JimmiGerman
-
Posts
416 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by JimmiGerman
-
-
An elderly Mormon asked his doctor if he thought he'd live to be a hundred.
The doctor asked the man, "Do you smoke or drink?"
"No," he replied, "I've never done either."
"Do you gamble, drive fast cars, and fool around with women?" inquired the doctor.
"No, I've never done any of those things either."
"Well then," said the doctor, "what do you want to live to be a hundred for?":)
- NightSG and Windseeker
-
2
-
That's because you're using the thumbnail URL. If you look at the URLs Google use for their image thumbnails, there is no file extension at the end of the URL. Your browser knows how to interpret the the image however, even without the file extension, by looking at the contents of the file.
The forum software isn't quite that advanced, and it's looking for a image file extension to verify whether it'll accept that type of file. It doesn't see one, so it simply doesn't allow it.
If you look at the image file you posted that did work, you can see the URL does have a JPG file extension at the end of it. Therefore the forum software knows what it is and allows it.
The solution is just to click 'view the full size image'. That will take you to a URL that likely has the file extension at the end of it.
You should be very careful doing this though. It's known as hot-linking and many websites don't like you to embed images direct from their websites. If you do that, it downloads the image from their website each time someone loads this forum page, using their bandwidth and costing them money. They can and do use techniques using cookies to show a different image to anyone who hasn't visited their website directly but is viewing the image via a different website, like lds.net. Sometimes this different image isn't very pleasant.
Thanks for this information, I see the point. Concerning hot-linking and the techniques to show different images to anyone who hasn't visited the site where the image is taken from directly and views it via a different website (like this) I will be careful and try to avoid embeding those images in future.
-
Jeremiah Johnson, with Robert Redford. (1972)
-
Got this song going thru my head. Here is a great version done by a children s choir.
(...)Sorry, but I find this song a bit scaring - to be honest, like from a horror movie.
-
But when I'm clicking on that small image mentioned before (which is not accepted by the forum software) I'm led to a wikipedia site about Hamburg, and from that site I can take an image and put it in here without any problem. So it's probably only Google images here which aren't accepted.
(This one is taken directly from the wikipedia Hamburg website.) -
I've found out there were restrictions concerning images that I wanted to show here in one or two of my posts that don't depend on the size of the image. Very often this message is indicated:
You are not allowed to use that image extension on this community.
Just for example, when I look for Hamburg images, from a Google site like the following (if you look for images you will often find those collections of Google images first), it's rejected by the forum software, even if it's only a small image.
Even a small one (out of the above mentioned Google collection it is the 8th one, showing some shiploaders on a quay) with only 220 x 147 pixels is restricted here. But when I find a similar image on any other website (wikipedia, cinema movies, Hamburg tourism sites, etc.) it works, and the forum software accepts it. Also YouTube videos, and I've only have to copy the link in one of my posts and it's shown as a video automatically without any restrictions. Are especially those Google images under restriction here?
-
Maybe the final solution were Al Bundy's creation of "God's shoes". Windseeker has already presented the suitable pair of socks for these wonderful shoes here in this thread.
-
Deceiving is very different from Cheating.
When you're in a street fight and you jab towards the face but at the last minute stick your thumb out to gouge the eyes so that nobody, not even your opponent, sees it - that's deceiving and can achieve your objective.
When you're in the UFC octagon and you jab towards the face but at the last minute stick your thumb out to gouge the eyes so that nobody, not even the referee, sees it - that's cheating and you may have achieved your objective but you have sold your honor.
What's the difference? You are aware that there are Rules to the Game and promised as gentlemen to abide by it.
I see the point. It's because of abiding the rules. You're right.
-
- Deleted by myself because of my own misunderstanding and stupideness. You are not talking here about real patriots, seahawks, and colts, but about American Football. Sorry. -
-
I took a look at your blog and the first thing that jumped out at me and you might want to change. Any time you are using the full name of the Church is needs to be done correctly.
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
The "d" should be lower case. :)
This is maybe a fine difference but an important one many people don't see or easily seem to ignore.
-
You SIR...are a gentleman and a scholar I might add.
I understand your dilemma and while I find your solution tempting, does not tying a knot in a sock when washing prevent uniform cleaning. I would think that dirt would get trapped in the knot. I would rather have socks on the wrong feet then to have one clean and one dirty sock.
Instead I propose that when donning said socks to hold them open from the top allowing them to hang to the floor. While viewing them from above, gravity will reveal their true nature as they will either curve slightly to the left or the right depending on which foot they belong too. Once their disposition is unveiled you can then done the socks appropriately.
Good luck good sir.
Gravity will reveal their true nature...? I will certainly have to think about it.
-
-
Well, gloves have fitted thumbs with design on one side - easy to determine left and right. But - food prep gloves - right and left are the same - pick two from the box and if the thumb is on the other side, flip it over.
Socks (at least Asian and American ones) are shaped the same for the pair... and it doesn't matter because they're stretchy and encase the foot snug. The high-end ones (like the expensive socks that you buy with your tuxedo) have shaped instep and should be worn on the left or right... these have a design on one side of the sock that is meant to be worn on the outside leg. My husband has a few of these - they don't get mixed in with the everyday socks - they are washed in delicate cycle and put in a separate box than the rest of the socks.
Most of the everyday socks do have ankle-bends so the only consideration is to wear the sock bottom-side down. Sports socks can come as tube socks - doesn't have ankle bends so you can wear bottom up or down doesn't matter. Shoes, on the other hand, are shaped specifically for the left or right foot and don't stretch.
I've already mentioned that I'm sure you are clever and certainly practically minded. But to be honest: your left foot is different from your right. Windseeker has proven it here. And a sock forms out where the left or right big toe is. Right? When changing them, the place for the right big toe is on the left side (actually preserved and formed out for the left big toe), and this looks a bit ugly. It won't disturb young boys or football players, but a highly civilized Gentleman.
-
Do your socks look like this?
Hahahaaa! Nope! This is like it was in the American sitcom (in German: Eine schrecklich nette Familie) when Al Bundy (as a shoe seller assistant) once invented "God's shoes" to make money, and they were of golden metal, and looked the same you've shown here. Of course, it was going to end up in a flop.
-
Now, here's an interesting thing - my 2 kids have the same size socks and underwear... and I grew up with an OCD mother and got used to not sharing spoon/forks let alone socks and underwear.
Solution - one son has fruit of the looms, the other son has hanes.
You are undoubtly clever and maybe prudent. But it doesn't fit my problem.
-
I agree with backroads and anatess. You have black socks, you have blue socks, you have white socks. Just grab 2 of the same color and you're good to go.
Of course now the big thing is to wear socks that don't match. Go figure.
It's a question of esthetics. A right sock belongs to the right foot. A right shoe belongs to the right foot. Or would you recommend to mix your left shoe with your right? No. And what would a sock look like if you weared it several times on your right foot and then suddenly on your left? It wouldn't fit perfectly and it wouldn't look fine. Do you wear a right glove on your left hand, ladies? No, certainly not.
-
My horror story: Sorry, I've deleted it. People might think I'm a coward, afraid of flying. and that would be, of course, a total misunderstanding of the facts.
PS... Thanks, Vort, for the "like" - and sorry I had to delete my story. Please don't tell anyone about my airport disaster in that small Aircross turboprop plane before the take off, and what the stewardess said, and what she called to the pilot, and how the airport bus brought me back to the terminal. You alone certainly know that I'm not afraid of flying, and there was a very important phone call I had forgotten (as I mentioned, it was the time before the mobile phone), and that I had to leave the plane and to return to the terminal immediately. ...
-
I have a better solution - don't buy socks that have to be worn either on the left or the right.
Ye might be talkin' about nylons and those things, ladies' wear. I'm talkin' about good old cotton socks, and they're getting formed out for yer right or left foot after wearing dem a few times. Especially in boots it's quite uncomfortable when dem don't fit exactly. More disturbing than a darn..
rattlesnake's bite.*edited for use of profanity
-
Ye might know the problem: ye put yer socks into the washing machine, an' later ye don't know which ones were the right or left ones. I've found an absolutely reliable solution: always tie a knot in yer right socks (or yer left ones, it depends on ye, if ye're a Yankee or a Southern man). Make a tight knot. Put'em into the machine, and, as the knot won't get open, then lay'em the same way on the heater and let'em dry. They'll be clean and will dry, because the knot doesn't matter. This is what I would recommend to ye, and the (maybe) final solution of an old Yankee problem, and, not to lose my religion, don't le' me unmention the South will rise again.
-
Plutonium...?
-
Death and waiting for resurrection – Body is temporarily separated from the spirit. Kind of sucks for a little bit, but it’s only temporary.
Kind of sucks for a little bit...? How long is t... temporary...?
-
Death and waiting for resurrection – Body is temporarily separated from the spirit. Kind of sucks for a little bit, but it’s only temporary.
Hmmm, what means temporary...? Longer than I need to eat up my popcorns...?
-
I wonder why we have been blessed with a wonderful day for the winter season.
Hah! Come here to Hamburg. Last week it was like in springtime here! About 8 degrees Celsius! But now it has become a bit colder, about 2 to 5 degrees Celsius. We haven't had any snow yet, only rain and storm. Winter? No winter yet.
-
Jeremiah Johnson, with Robert Redford. (1972) Good movie.
Yea! Thanks to you! I'll look for it on YouTube. Think it must be found there.
New to lds.net and want to share my blog
in Share
Posted · Edited by JimmiGerman
Not only the Protestants... I would say many others tend not to like doing that for obvious reasons, either.