Ht 0-0
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
General weirdness when quoting
- Thread starter Hillian1
- Start date
Ht 0-0
Lord Bracknell
On fire
When I posted this message, it reached the board as post #18. Then it became post #20.
El Sid
Well-known member
I think the NSC server clock is out of whack. It seems to be a couple of minutes ahead of actual time.(sometimes?)
TomandJerry
Well-known member
- Oct 1, 2013
- 12,323
Question is, who broke the system
This might be a possible explanation. On the match thread today, several posts popped up showing that they were posted three minutes in the future.
sebtucknott
Active member
It doesn't have to be quoted posts.
See the loan thread, the first reply is before the op!
I presume the post date is varying for users which seems odd as I presume the db/php will be generating the datetime.
When I posted it said am I sure I want to leave the page then took me to the full reply page. The wouldn't let me post says wait 30secs. Upon returning to the thread (match day) my post was before others I'd already seen.
See the loan thread, the first reply is before the op!
I presume the post date is varying for users which seems odd as I presume the db/php will be generating the datetime.
When I posted it said am I sure I want to leave the page then took me to the full reply page. The wouldn't let me post says wait 30secs. Upon returning to the thread (match day) my post was before others I'd already seen.
I think that is what we are saying. What I think I witnessed this afternoon (maybe a restate of same) was that if I refreshed a page, the posts were not in the same order as before
Absolutely,right - we should have a poll. The normal candidates as I recall are:-
Gus
JFC
Glenn Murray
Berk
The Finn
Ashley Barnes
Thatcher
Blair
Religious Extremists
brakespear
Doctor Worm
This. It was not necessary for a quote to be included, some posts (I remember especially I think [MENTION=12225]MacKenzie[/MENTION] and [MENTION=28761]carteater[/MENTION]) were posted three minutes or so ahead of everybody else according to the timestamp put on them by NSC. Then all of the rest posts made in the next three minutes would appear 'behind' these posts (including any posts which quoted them) until the rest of NSC caught up.
Yes, I've seen the end result. I'm not sure what people are saying is actually happening, when it happens. Are the two posts reversing in order, i.e.:
Action 1: post 1 at 17:51
Action 2: post 2 quoting post 1 at 17:53
Result: post 2 shown at 17:51 and post 2 shown at 17:53
or
Action 1: post 1 at 17:51
Action 2: post 2 quoting post 1 at 17:53
Result: post 1 moved to (say) 17:54 and post 2 shown at 17:53
or something else.
Exactly, yes.
My only thought is that is a result of the differing template now on use on NSC. Perhaps the new (Modern) template has a bug inherent within it.
seagullsovergrimsby
#cpfctinpotclub
My post in the matchday thread - "Come on you super seagulls. Posted 3 minutes earlier than usual in case it appears 3 minutes later" started off on page 2 , moved to page 3 , back to page 2 and finally ended up staying on page 3.
super-seagulls
Soup! Why didn’t I get any Soup?
This is happening I think because the different versions of NSC have different clocks which are not synced.
So if poster a is using the original version which is a few minutes ahead of the newer version then poster b (newer version) would see poster a's quote and reply but the time poster b replied could be a minute or two before the clock on the other version.
NSC files posts chronologically according to its own clock.
Anybody following?
So if poster a is using the original version which is a few minutes ahead of the newer version then poster b (newer version) would see poster a's quote and reply but the time poster b replied could be a minute or two before the clock on the other version.
NSC files posts chronologically according to its own clock.
Anybody following?
When it happened to me earlier today, the posts I quoted (before I actually posted) were timed at 2 or 3 minutes into the future (according to my PC clock).
The timings didn't alter, therefore my posts were ordered before the originals.
BTW, I'm using IE11 on Classic if it helps
The timings didn't alter, therefore my posts were ordered before the originals.
BTW, I'm using IE11 on Classic if it helps
Mackenzie
Old Brightonian
The post times quoted on my posts were three minutes in front of the time shown on my PC, that's why I queried whether the NSC clock was running fast.
I think the problem is all to do with the NSC internal clock!
I think the problem is all to do with the NSC internal clock!
TomandJerry
Well-known member
- Oct 1, 2013
- 12,323
Baldseagull
Well-known member
Sadly, your post seems to be slightly worse than the Albion and has slipped down to 22nd.
Post 1 - modern template.
Post 2 - classic.