum operation, please post them in the feedback thread.
  • An addendum to Rule 3 regarding fan-translated works of things such as Web Novels has been made. Please see here for details.
  • RIP @Silver Swallow
  • Due to issues with external spam filters, QQ is currently unable to send any mail to Microsoft E-mail addresses. This includes any account at live.com, hotmail.com or msn.com. Signing up to the forum with one of these addresses will result in your verification E-mail never arriving. For best results, please use a different E-mail provider for your QQ address.
  • For prospective new members, a word of warning: don't use common names like Dennis, Simon, or Kenny if you decide to create an account. Spammers have used them all before you and gotten those names flagged in the anti-spam databases. Your account registration will be rejected because of it.
  • Since it has happened MULTIPLE times now, I want to be very clear about this. You do not get to abandon an account and create a new one. You do not get to pass an account to someone else and create a new one. If you do so anyway, you will be banned for creating sockpuppets.
  • Due to the actions of particularly persistent spammers and trolls, we will be banning disposable email addresses from today onward.
  • The rules regarding NSFW links have been updated. See here for details.

XF2 transition feedback

Reader mode
now, do not take my words for pure fact as it's been a while since I looked into/asked about it, but iirc it's a combination of that being a feature of an add-on XF1, that was not portable, and the feature that is used in XF2 is not only a paid addon, but it also doesn't mail you the full reply, but only the first few sentences/paragraph or so, as you can see from SB mails.......aaaaand iirc there's also possibly a legal issue if it was restored? That and/or stuff in the mails being possibly blacklisted by mail providers
And considering even the addon being used by SB is obviously limited, there's the obvious question of why even bother with paying/adding more stuff into the server code that gives very little useable info to all users
 
Where do we go about image proxy issues? Is this an acceptable thread?

I've come across several posts where I know the images used to be proxied correctly, but don't appear to be now. Example.
 
MissileTeatime said:
Where do we go about image proxy issues? Is this an acceptable thread?

I've come across several posts where I know the images used to be proxied correctly, but don't appear to be now. Example.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The post you linked mentions the images in question being hosted on Imgur. Imgur has since deleted all NSFW content it once hosted. That CYOA was likely NSFW, judging by the title of it. Ergo, this is most likely not an issue with QQ's image proxying.
 
ZurigaSungama said:
The post you linked mentions the images in question being hosted on Imgur. Imgur has since deleted all NSFW content it once hosted. That CYOA was likely NSFW, judging by the title of it. Ergo, this is most likely not an issue with QQ's image proxying.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
To my recollection, historically, images that were proxied would still be available on QQ because of the image proxy. That's why I thought it was unintentional behavior. If those images should still be available through the image proxy but aren't, that's a bug.

Is that no longer the expected behavior? Am I missing something else?
 
ZurigaSungama said:
The post you linked mentions the images in question being hosted on Imgur. Imgur has since deleted all NSFW content it once hosted. That CYOA was likely NSFW, judging by the title of it. Ergo, this is most likely not an issue with QQ's image proxying.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
MissileTeatime said:
To my recollection, historically, images that were proxied would still be available on QQ because of the image proxy. That's why I thought it was unintentional behavior. If those images should still be available through the image proxy but aren't, that's a bug.

Is that no longer the expected behavior? Am I missing something else?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

To my knowledge, broken links to imgur have a specific image that says something along the lines of "The image you are requesting does not exist or is no longer available".

Like So.

Take a look at any of the imgur links for those CYOA's and you'll see what I mean.

In the one MissileTeatime links has images that somehow, for some reason, have the 'image failed to load' thing that QQ has where if an image is a bit borked or takes too long it'll have a 'IMG' bit of text. In this case it's even weirder because it's literally just the text 'IMG' but in a form that's literally just text, not an image or an image link or anything.

Pretty sure SOMETHING is fucking up there, but I'm also sure it's probably not because of Imgur.
 
MissileTeatime said:
To my recollection, historically, images that were proxied would still be available on QQ because of the image proxy. That's why I thought it was unintentional behavior. If those images should still be available through the image proxy but aren't, that's a bug.

Is that no longer the expected behavior? Am I missing something else?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
My guess would be that the proxy doesn't hold images forever, since that would mean holding a copy of every image anyone ever linked on QQ forever. I suspect the proxy only keeps a given image until a certain amount of time has passed without anyone looking at it, then discards it. So if you're looking at an old thread - one that you might well be the first person to read in weeks or months - then the images will no longer be in the proxy, and if the original source is also gone, you're SOL.

But, again, just a guess. I'm not privy to the details of how the proxy is set up.
 
Anyone else having issues leaving commenta on pc. I'm only able to comment via andriod right now.

Haven't tested apple but i dont have any apple devices either.



image.png
 
Aleh said:
As you can see, no. It may be a Brave thing, though? They're weird.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
It was fine on brave before the update. Now I can't comment on pc's brave browser, open spoiler buttons, and something else I forgot..... Images?? Image spoiler buttons???? Ya that one of them. Were there more?? I'll remember at some point probably then I'll just edit this I think.

Works fine on brave mobile for andriod though.
 
Imperium said:
It was fine on brave before the update. Now I can't comment on pc's brave browser, open spoiler buttons, and something else I forgot..... Images?? Image spoiler buttons???? Ya that one of them. Were there more?? I'll remember at some point probably then I'll just edit this I think.

Works fine on brave mobile for andriod though.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I mean, the update here was back in May. If you're talking about a Brave update, though, you might want to look there.
 
Aleh said:
I mean, the update here was back in May. If you're talking about a Brave update, though, you might want to look there.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Just checked when the update for brave happened and it did happen right around when I started having issues. December 19th and it works fine on firefox posting from there now. So you were right the issue is with brave, it must been interacting weird with xenforo 2 due to braves latest update. No Idea how to fix it, only how to work around it with firefox.

Thanks for telling me the qq xenforo 2 update happened in may for some reason i thought it was more recent.

image.png
 
So, do we know why imgur embeds don't work anymore? I mostly use imgchest these days, but it's still annoying. Did it break when we switched from XF1 to XF2, or was it something else?
 
TroyX said:
So, do we know why imgur embeds don't work anymore? I mostly use imgchest these days, but it's still annoying. Did it break when we switched from XF1 to XF2, or was it something else?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
It's a side effect of Imgur's ban on NSFW content. Apparently QQ's notable enough to be on the list of known porn sites that Imgur is aware of, and as a result Imgur has decided to block QQ from embedding images from Imgur. Since the problem is on Imgur's side, not QQ's, there's not really anything that anyone on QQ can do about it, short of somehow getting the money to buy Imgur outright and revert their NSFW ban.
 
searcher8 said:
It's a side effect of Imgur's ban on NSFW content. Apparently QQ's notable enough to be on the list of known porn sites that Imgur is aware of, and as a result Imgur has decided to block QQ from embedding images from Imgur. Since the problem is on Imgur's side, not QQ's, there's not really anything that anyone on QQ can do about it, short of somehow getting the money to buy Imgur outright and revert their NSFW ban.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Ah, I got you. Thanks for the answer. It sucks, but I'm glad to know the reason behind it.

A bit odd that they'd go that far with their ban though. They don't allow NSFW pics, so what's the harm of a SFW pic being embedded on a NSFW site? But whatever.
 
Does the "imbed images hosted on Imgur as media" workaround still work?
 
Hi!

Am I the only here who's having a problem with several issues?

One is that embeded twitter (x) posts don't load and show up on mobile. Another is that I can't seem to search site members properly even when typing their full name! The names just doesn't show up in the search suggestion!

😔
 
Renko said:
Hi!

Am I the only here who's having a problem with several issues?

One is that embeded twitter (x) posts don't load and show up on mobile. Another is that I can't seem to search site members properly even when typing their full name! The names just doesn't show up in the search suggestion!

😔
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Don't have issues with X, formerly known as Twitter, but have something similar when searching for my own name. I remember sometime ago, or was that from SB?, that I was able to use that feature to find my own post in a thread, but recently my own username it didn't show up in the search suggestion bar.

But other than that minor and rarely needed inconvenience, the search by members function works fine for me and the name is properly displayed in the search suggestion popup as far as I can tell.
 
Renko said:
Am I the only here who's having a problem with several issues?

... Another is that I can't seem to search site members properly even when typing their full name! The names just doesn't show up in the search suggestion!
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
It's a known bug, that's been happening for a couple months now. It appears to concern specific userhandles (a great many of them at this point), with little rhyme or reason otherwise.
 
searcher8 said:
It's a side effect of Imgur's ban on NSFW content. Apparently QQ's notable enough to be on the list of known porn sites that Imgur is aware of, and as a result Imgur has decided to block QQ from embedding images from Imgur. Since the problem is on Imgur's side, not QQ's, there's not really anything that anyone on QQ can do about it, short of somehow getting the money to buy Imgur outright and revert their NSFW ban.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Uh, got a citation on that?

My understanding was that the issue was with QQ's image proxy not working with Imgur's auto-redirect for image links. Basically, if you take a link to an Imgur image and try to open it in your browser, Imgur detects that, and automatically redirects you from the image itself to a page containing that image. For example:
The problem, then, is that when you try to post an image on QQ, instead of sourcing the image directly, the resulting image is sourced from QQ's image cache, which itself must fetch the image from Imgur to add to the cache. The problem is, Imgur thinks the request from the proxy is a request from a browser rather than an embedded image, and returns the HTML redirect instead. The proxy, which is expecting an actual image rather than an HTML page, can't handle that and gives up.

So, yes, the problem could be fixed on QQ's end: figure out what bit of metadata Imgur uses to tell the difference between embedded image requests and direct browser requests, and adjust the proxy to include that so Imgur stops trying to redirect it. Or, if that's too hard, just exempt Imgur images from the proxy entirely. But that haven't bothered.
 
Last edited:
macdjord said:
Uh, got a citation on that?

My understanding was that the issue was with QQ's image proxy not working with Imgur's auto-redirect for image links. Basically, if you take a link to an Imgur image and try to open it in your browser, Imgur detects that, and automatically redirects you from the image itself to a page containing that image. For example:
The problem, then, is that when you try to post an image on QQ, instead of sourcing the image directly, the resulting image is sourced from QQ's image cache, which itself must fetch the image from Imgur to add to the cache. The problem is, Imgur thinks the request from the proxy is a request from a browser rather than an embedded image, and returns the HTML redirect instead. The proxy, which is expecting an actual image rather than an HTML page, can't handle that and gives up.

So, yes, the problem could be fixed on QQ's end: figure out what bit of metadata Imgur uses to tell the difference between embedded image requests and direct browser requests, and adjust the proxy to include that so Imgur stops trying to redirect it. Or, if that's too hard, just exempt Imgur images from the proxy entirely. But that haven't bothered.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

On SB, I can do direct imgur image embeds.

On the Paradox forums, I can do direct imgur image embeds.

Both of those are XF2.

Why is QQ uniquely unable to do direct imgur image embeds when the same issue should happen on all other XF2 forums?
 
evildice said:
On SB, I can do direct imgur image embeds.

On the Paradox forums, I can do direct imgur image embeds.

Both of those are XF2.

Why is QQ uniquely unable to do direct imgur image embeds when the same issue should happen on all other XF2 forums?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Because neither of those sites use an image proxy, AFAIK.
 
macdjord said:
Because neither of those sites use an image proxy, AFAIK.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Nope, image proxy is a standard XF feature. The only difference between QQ and SB is that QQ keeps the image proxied indefinitely whereas SB will dump it and reproxy it after a certain amount of time.
 
searcher8 said:
Yeah, my citation is the explanation that @alethiophile gave in this post. The problem is that Imgur has blocked QQ's server specifically, on their end, which is why image embeds work on say, SB and SV, but don't work over here.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Uh, try reading that again. Unless they happened to decide to start blocking QQ on the exact same day we happened to be doing a server move, it clearly isn't them targeting us specifically because we're a porn site.
 
macdjord said:
Uh, try reading that again. Unless they happened to decide to start blocking QQ on the exact same day we happened to be doing a server move, it clearly isn't them targeting us specifically because we're a porn site.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
That is exactly why they started blocking us, they started getting a bunch of traffic from a new IP address, so they looked at where it was from saw it was here and decided they didn't want us to be able to make use of them. They didn't notice it prior because it wasn't new traffic before then and so they didn't bother looking into it when they banned NSFW.
 
With the changeover, would it be possible to add filter tags to the nsfw section for smut?

Eg, "no smut", "low smut", "infreq smut" "freq smut" "mostly smut".

Or heck, just three filters. "story focus" "story with smut" "smut focus"

Or other filters that could be used in conjunction with each other perhaps?

The main idea however is that it should be clear enough how much of the story would be detected as porn, how much would be questionable content but still sfw and how much is not smut at all.

If I wanted to read a story, I can immediately tell that although it has smut, I can stay for the plot. Or alternatively, that I won't be doing much skipping ahead to read something steamy.
 
Reader mode
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 4 (members: 0, guests: 4)
Back
Top