1  2  3  4  5  6  |   Order by default

Nov 23, 2003, 7:01pm

Good then. We are in 100% agreement on that. True debate does not equate to
"hate".
[View Quote]

Nov 26, 2003, 4:13am

Who is the small child who flooded my mailbox (200 emails, but easy to get
rid of, sorry) with the message "YOU FUCK WITH BUSH, YOU FUCK WITH ME
WHORE...THAT DR SEUSS THING WAS WAYYYY OUT OF LINE!"?

I don't think so....you are no equal to George Bush or even one of his dirty
socks. He sure doesn't need a misguided child like you to speak up for him,
he'd be embarrassed.

Why stand behind the phony email address, why not face me with your real
identity? You don't do Bush any justice if you are only willing to defend
him using phony identification. Where were you when I defended MY country in
these news groups? Did you lack the necessary (ahem) physical attributes to
stand along side me then? Even George Bush allows his citizens to say what
they feel, who are you to deny me?

If you really are a US citizen then it's way past your bedtime. Now go to
bed, your mommy might catch you at the PC.

Nov 27, 2003, 6:38am

I'm so disappointed (note I didn't say surprised) that over 24 hours after I
hinted to the one who so identified with George Bush that he used
georgebush at microsoft.com to flood my mailbox, he still hasn't come forward
to identify himself. You're that afraid to stand behind your convictions and
be identified with them? What would you do if George Bush asked you to lay
your LIFE on the line for his convictions as so many are doing? Would you
hide behind your swing set and lob water balloons? No, you'd probably have
your sister do it. I at least have a respect for those who either love or
hate the US but can say so with decency and respect for the individuals they
are talking to-when they say so in their own names, or if in AW, the names
that people know them by-and will allow equal time after saying their
piece-but you? Perhaps you aren't from the US after all, because apparently
you don't know I can "roast" my president with a poem, even criticize him,
without fear of retribution. Look how he handled his detractors in London
lately-with dignity, and respect for their right to show how they felt. (I
even said the poem was partly true-my opinion, my right to hold it- but it
was not my poem to edit. I passed it on the way it was because it was well
written and funny. And-most important-a caricature in words.). But you think
that your little display of virtual terrorism (yep-that was an example) is
how a true American is supposed to handle something from another American
(or human being to human being for that matter) who he doesn't personally
agree with? Obviously. Then you are not worthy of the status. Any status.

[View Quote]

Nov 27, 2003, 3:44pm

[View Quote] >Overall, I feel that boasting about who ended or was in a war isn't
>something we should take pride in. War is not glorious. Neither is it
"Sweet
>and fitting to die for ones country". War is death and fighting - it should
>never be able to start......whether we can see
>past the pathetic rivarly between countries and people is up to you.


I could never imagine a truer statement about war. Besides the fact that it
is generally the rich and powerful of those superpowers sending their young
and (often) innocent to fight their physical battles for them, doing so much
"collateral" damage along the way, the details of the real whys and hows of
war are often lost to history along with the people of power who decided
them. (Although the glory and fame, or infamy, are usually theirs.) We are
often not allowed to know the intricate details of what we are asked to
fight for. We (I assume most) were taught at 8 not to fight, but then taught
at 18 to fight strangers for reasons sometimes unknown to us. Where is the
logic?

In an ideal world, we would be celebrating a global Thanksgiving, for
reasons we could all appreciate.

By the way, we could all take a lesson from your diplomatic skills.

Nov 28, 2003, 4:59am

To the person who sent me 350 more love letters, this time pretending to be
ALaskanShadow, you are wasting your time more than mine. Since you left me
no way to contact you because of your fear, I have to write here. Your
threats against me and others in AW don't worry me, but it wasn't nice to
make them. And the extremely naughty words you use could cause you to become
sterile. You better stop now. Thank you.

Nov 28, 2003, 6:31am

Your point is a good one and I did think about that. That's why I said
"pretending to be" and also asked AS if I might say the mail bomber used
their name in the way I am telling you now, and it seemed to be OK with
them. I did gram ALaskanShadow, who I do not know, and told him or her (I
forgot to ask which they were) the story and they said it wasn't them. I
tend to believe them because you can tell by the 550 total emails that the
emailer would not be the type to purposely say who they are and put
themselves in danger. Though I can't know for sure, of course. I do have
people working on that though. But, the emails were the vilest stuff and
said they were practicing their talent for that kind of stuff on me so they
could work toward worse stuff. There's a lot more to it, I tried not to get
wordy, but still it was important to me that the person knew when they
threatened me against posting in the NG anymore, that it was not their
choice to make. The second mail attack said they didn't really care what I
said in the news groups, they just wanted to attack. If they'd have given me
a valid email address instead of the strange ones they emailed with, I would
have contacted them that way. Seriously, if I'd have known who to ask, I'd
have asked for help or suggestions instead.

[View Quote]

Nov 28, 2003, 7:01pm

Yes, that is something I could do, thanks for the tip, but-wouldn't that
affect my email in general? This person already has my email address so
changing it wouldn't help for this particular psychopath. And no one in
these newsgroups has ever used it (mine) for unfriendly purposes before. I
have had people from the AW newsgroups reply to me in friendly terms several
times on other posts though, using email or grams for various reasons. On
this particular issue I've already had more than one person contact me
within AW to say they've also had similar stuff happen, one being contacted
via telegram by someone claiming to be AS. I just thought that might be kind
of important.

I didn't think my news group views were really radical enough to deserve
what he/she did (and they finally claimed it had nothing to do with my
views) nor do I appreciate having to hide behind the nearest tree like
he/she is doing (by not identifying himself).

By the way, I've just received an email that has the OP passwords of many
worlds including 2 of mine....somehow related?

[View Quote]

Nov 28, 2003, 7:02pm

Right, and she seemed very nice, and concerned about whether it could have
happened to anyone else. I'm glad I contacted her. When the first mail
bombing said it was the poem about Bush that made them mad, and then the
second attack said it was ALaskanShadow (written that way), I did a search
on that name-and a website I found under that name showed that the owner was
not exactly a Bush fan. That's anyone's right to express.

By the way, I've just received an email that has the OP passwords of many
worlds including 2 of mine....somehow related?

[View Quote]

Nov 28, 2003, 8:18pm

I'll send you the exact texts privately (and I only say so here so it
doesn't look like I'm not responding) because it does look incriminating so
I'm sure you will want to get to the bottom of it also.

[View Quote]

Feb 8, 2001, 7:53pm

I never wanted this subject to be my first post to one of AW's newsgroups,
but as long as
it is being said, I am compelled to say my piece. I have read these posts
for maybe 2
months and wanted to learn, share and be a part of them but didn't want to
have to deal
with the anger I would feel (not to be interpreted as fear) when (not if) I
would be torn
apart by and subjected to eep's belittlement of my *newbie* posts. It just
wasn't worth
the frustration. I still read, and learn also, but cannot ask questions or
share anything I
might have to add. Once, by way of introducing myself to him, I corrected
his spelling of
the word hypocrite (his spelling was hipocrit) because I couldn't believe
the irony of
it.(eep replies to dennis13: " So why did you then post in HTML, idiot?
Don't be such a
fucking hipocrit.") I did this in private e-mail because 1. it was certainly
off-topic and 2.I
was not trying to publicly ridicule him, although I'm sure he doesn't
understand the
concept. I will admit though I had a need to show him he was not infallible.
He came
back with the vilest, filthiest names for me that I could imagine, and
certainly am never
usually subjected to in the church in which I happen to work. (Yes, I
mention that on
purpose) He also called me a newbie, which was certainly confusing because I
have
belonged to AW for some years, have owned worlds for some time now, and wasn
't
posting (for reasons I have mentioned) so what at related thing was I a
*newbie* ? But
anyway, I am happy to see that he has used the correct spelling in the many,
many times
he has used the word since. No eep, no thanks expected. I have sat through
these weeks
of seeing him tear people apart for his declaration of their stupidity,
worthlessness and
worst of all their imperfect English. One of these people has been a good
friend to me
and my worlds and in his citizenship of only a few months has become a very
good object
and avatar maker and shares them not only with me but with everyone else.
This person
had the audacity to be born in Germany and has not been able to keep up with
eep's (less
than perfect) command of the English language, although many of our visitors
do not
realize he is not US born until he tells them. This same person convinced me
to read the
newsgroups for what they have to offer and I then did, just in time to see
him singled out
not for what he knew, but the perceived imperfection in the language he used
to share it.
Now, many people have said just never mind eep because he does have
something useful
to say between vile cutdowns if you cower to him appropriately. Well I don't
know about
anyone else but I don't think I enjoy the prospect of looking for a few
nuggets gold (or
would that be fool's gold?) in a field riddled with land mines. My theory
would normally
be that the a person like eep has been figuratively emasculated somewhere
along the line
and that explains his combative ways, but I don't think it's fair that he
needs to do the
same to others to give himself imaginary status. I know this post is
outrageously long for
which I apologize, and I will not add any quotes so that it doesn't get any
longer, you
know what I'm talking about. But I feel so much better. Rip away, eep. My
vote is in.
CarolAnn

Feb 9, 2001, 7:35pm

This is a serious question..asked because of me "newbie" status in this
newsgroup...If I am truly wanting to ask a question to which I don't
know the answer...what better place to ask than where many knowledgable
users can see it? It can't be a self esteem issue-I would already be
telling you I don't know something. There would be nothing to defend.
Feeling the need to "prove" myself before I can ask it or be answered
would be showing low self esteem..and also a catch22 to the extreme. I'm
not sure if I believe completly the saying "The only stupid questions
are the ones not asked" but I think it might fit in the above scenario.
[View Quote]

Feb 9, 2001, 2:30am

I vote to stop
CarolAnn #291871

The word censorship keeps being brought up pertaining to a private company-or a
representative of one-denying a “guest”, paying or not, the right to spew unrestricted filth
(not just ideas, information and opinions). Is this censorship or simply restrictions placed
on all for the good of the whole? Remember this is private enterprise, not government.
The next time you walk into your local Wal-Mart with your mother or child and someone
walks by yelling obscenities over having to wait in a long line think about whether or not
you, or Wal-Mart, has the right to object or remove the offending party. You are a paying
customer after all..but so is he. Obviously you cannot filter someone there but you can
leave or quickly buy some very affective earmuffs so that the offender’s right to spew is
not compromised. Would you accept his mother’s explanation that many find his
language colorful and entertaining and that his complaints are valid? There is no law
against incivility (up to a point) but there is certainly nothing wrong with it. But anyway I
came to cast my vote, but not before giving it some thought. I recalled that in the 1 line
email I sent to eep correcting 1 spelling error, as I’ve explained in an earlier post, I
noticed in his extremely offensive reply (yes, by my standards...want to hear it?) that he
has also sent a copy to ABUSE at (my isp). Now, why did he do that? Did he want to
censor me by having my Internet privileges (rights?) revoked? Was it really abuse? I
realize it was his private e-mail though so I guess I cannot complain about his asking me
to not e-mail him..which he did not...but to report me for a spelling correction without
one warning or notice? Why not just block future e-mails from me? Happily they
apparently disregarded his e-mail because I am still online. I am just bringing this up for
those of you who are defending eep’s right to free speech. Hopefully he would do the
same for you even if you treated him as poorly as he treats some of the “inept” and
foreign born. Is this or is this not a forum for all abilities? If there was no one who
needed his valuable information would he then be needed? Then why does he use the
term “newbie” as an insult? These are just things I have thought about as I’ve read what
some of the more active and talented members of AW have said. I can’t understand some
of the ones who are so complacent..and even “reverant” about the way he talks but I do
agree that a vote might be less fair than a representative of the company deciding the fate
of any poster. Kind of. CarolAnn

[View Quote]

Feb 9, 2001, 5:27am

eep-please read again the quote from the e-mail to which you refer...if
the one line e-mail I sent to you was full of "condescending overtone
and smartassedness" then it was not an attitude, I copied and pasted
that spelling and definition right out of an online dictionary. I was
not trying to get a rise out of you OR provoke you or I would have done
it right here...read again! I WAS trying to make a point, in private,
without ridicule. It is the way I do things. You do not know me or you
would know better. Everyone doesn't do things the way you do. My
comeback to your vile terms for me was NOT the way I normally do things
though and I regret it. Kind of. If you would have only asked who I was
instead of interpreting for yourself who you thought I was, I would not
have to think about that. The term *newbie*, although it now has
negative connotations here, should not be an insult but a stage of
developement. Can you imagine if all the firsts in our lives were met
with the same *newbie* scorn? For example....take your honeymoon.......
I still would like to know what made you refer to me as a newbie? I meet
them everyday I am in AW and am gratified when I can help one in some
little way and enjoy the fact that some seek me out later for one reason
or another. If I begin to feel impatient I certainly don't let them know
it because that might alienate them from me and from AW...which I'm sure
happens often enough as it is. Some learn, some don't but at least I
know I have tried to help in a friendly way. I also find it easy to
learn some things..and not so easy to learn others and am certainly no
expert in all things AW..or even most, but whatever small help I can
give here, and my service to people in my r/l do not mean I don't have a
life, or whatever else that kind of attitude implies to you-as you so
strangely suggested was Facter's reason for his service-but it adds to
it. In my first 2+ years of AW I rarely have felt anything negative in
the "social" aspects of AW..but coming here and reading some of the
things I've read make me wonder if it's a "social" atmosphere at all. I
had no idea these kinds of things went on behind the scenes. I know I
could have stopped reading here but it was too late when I saw friends
being denigrated for no good reason. Think about it...if you can be
angered to the point that you often apparently are by perceived human
imperfection, and can then show it in the way that you do..can I not be
just as angered by purposeful infliction of hurting words on another
person just because you feel they are beneath contempt, and show it the
way I do?

[Once, by way of introducing myself to him, I corrected his spelling of
he word hypocrite (his spelling was hipocrit) because I couldn't believe
the irony of it.(eep replies to dennis13: " So why did you then post in
HTML, idiot? Don't be such a
fucking hipocrit.") I did this in private e-mail because 1. it was
certainly off-topic and 2.I
was not trying to publicly ridicule him, although I'm sure he doesn't
understand the concept. I will admit though I had a need to show him he
was not infallible. He came back with the vilest, filthiest names for me
that I could imagine]
[View Quote]

Feb 9, 2001, 6:18am

I did think about it..and did what I did. Snide remark? What was it?
There was none. And that smirk? That was a smiley face...as in
"smile". I feel no heat, eep, I am not the fearful type...these are only
words after all. It is the
cutting, hurtful words you so generously dole out to everyone else I
take exception to. Do
your worst, it only helps bring out your true colors...as if they don't
already show enough.
But what's this thing with everyone having low self-esteem if they speak
up to you? I think
the opposite might be more accurate. I can understand people respecting
your knowledge but
deferring to your demeanor has to be the act of a coward. I could one on
one with you all
day and only be energized by what I know is right but this of course is
not the place for that
so buh-bye.
[View Quote]

Feb 12, 2001, 7:50pm

Would it have been possible for "I Love Craig" to find out or reasonably
conclude whether
or not AWGate accepted homosexuals before feeling the need to ask? I
realize that he could
not whisper there so the information that he can whisper "help" does him
no good but he is
also directed like this:
" For the Conduct Guidelines please say World Rules or see
http://www.activeworlds.com/conduct.html " If homosexuals were not
allowed by AW I think it
might be stated, as age requirements are in Gor worlds. If he
disregarded the welcome
message's suggestion then I think he was trying to get personal feelings
about it from anyone
who heard him and anything beyond what the guidelines say would also be
personal
interpretation, not AW's guidelines specifically. If "I Love Craig" was
really wanting to know what part of himself it was important to reveal
at AWGate, he could have "listened" for just a short time to see how
many people felt the need to state personal details upon entering or if
personal details were required. It seemed fairly obvious to me that the
information was not solicited. It also seems to me that those appointed
to monitor a world, in
this case AWGate, are only human and at some point have to call them as
they see them, and
to some human minds it could have appeared (even in the altered
conversation) that because
the question was asked it may have been a lead in to chat of that
nature. Why else would a
person state a particular detail, any detail, about himself?


> I did want to assure you that this matter was taken very seriously and
> investigated thoroughly by a number of people including myself.

> On one hand, I am sorry that this situation ever took place. On the
other
> hand, I'm looking at it as a valuable opportunity for learning on all
sides.
> :) It has given me the opportunity to remind the Gate Keepers of their
> precarious position and responsibility, and that they need to choose
their
> words wisely...... as we all should.
>
> Mountain Myst/Kellie Williams
> Executive Team Leader Gatekeepers
> AWCom/Juno3DChat Support Team
> Activeworlds.com, Inc.
>
>
>
>

Apr 11, 2001, 8:01pm

Except..if the citizen who stole the name is also on the same contact
lists..then the name will appear still..as if nothing has changed. All
contact lists you and the thief both appear on will see the name and
think it is still you unless you inform them. There will be a changed
name yes, but it will be the one that you meant to switch to
temporarily. If citizen A and citizen B switched names and were both on
the contact list of citizen C..Citizen C still sees A and B...how would
he know they switched names unless he was told?
[View Quote]

Apr 11, 2001, 10:10pm

I'm very sorry...I posted a reply based on the post that preceded mine.
Both were in the wrong place...but now that I'm here...I wasn't aware
you could apply the cost of your existing citizenship to a
world......the trial worlds they offer for 30 days are supposed to help
you decide if you like world ownership, but if they promised that they
should of course honor it. It would help maybe if this was an e-mail
correspondence you had with them. But if they don't honor that and you
keep the world, it's a nice gesture to offer the extra citizenship to a
tourist who is particularly helpful to you, or maybe to one who seems to
especially like your world. Hope it works out.
[View Quote]

Apr 12, 2001, 1:31am

----- Original Message -----
From: "m a r c u s" <none at sfsdfsd.come>
Newsgroups: community
Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2001 8:42 PM
Subject: Re: Clarification on my post


> "I wasn't aware you could apply the cost of your existing citizenship"
>
> Apparently, you can't. They sell you a citizenship, then when you
want to
> get a world they sell you a world which includes a citizen. If I knew
about
> that, I wouldn't have bought a citizen and built as a tourist. Then,
I
> would have purchased a world for $80. If I buy a world now, it would
come
> to a total of $100.

As I said, I have read the world purchasing pages very thoroughly and
saw that I can see if I like it for free for 30 days...a good deal I
thought. Then when I am ready to buy a world I can send the $100 (for
example) and was happy to see included in the cost are 1, 2 or 3
citizenships..a bonus I thought...the world itself was what costed $100.
It never mentioned anything about a trade-in allowance. I still think
they should honor your special agreement with them, however I guess they
get to set the pricing and we either go along or not. As jfk2 pointed
out, some worlds come with more, so their intention does not seem to
have them as trade-backs...maybe as something a world owner can put to
other uses. Seriously though, if it does say that somewhere and I missed
that too..please let me know..I have some money coming. (kidding here
though...they are a great bonus)


> "It would help maybe if this was an e-mail
> correspondence you had with them."
>
> In my original post I said, "I have been discussing with AW in email"
>
> Please read these posts carefully, sorry for snapping but when you
type the
> same thing over and over again and people don't read your words it
gets very
> frustrating trying to communicate.

I'm sorry, I understand your anger..but I guess what I was getting at
was on the strength of the saved e-mail correspondence with them I am
quite certain if you went about things the right way you will get them
to honor their written promise, provided that's how the wording went.
You said "discussing with AW in email"...have they flat out refused
yet..or are they slow in replying...have you sent them a copy of their
email stating they would allow this? They can, if need be, be reached by
phone as I have done. I admit I can't recall if they have a toll free
number, but you could find that out and if they do...that would
certainly be my next step. Bait and Switch is a serious legal offense
where I am from..and also a serious accusation. Was this a special
circumstance or request? I did read your post carefully and didn't see
how it came about that they promised this. I have read the pages
regarding purchasing a world very thoroughly on several occasions and
don't recall of seeing that stated...but a gaurantee by them should have
to be honored. Persistance usually pays off.

world

A trial world is great for this..and 30 days really fires us your
enthusiasm if you really end up wanting to buy.

Apr 12, 2001, 3:04am

Aha! Now I can call you on not reading thoroughly :-) I quote what I
wrote earlier "But if they don't honor that and you keep the world, it's
a nice gesture to offer the extra citizenship to a tourist who is
particularly helpful to you, or maybe to one who seems to
especially like your world." One advantage I didn't mention is you can
use the new citizenship to build if you like to build undisturbed
too..using your normal cit's privileged password so all your work is in
your normal cit name, then when you want to have fun with your AW
friends..you can do that in your normal citizenship. And as long as your
world is renewed, so will the citizenship.

[View Quote]

Apr 12, 2001, 9:06pm

[View Quote] > AW will get $20 more ($100 total) from each person that buys a
citizenship
> first if they charge that citizen who could have paid for a world at
$80
> instead of $60 using the smallest world as an example.

First of all you mentioned "discount if I try out the citizenship, then
pay for the world later".
The way I see it, you try out the citizenship by being a tourist..if you
like that then for $20/year you get more. You try out the world by
getting a trial..if you like it you pay full price and have extra
citizenship(s) as a bonus. No mention is made of a discount if you try
out a citizenship, then pay for a world later..at least I haven't seen
it. By "honor that" I meant the special agreement you may have had with
them...I never saw exactly how that came about nor have you clarified
when or how you reached this agreement with them so that is how I had to
word it. To my knowledge it isn't mentioned where most of those seeking
to buy a world can see it. Also, yes it is true that AW will get $20
from each person who buys a citizenship and $(whatever amount) if he
also buys a world..to paraphrase what I understand you to say, because
they are two seperate purchases from all I understand. It seems
otherwise the infamous Immigration guy would offer the package of
citizenship/world to tourists. It's been awhile but I don't think he
does.

Apr 12, 2001, 9:21pm

[View Quote] It doesn't? I based my belief that the citizenships were also renewed on
the fact that their renewal page also lists them in the chart.
http://www.activeworlds.com/products/renewal.html Since it isn't the
original purchase page but the renewal page it implies that I thought.

[View Quote]

Sep 14, 2001, 4:45pm

Of Course He should be able to speak his mind...but that is no more
appropriate in a memorial world than is putting up flyers about rumors
surrounding the death of your family member at his/her funeral or
memorial service. A memorial service or place should be and is in r/l
meant to be a time to think of those gone, not anything to do with
obscure peripheral details not directly related to their life. Certainly
not for politically inflaming rumors. I do urge anyone though, since it
has been shown, to go to the website and see that the link leads to a
story that has no proof or other background information. He could have
said that the footage came from his last birthday party and it wouldn't
be less provable at this point. That story had no right to be anywhere
without proof, just hearsay and was only and obviously meant to inflame.
I'm sure CNN has enough grim and gruesome footage to get the point
across without risking their credibility doing something that would be
easy to uncover. Also..weren't people who came their to pay respects to
the dead also entitled to speak their mind about having such a
depressing story where they came to mourn their loss?
[View Quote] [View Quote]

Oct 3, 2001, 9:48pm

How about if I give you a little hint here then..as the world owner CarolAnn
he mentioned without consulting...just as he way overbuilt without
permission to build at all. I feel so strongly about this that I am
compelled to say something that I normally wouldn't be caught saying and to
borrow your phrase... BULLSHIT!!!!! Want to know more? Ask me.
[View Quote]

Oct 3, 2001, 9:48pm

Ok..let me give you a little hint as to the validity of Bodhi's post. As the
world own CarolAnn that he mentions without consulting..just as he way
overbuilt without permission to build at all..let me just borrow your phrase
and say something I normally wouldn't ever be caught saying BULLSHIT!!! Want
to know more? Ask me.
[View Quote]

Oct 3, 2001, 10:03pm

I agree and sorry for posting twice..in my anger at his attempt at public
humiliation I couldn't see straight and thought the first one didn't go.
[View Quote]

Oct 3, 2001, 11:06pm

leave it alone...no one wants to hear this version of your Memorial World
fiasco...you bring shame to the people who's names you mention because that
means they know you...your bitterness and rage are so apparent...your need
for vengeance for whatever wrongs you think were done against you are there
for all to see. And "in love with Ananas"? Who cares if I was? Certainly not
this newsgroup..but if I was, you know that he would know it after 18 months
of a great friendship and working relationship, I would certainly tell him
and we do (or did 'til now) enjoy each other's company..but you know as well
as anyone that there is someone in my life...now keep my name out of your
stupid, ridiculous posts and take your idiocy elsewhere!! And no Goober
King..this will not be a replacement for that other soap opera as far as I'm
concerned...no more from me either..your point was a good one, let his
record speak for itself about the validity of anything further he might have
to say.
[View Quote]

Feb 18, 2002, 6:24pm

Please excuse my naivete here-and believe me it doesn't offend me one bit
who posts his AW related services here, fee based or otherwise-but what is
the difference as to why this advertizement by alterlinks is accepted here
in the community area and the unbelievable reaction to Insanity's posts of a
couple weeks ago in "Worldbuilders", which of course was exactly what
Hosting, objects, etc is related to? This a real question, not an opening
for any other kind of reaction. Before posting this question I looked at
both sites and they both seem to be professionally done and attractive with
many options for an AW world owner that need to be mentioned somewhere if
anyone is ever to be able to take advantage of them.
[View Quote]

Feb 21, 2002, 9:19pm

Why? Because I don't allow bots and they used one. Whether they have a right
or reason to do that is beside the point. I think world owners owe it to
themselves and their builders to stay aware of anything that goes on in his
or her worlds that might jeopardize their investment of time and money. Don'
t you? I happened to be the one who discovered these strange entries in the
logs of the 2 worlds that I host myself and showed someone who I knew might
be able to help me decipher them. When he checked it out he found that there
were others who had this happen. I personally think that the apparent future
browser feature sounds great -I'd like to see that and I don't care if they
check out my worlds, but anytime you attempt to keep something you're doing
on someone's property (rented from you or otherwise) a secret-a birthday
party or burglary or whatever-you take your chances on the reaction of the
recipient if they catch you. You then (and always) have a responsibility to
account for your actions. Should I have kept quiet because there was a
chance that the "Search Spider" had a good reason to be there or was I right
in investigating on the chance that it didn't? I pay a good amount of money
every year to have my worlds, and I think in doing so I have the right to
question what goes on there even by the company from whom I license them. I'
m sorry I untied the first knot that let the cat out of the bag but I also
know that I had the right to look inside under the circumstances.

[View Quote]

Feb 22, 2002, 12:15am

Hello? You are responding to a post that was made an hour before MrGrimm
explained who it was or what he was doing...and as you saw, Ananas's post
said in part "Someone without world bot rights is using a bot in several
worlds." So...using your analogy..that landlord is crashing the party
wearing a disguise. No invitation was required...but there was a sign saying
"no disguises allowed". Would you have known what it was if you had seen it
in the log of your world? You said >If your world is public, you must not be
worried about people entering it and since the bot is doing no harm and is
only in for a split second to take information, why are you wining? If you
don't want the bot to come in, make your world private.< Well "Public" is
allowed in BUT "bot" rights were not allowed...so maybe that explains the
reason for the original post. You supposedly did not have to make a world
private to disallow bots...understand now?

[View Quote]

Feb 22, 2002, 1:19am

Dion, I don't say this to people often because I know when it happens it's
not usually the fault of the person but.....you are incredibly dense. Number
one (1)....when the original post was made, neither the poster nor the world
owner (me) knew what the bot was or who it represented so we had every right
to find out. Do you agree? Number two (2) not only did we not know who it
was, we did not know why it was there nor how it got in a world where bot
rights were not allowed. Do you get that? Was it invading privacy? Yes. Do
we think it was logging chat? Like I said...we didn't know WHAT it was doing
there. MrGrimm explained only later...after the first post was already made.
Do you understand thgis part? Number three (3) Let them put my worlds in
some database that can allow the features to be found using a search
utility...I love visitors. If they didn't want a reaction from me after
finding a strange world log entry though-they should have made sure I would
have no reason to question it. Why have a world log then? Do you understand
these things? Number four (4)...I am sure you must have someone reading
these posts for you so please ask them for me to do a better job of
explaining some of these posts. Thank you. And...as Steller says, some would
and some wouldn't want to participate and if closing worlds disallows
management to come in why shouldn't having no bot rights disallow them from
having that? They are allowed in my worlds in any way, shape or form, but if
it is presently disabled, ask me if I will change that for them, don't do it
for me. Is that all right with you?
[View Quote]

1  2  3  4  5  6  |   Order by default