Thanks @jumper it looks as if it's still working for you too.

I will ask xper (he's on holiday at the moment) if he can suggest why it may not be working for some members.

That paste was a test.  So I can confirm it works if I *bypass* uBO (which I've never had to do before).

So okay, yeah, I should have checked that first, I didn't isolate which list/rule is the culprit.

But it is something with uBO preventing the pasted image from posting.

No clue, at least I know I can do things the "easy way" (NO FILE HOSTING) and just copy/paste as long as uBO is temporarily bypassed.

@Dave-H ; Would it be too much to ask if I kindly requested that ALL these recent OT posts about image-pasting+posting in the MSFN forum editor be moved to a topic of its own under:

https://msfn.org/board/forum/23-site-amp-forum-issues/

? This, practically dead, thread is not apt for such an issue, it'd be more visible in a "proper place", should other MSFN members with uBO configuration similar to NHTPG's experience the same predicament...

Thanks!

18 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

Also, it could be possible that whatsup just does not work with UNGOOGLED.

Bingo. The mini_installer.exe  file works fine after unpacking.

thx.

btw: I'm wondering which is better: supermium or the fork you suggested...

26 minutes ago, covo said:

btw: I'm wondering which is better: supermium or the fork you suggested...

The e3k-blah fork by FAR.  You couldn't PAY ME to use Supermium!

To each their own, of course.  Browser preference is (and always has been!) a purely personal preference.

There never will be any "one size fits all" browser.

52 minutes ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

The e3k-blah fork by FAR.  You couldn't PAY ME to use Supermium!

becasue...

4 minutes ago, covo said:

becasue...

First and foremost = *personal preference*.  I've stated here at MSFN *dozens upon dozens* of times over the years that there is never a "right answer" to the question of "what browser is better", it *always always ALWAYS* boils down to PERSONAL PREFERENCE.  **ALWAYS**  My hardware is not the same as yours, my OS is not the same as yours, etc etc etc.  What I need for my browser to do is not the same as what you need your browser to do, etc etc etc.

Just off the top of my head -

I am down to only two computers still running XP.  Both of them run x64, I've not ran a 32bit OS in over twenty years.
Whether it is x64 versus x86 or whether it is how my XP is configured for "subpixel font rendering" or "smooth edges of fonts" or whether it is the graphics card or driver, the list is endless, but Supermium has *SEVERAL* areas within the GUI where the font is *CUT OFF* on the very left edge, the first 1/3 to 1/2 of the very first letter is INVISIBLE, the font is SHIFTED to the left.  Discussions do suggest, however, that the FONT CUT OFF ISSUE has been fixed.  No clue, I don't follow Supermium's development on a daily basis.

I *do* keep CURRENT with Supermium as fas as always keeping the MOST RECENT version (as often as I can) on my VirtualBox VMs.
And therein is one of my biggest issues with Supermium.  It does not "behave" the same from inside a VM as it does on real hardware.
From inside a VM, it is absolutely **USELESS**.  Let it sit idle for so much as two tiny minutes and it LOCKS UP, has to be task-killed.
But if you don't catch it fast enough, the CPU is pegged to the point where you CAN *NOT* task-kill, you have to shutdown the VM entirely and restart.

I've used HUNDREDS (literally!) of browsers over the years.  Supermium is the *ONLY* one I have ever encountered that behaves this way inside a VM.
I'm a "patient man" for the most part and these LOCK UPS gets me so INFURTIATED at the computer that I want to pick it up and THROW IT OUT THE WINDOW.
And it's not like Supermium does that "rarely", it does it EACH AND EVERY TIME that I let it sit idle inside a VM.

But it's not like it's just inside a VM, it is TERRIBLE on REAL HARDWARE also.  But yeah, *MY* hardware is *NOT* the same as yours, so you may not have the same experience.

All that aside, the e3k-blah fork is WORLD REKNOWN.
It is FAR more KNOWN around the world!  To the point of other DEVELOPERS turn to IT for GUIDANCE.
You see it on Firefox forks and Chrome/Chromium forks alike, "new developers" will reference e3k-blah OFTEN.
When they are debugging BUG REPORTS, the DEVELOPER will ask "is this bug also present in e3k version?", they will *NEVER* ask "is this bug present in Supermium?"
The e3k forks have a VASTLY SUPERIOR REPUTATION in the circles that I run.  That buys "trust" in my book.  I do *NOT* "trust" Supermium, it CRASHES my VMs far too often.

You literally cannot PAY ME to run Supermium on a daily basis!

9 hours ago, covo said:

I'm wondering which is better: supermium or the fork you suggested

https://github.com/e3kskoy7wqk/Chromium-for-windows-7-REWORK/issues/65

The two pieces of info above have been read and understood. thx