|
|
punky feople // User Search
punky feople // User Search
Feb 10, 2002, 10:17am
I mentioned in the community group but will mention here too as it seems
appropriate. Shameless promotion? Maybe. But when people complain about
what they dont like in life, why not do something about it rather than sit
and complain? Well I am doing my best to do this. While others have tried
and failed to create something "like" AW over the years, I can promise that
my project will be released and it will grow.
Find out more, visit www.seeray.com
What makes me think I can succeed where others have failed? I created
OuterWorlds and have the experience in multi-user networking to make it
happen. I also know the down falls of the AW technology as deep as the core
Universe software. To much overhead for the backend systems.
Anyway, if you are pissed, do something about it, if you can't do something
about it, look around for someone that is.
Thanks,
Derek Rayburn aka SeeRay
derek at cyboria.com
[View Quote]"xavarella" <xavarella at unforgettable.com> wrote in message
news:3c44e8b5 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> I'm not complaining, but I don't plan on paying either.
>
> goober king <rar1 at acsu.buffalo.edu> wrote in message
> news:3C44BD7D.5040902 at acsu.buffalo.edu...
> So rather than piss and moan about how much AWC sucks and
>
>
>
|
Feb 11, 2002, 3:04am
Look at Coca Cola, anyone remember "New Coke"? AW pulled the same scam and
to a degree it is going to work. Change the product complety and take away
what everyone knew then after they get their bitching and moaning out change
the product back a "little" and the customers will be just as happy as they
were before. Granted Coke changed their product back to the same formula
but they also went up on the prices of coca cola and everyone swallowed the
change of price just so they could have their old coca cola back.
I have worked with the AW product from the beginning, I have been around
since Ron, Danny and others were still at Worlds, Inc on paychecks. I have
not only studied all possible business avenues for AW technology but I have
tried more than you can imagine while I was running OuterWorlds. I will
thank AW for two things,
1) I have spent enough time in AW to now know exactly what it takes to make
this type of business not only fully acceptable to the community but
extremely marketable while at the same time being attractive to an extremely
large user base. Without AW I would have never realized that.
2) I now realize that the only way I can fully see if my theory is correct
is going to be to write my own software. Management at AW does not want to
hear my suggestion and after what it has cost me to obtain "The Keys To The
Kingdom" (as my partners call it, who have seen my vision and they are as
excited as me), I would never offer my solution to AW's long standing
problem to them anyway.
I do love AW, I will always love AW, I will tell my grandchildren about AW
even after it is long gone. It is an amazing technology and it deserves so
much more. But some people just do not get it and unfortunately for us,
those people are running the company. Ron Britvich was fighting the same
battle we are all fighting now, a few years ago. He did not like the way
they were taking advantage of the users and ignoring the full potential of
the product and its future plans. Ron was a true visionary.
Sorry JP, but your antics and avoidance of me while I was paying you $25,000
for a universe was uncalled for. Sorry Rick, I remember helping you spell
check your letter to attract investors way back when but for some reason my
requests for you to contact me or consider my ideas has gone unacknowledged.
Roland your a great programmer! You have great visions for the Software and
I only wish some of the things you told me about 3 years ago would finally
make it into the software.
AW RULES!!!!! but I am soon to move on.
Oh yeah, if the new pricing plan is a result of user suggestions, would
someone step forward and send me a copy of your letter where you convinced
AW as a USER that what they are doing now is any better than the Jan 2nd
attack? I would like to be just as convinced as AW and maybe since the new
pricing structure was from suggestions and all, I would like to read the
original suggestion myself and see if it convinces me.
I don't think that person exists. I think its easy to say "we listened to
you and formed our new structure around what you suggested" when its hard
to pinpoint if anyone at all suggested the things they are now doing.
Especially with a few thousand users. (or are they still claiming to have
160,000 users?)
Thanks,
Derek Rayburn
derek at cyboria.com
[View Quote]"lara" <Lara at tnlc.com> wrote in message news:3C67440B.D36FFEC3 at tnlc.com...
> Goob, AWCorp suddenly unveiled the ill-fated price plan of January 2 on
its users without warning and without asking for input from the
community-at-large.
>
> Does the February revision really indicate a willingness to listen to
constructive criticism? Or is the revision better described as a sheer
survival response? Droves of previously loyal citizens and world owners not
only complained about the January price plan, but told AWCorp in no
uncertain terms... "If you do this, we cannot/will not renew our
citizenships or our worlds. Good-bye."
>
> The February revision doesn't reflect a change in attitude toward the
"community" at all, imho. Given the reaction to the January plan - the
"complaints", if you will - the company had no choice but to try something
else that the users might swallow. Or just pull the plug. You can bet that
if they had NetBroadcast making money for them, the plug *would* probably
already have been pulled on this browser/software.
>
> Don't get me wrong. I understand full well that if ActiveWorlds (the
program) can't make money for Activeworlds, Corp (the company) AWCorp will
have to let this go. I don't expect any business to exist as an altruistic
exercise. I would love to see this program rolling in the dough for them.
I'm all for this program making money so the program itself can survive.
>
> Many users probably did phone and write the company to offer constructive
ideas (along with strident complaints) during January. However, the February
revision hit the website the same way January's did. No draft for the
userbase at large to look at ahead of time and critique before it went into
effect. It's still a "we're the corporate executives - we know best what
will make this program successful" attitude. That would be understandable
in a large company doing a traditional kind of business. But this is a
program with a "community" aspect to it which makes it not fit the usual
business model. This program can succeed and be profitable only if that's
fully recognized and capitalized upon. I still don't see that management
learned much of anything from the debacle of January 2nd about how to make a
program like this succeed financially.
>
> Does management really think the majority of people who said "you need
tourists back" meant it's good for tourists to be corraled in AWGate world
with no opportunity to try out building? The February plan doesn't allow
tourists to enter AWSchool world or any other AWCorp owned public building
world. As one person at the Gate said, "it's like letting them sit in the
car but not giving them the keys for a test drive."
>
> I seriously doubt that the majority of world owners who asked for return
of tourists meant that they would pay an additional $59.95 fee in order to
buy "permission" to make a world *they had already bought* tourist
accessible again. The unfairness of that aside, management's idea that
making it difficult for tourists to see worlds other than AWGate would be an
"incentive" to get them to register, is ludicrous.
>
> Perhaps the day will come before it's too late, that management will see
the value of a good idea you tried to get going last year, Goober... a way
to get "constructive" input from the community at large. Back then you
meant it as a way to get ideas about how to improve the features. It's
still a good idea today; however, with a focus now on brainstorming for ways
to increase registrations and make the program profitable...able to survive
and flourish in the long run.
>
> However, if management continues to regard the "community" as nothing more
than a virtual anthill, and looks upon the userbase as annoyances who just
"don't understand business", there isn't much hope that the the rate of
registrations will ever increase the way it could.
>
> You know the popular phrase that most managers in every business have
learned by rote: "we value you and welcome your input"? Well, I'll use
Aine's phrase (below): "I don't have any confidence that that is true."
>
> Lara
>
> goober king wrote:
news:3C44BD7D.5040902 at acsu.buffalo.edu...
not
solutions
listen
constructive and reasonable solutions. Those were, for the most part,
ignored. You can go ahead and think AWC is willing to listen, and that it
sees the creative potential in this software, but frankly, Goober, I don't
have any confidence that that is true.
|
Feb 10, 2002, 10:31am
Try the Quark editor, there are plug-ins that allow you to un-pak bsp files
and extract their .map files as well as many other compressed types of game
files.
search for quark on google.
Thanks,
Derek Rayburn
derek at cyboria.com
[View Quote]"dabartender" <never at mind.com> wrote in message
news:3c65f227$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> Plugging the phrase "Quake map editor" into Google pulls up roughly 50,000
> semi-relebant hits LOL...I can see where it might be difficult to sift
thru
> all that :D
>
> I haven't played with Quake stuff at all, but I'm sure there's *something*
> to fit the bill *somewhere*...it's just going to be a question of
narrowing
> down the field. Have you thought about posting on any of the message
boards
> at various Quake sites, and maybe asking what the folks are using for
their
> editing? I think that'd be my first stop at this point. But running
through
> the top 20 or 30 hits on the Google search should also yield some good
info.
>
> Good luck! :-)
>
> "johnny b" <uniquect at optonline.net> wrote in message
> news:3c65db8f at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> What
> .MAP
> none
play,
>
>
|
Feb 10, 2002, 10:17am
I mentioned in the community group but will mention here too as it seems
appropriate. Shameless promotion? Maybe. But when people complain about
what they dont like in life, why not do something about it rather than sit
and complain? Well I am doing my best to do this. While others have tried
and failed to create something "like" AW over the years, I can promise that
my project will be released and it will grow.
Find out more, visit www.seeray.com
What makes me think I can succeed where others have failed? I created
OuterWorlds and have the experience in multi-user networking to make it
happen. I also know the down falls of the AW technology as deep as the core
Universe software. To much overhead for the backend systems.
Anyway, if you are pissed, do something about it, if you can't do something
about it, look around for someone that is.
Thanks,
Derek Rayburn aka SeeRay
derek at cyboria.com
[View Quote]"xavarella" <xavarella at unforgettable.com> wrote in message
news:3c44e8b5 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> I'm not complaining, but I don't plan on paying either.
>
> goober king <rar1 at acsu.buffalo.edu> wrote in message
> news:3C44BD7D.5040902 at acsu.buffalo.edu...
> So rather than piss and moan about how much AWC sucks and
>
>
>
|
Feb 11, 2002, 3:04am
Look at Coca Cola, anyone remember "New Coke"? AW pulled the same scam and
to a degree it is going to work. Change the product complety and take away
what everyone knew then after they get their bitching and moaning out change
the product back a "little" and the customers will be just as happy as they
were before. Granted Coke changed their product back to the same formula
but they also went up on the prices of coca cola and everyone swallowed the
change of price just so they could have their old coca cola back.
I have worked with the AW product from the beginning, I have been around
since Ron, Danny and others were still at Worlds, Inc on paychecks. I have
not only studied all possible business avenues for AW technology but I have
tried more than you can imagine while I was running OuterWorlds. I will
thank AW for two things,
1) I have spent enough time in AW to now know exactly what it takes to make
this type of business not only fully acceptable to the community but
extremely marketable while at the same time being attractive to an extremely
large user base. Without AW I would have never realized that.
2) I now realize that the only way I can fully see if my theory is correct
is going to be to write my own software. Management at AW does not want to
hear my suggestion and after what it has cost me to obtain "The Keys To The
Kingdom" (as my partners call it, who have seen my vision and they are as
excited as me), I would never offer my solution to AW's long standing
problem to them anyway.
I do love AW, I will always love AW, I will tell my grandchildren about AW
even after it is long gone. It is an amazing technology and it deserves so
much more. But some people just do not get it and unfortunately for us,
those people are running the company. Ron Britvich was fighting the same
battle we are all fighting now, a few years ago. He did not like the way
they were taking advantage of the users and ignoring the full potential of
the product and its future plans. Ron was a true visionary.
Sorry JP, but your antics and avoidance of me while I was paying you $25,000
for a universe was uncalled for. Sorry Rick, I remember helping you spell
check your letter to attract investors way back when but for some reason my
requests for you to contact me or consider my ideas has gone unacknowledged.
Roland your a great programmer! You have great visions for the Software and
I only wish some of the things you told me about 3 years ago would finally
make it into the software.
AW RULES!!!!! but I am soon to move on.
Oh yeah, if the new pricing plan is a result of user suggestions, would
someone step forward and send me a copy of your letter where you convinced
AW as a USER that what they are doing now is any better than the Jan 2nd
attack? I would like to be just as convinced as AW and maybe since the new
pricing structure was from suggestions and all, I would like to read the
original suggestion myself and see if it convinces me.
I don't think that person exists. I think its easy to say "we listened to
you and formed our new structure around what you suggested" when its hard
to pinpoint if anyone at all suggested the things they are now doing.
Especially with a few thousand users. (or are they still claiming to have
160,000 users?)
Thanks,
Derek Rayburn
derek at cyboria.com
[View Quote]"lara" <Lara at tnlc.com> wrote in message news:3C67440B.D36FFEC3 at tnlc.com...
> Goob, AWCorp suddenly unveiled the ill-fated price plan of January 2 on
its users without warning and without asking for input from the
community-at-large.
>
> Does the February revision really indicate a willingness to listen to
constructive criticism? Or is the revision better described as a sheer
survival response? Droves of previously loyal citizens and world owners not
only complained about the January price plan, but told AWCorp in no
uncertain terms... "If you do this, we cannot/will not renew our
citizenships or our worlds. Good-bye."
>
> The February revision doesn't reflect a change in attitude toward the
"community" at all, imho. Given the reaction to the January plan - the
"complaints", if you will - the company had no choice but to try something
else that the users might swallow. Or just pull the plug. You can bet that
if they had NetBroadcast making money for them, the plug *would* probably
already have been pulled on this browser/software.
>
> Don't get me wrong. I understand full well that if ActiveWorlds (the
program) can't make money for Activeworlds, Corp (the company) AWCorp will
have to let this go. I don't expect any business to exist as an altruistic
exercise. I would love to see this program rolling in the dough for them.
I'm all for this program making money so the program itself can survive.
>
> Many users probably did phone and write the company to offer constructive
ideas (along with strident complaints) during January. However, the February
revision hit the website the same way January's did. No draft for the
userbase at large to look at ahead of time and critique before it went into
effect. It's still a "we're the corporate executives - we know best what
will make this program successful" attitude. That would be understandable
in a large company doing a traditional kind of business. But this is a
program with a "community" aspect to it which makes it not fit the usual
business model. This program can succeed and be profitable only if that's
fully recognized and capitalized upon. I still don't see that management
learned much of anything from the debacle of January 2nd about how to make a
program like this succeed financially.
>
> Does management really think the majority of people who said "you need
tourists back" meant it's good for tourists to be corraled in AWGate world
with no opportunity to try out building? The February plan doesn't allow
tourists to enter AWSchool world or any other AWCorp owned public building
world. As one person at the Gate said, "it's like letting them sit in the
car but not giving them the keys for a test drive."
>
> I seriously doubt that the majority of world owners who asked for return
of tourists meant that they would pay an additional $59.95 fee in order to
buy "permission" to make a world *they had already bought* tourist
accessible again. The unfairness of that aside, management's idea that
making it difficult for tourists to see worlds other than AWGate would be an
"incentive" to get them to register, is ludicrous.
>
> Perhaps the day will come before it's too late, that management will see
the value of a good idea you tried to get going last year, Goober... a way
to get "constructive" input from the community at large. Back then you
meant it as a way to get ideas about how to improve the features. It's
still a good idea today; however, with a focus now on brainstorming for ways
to increase registrations and make the program profitable...able to survive
and flourish in the long run.
>
> However, if management continues to regard the "community" as nothing more
than a virtual anthill, and looks upon the userbase as annoyances who just
"don't understand business", there isn't much hope that the the rate of
registrations will ever increase the way it could.
>
> You know the popular phrase that most managers in every business have
learned by rote: "we value you and welcome your input"? Well, I'll use
Aine's phrase (below): "I don't have any confidence that that is true."
>
> Lara
>
> goober king wrote:
news:3C44BD7D.5040902 at acsu.buffalo.edu...
not
solutions
listen
constructive and reasonable solutions. Those were, for the most part,
ignored. You can go ahead and think AWC is willing to listen, and that it
sees the creative potential in this software, but frankly, Goober, I don't
have any confidence that that is true.
|
Feb 10, 2002, 10:06am
You know it seems to me that most people take different approaches to things
they do not like in life. Myself I am just as pissed about the price
increase then decreased (this is probably best referred to as the New Coke
scam) as I have been most of the desicions that AW have made on a business
level.
So what have I done? I decided to just start over. I actually started
completely over. No AW involved. If you want to see what I am talking
about, visit www.seeray.com
My point is why complain if you think you can do better, then get off your
ass and do it. I can't promise that what I do will ever be what AW is but I
can promise that while many have tried and failed to create an AW type
system without ever reaching market, I can promise that I will release and
the system will grow to be something amazing.
Thanks,
Derek Rayburn aka SeeRay (Creator of OuterWorlds),
derek at cyboria.com
Feb 10, 2002, 5:09pm
Gav, Does the AW community know that it is you that is distributing the
hacked Universe servers? As for OW you have no clue what really happened.
Most people don't, why? becuase they are listening to one sided rants and
raves that are simply not true, but I on the other hand will not stand in a
community news group and defend myself about things I did or didn't do in
OW.
> Ok, this bit really pisses me off. This is an ACTIVEWORLDS COMMUNITY
> newsgroup. If you think you little VB project can help the AW Community
> then I suggest you think again. I consider this as pointless drivell in
the
> AW newsgroup, if you want to talk about it somewhere, try
> sci.virtual-worlds.apps or something, here is not the place and is not
> helping your reputation, your product nor AW. Now about your product in
> general; I personally would not trust any project that uses a ready made
> engine, including renderware. But in the case of AW, I will ignore the
> issue because at least its a C based engine that functions on many
> platforms. Whereas you project is based on a planetsourcecode.com server
> example, and a ready made VB engine. Cant wait to see when your first
beta
> is 4 times the file size of AW, with an insecure protocol and a serious
lack
> of creativity. I may be wrong, but I think people need something that is
> exactly like AW or NOTHING like AW. I know this simply because I tried
much
> the same thing over a year ago, I had users, I had interactive avatars, I
> had downloadable worlds, I had everything needed for a beta product, but
it
> simply was not what was needed for the community. Maybe your product will
> take off and you will become a multi-millionaire, in which case I will
take
> my hat off to you.
Here is not the place? To tell people to stop bitching about AW and if they
dont like it to shut up and do something about like I am doing? Sounds like
AW to me.
How do you know what my system is developed in? only 6 people on earth have
ever seen it and I trust these people with my life albeit there were some
involved with OW that I had the same trust with and it was betrayed. How do
you know that my system isn't built around a C engine? (pssst it is) Whats
wrong with basing code on something someone else did on planetsourcecode?
Do you have any submissions there? Yes I will admit now that my system will
be larger than AW on initial download but not only are you comparing apples
and oranges, you forget that the average world (textures, objects, avatars,
seqs and object database) is around 30 megs each, who cares what size the
app is! hehe
What you tried a year ago, I saw, it was nothing more than the AW SDK with a
seperate 3D engine and when people talked in your world they were also
chatting in an AW world, when they logged in, they were actually logging
into an AW world. So why did you stop development on it? It was not what
was needed for the community? So your next venture was to hack the
universe? That was really needed!
I doubt I will ever become a millionaire, would be nice, but that is not
what I am doing this for. I am writing this software because I have had
visions of 3D enteractive environments much longer than AW has been around,
when I found AW I stopped all development towards creating my own system
because I fell in love with AW.... I have since been tossed around on more
levels than just a citizen getting slapped with price increases I have also
spent the last 4 years trying to make a business successful based on the
core AW technology and the only reason it ever failed was because of the
pricing structure of the product itself and the lack of understanding and
willingness to work with me from AW.
Ohhhh... Yes I do own ActiveWorlds.net I have owned it since before they
supposedly trademarked AW and I have the documents from my lawyer to prove
it. I also bought it before they changed their name to ActiveWorlds Inc.
And as for my project utilizing the domain name? haven't yet but thats not
a bad idea, thanks Gav.
Anyone want to buy it?
Thanks,
Derek Rayburn
derek at cyboria.com
[View Quote]"gavroche" <gav at vrg8.com> wrote in message
news:3c66a1b4$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> "punky feople" <derek at cyboria.com> wrote in message
> news:3c66625d$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> things
Coke
business
>
> I honestly think they are doing a good job of managing the public. Ok,
they
> have made the odd mistake but AW still exists right?
>
>
>
your
but
> I
and
>
> I cant wait to see the amazement on my face when your product becomes
> amazing. : )
>
>
> The citizens and tourists of Outer Worlds where the creators of Outer
> Worlds, you just provided them with a starting point and hid away in the
> darkness. If everyone knew about your recent actions against Outer
Worlds,
> you would more than likely be considered the destroyer of Outer Worlds.
>
> -Gav
>
> PS. I know this will send out some bad vibes, but this is all my opinion
and
> we are all entitled to them. I could call Derek Rayburn a lot of very
> colorful words, but this is not the time nor the place for that.
>
> I got my fire extinguishers, if you want to flame me.... go ahead.
>
>
|
Feb 11, 2002, 2:44am
Mac you have the right idea about the marketing of the AW product and why
it, in my opinion, is failing. They are placing to many restrictions on the
user/land limitations which strangles any possible growth of the technology
on a world wide scale.
As for Gav, I will testify in a court of law and if I dig deep enough I can
prove it, that in fact Gav is the single person responsible for distributing
not only a hacked version of the ActiveWorlds Universe Server to Guardian
and Likeness of OuterWorlds, but he also documented to Guardian how to hack
away all the user limits and land limits in the worlds as well. He also
documented what happens if you raise the land limits in both the World
server and the Universe server above 65535. I have the emails somewhere.
In fact the moment that Roland and Bill sent out a copy of the 3.2 Universe
server addressed to myself, Likeness and Guardian within minutes Gav had
cranked up a copy of the new universe on his machine in an attempt to start
applying those cracks to the new version. The universe software now sends
back IP addresses and other information to AW as soon as it attempts to
launch. Roland and Bill caught on to this and this is how I found out that
Guardian had sent the universe to Gav.
Gav shut up and go back to OW.
Yes I am sure that as soon as AW caught on to Gav being responsible they
wanted him to start researching security for them. Natural for a company
like AW to want to close the gaps that Gav found.
As for who created the browser for XW, who cares!? All the browser needed
was [universe] host = xworld.url.com port=5670 in the ini.
Besides of all the topics of my original post, gav, you sure did get quite
defensive about this one topic. Guilty conscious? If you didn't do it,
don't respond to this any further and let the truth find its way to light
without my comments and without yours. You drop it, I will drop it. The
truth always comes out sometimes without anyone saying a word.
Thanks,
Derek Rayburn
derek at cyboria.com
[View Quote]"macb" <Z at X.Y> wrote in message news:3C6706AD.5080701 at X.Y...
> Well I don't have a horse in this race. But I know that AW has in the
> past rewarded people sort of as a pay-off for not doing bad things, once
> they had demonstrated that they COULD do bad things. There is some of
> that in the origins of the PK's in fact.
>
> White Hat hacking is a valuable thing as long as the person responsible
> doesn't decide to change hats somewhere along the line.
>
> There are some well known hackers that constantly break Microsoft
> security. The responsible ones give MS a few weeks to produce a patch
> before announcing the flaw to the world.
>
> Others can't resist doing it the other way around though... making sure
> that they get credit for the hack. It's an ego thing.
>
> If AW simply charged for the browser...and then charged for upgrades,
> then charged for the server, and corresponding upgrades, and then let
> people have all the users and land that their servers could support...
> then there would be very little reason to hack anything. There would
> also be a lot more users in my opinion. It's not a model that AWLD has
> ever shown any interest in. Adobe has.
>
> AW is such a tempting hack target I suspect because it attempts to exert
> control over things (User ID, user limits, land limits) that don't
> really have any (real) cost associated with them.
>
> Just curious: Can you be sure that someone didn't hack into your server
> and steal a copy of the hacked server? Stranger things have happened.
>
> Also, that part about you hosting a cracked server for someone else, and
> therefore not being responsible for it. You lost me there somewhere.
> I'm sure your intentions were honorable though. Right?
>
> One of the first macro viruses for MS Office was for "educational
> purposes". It still got out and caused some damage.
>
> There have been some bots out there that sent passwords back to the
> mother ship too. The average user has no way of knowing this. When
> discovered the author can always claim it was left over from the
> debugging stage.
>
> The term hacker was originally applied to people who created things...
> for people to actually use. Now that the term is more often applied to
> people who try to break things, regardless of their motives, its a shame
> that the creative people have to share the epithet.
>
> I don't know any of the people who are battling it out with each other
> here. Quite an interesting conversation though. Keep it up.
>
>
> gavroche wrote:
>
otherwise
hashed
servers.
would
to
really
AWST
u k
Universe
to
servers
server.
universe
One
the
to
first
>
|
Feb 11, 2002, 2:45am
Yes that is Danny and Ron's project and it is doing quite well. Check it
out sometime and give it a try. Unfortunately it seems there are much more
teenagers talking about young broken hearts than anything but its still a
great system with many users.
Thanks,
Derek Rayburn
derek at cyboria.com
[View Quote]"macb" <Z at X.Y> wrote in message news:3C66FAA6.5000907 at X.Y...
> Yep, I thought that was interesting too.
>
> Also it looks like AskEarth is becoming a real product rather than just
> a demo.
>
> dzap wrote:
>
>
|
Feb 11, 2002, 2:46am
Straight A's?
--
Thanks,
Derek Rayburn
derek at cyboria.com
[View Quote]"metawraith" <metawraith at ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:3c66c998 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> just click it alpha
> you will see that punky is all straight A's
>
> ---
>
> "alphabit phalpha" <alphabit at swbell.net> wrote in message
> news:3c66b359$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> huh?
>
> "gavroche" <gav at vrg8.com> wrote in message
> news:3c66ac2d$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
>
>
>
>
|
Feb 12, 2002, 7:03am
www.askearth.com you will find Ron there. Its his latest project.
--
Thanks,
Derek Rayburn
derek at cyboria.com
[View Quote]"casay" <casay2 at attbi.com> wrote in message
news:3c685add$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> *Dreams that Ron is still out there and maybe interested in all of
> this............ He sure knew what to do with the technology and we all
> wouldn't be where we are now if he was still around or if his ideas had
been
> listened to. How many years ago was Vegas and those wonderful
conversations?
>
> *waves to dzap and HUGE HUGZ stranger!
> Casay
>
> "dzap" <dzap at ldzap.nu> wrote in message
> news:3c66f983$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
>
|
Feb 12, 2002, 7:07am
Proceed away. I have the proof and will present it either to a lawyer or to
a judge. Besides the hacked universe you sent was a full copy of the AW
code complete with their embeded copyrights. But you had changed the
universe with a hex editor to allow unlimited land and unlimited users.
Derek Rayburn
711 Signal Mountain Rd
#165
Chattanooga, TN 37405
hehe
--
Thanks,
Derek Rayburn
derek at cyboria.com
[View Quote]"gavroche" <gav at vrg8.com> wrote in message
news:3c6787a5 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> I accept your offer to stand in a court of law. Please provide me with
> details and my solicitor will contact you shortly.
>
> I just cant understand why you continue to make false statements about me,
> you must be a very bitter person for some reason. And as I figure, you
cant
> have two pennies to rub together after holding OW to ransom. anyhow,
> whether you can afford it or not, I will fight you all of the way, even if
> it means I have to loose one or all of my businesses.
>
> I never denied receiving any universe server from anyone, nor cracking
one.
> As for X Worlds, I do believe it uses a different encryption system to the
> standard AW version, not to mention it was run on a cloned universe server
> designed and written by me for SGI IRIX 6.2. All of my activities on this
> project have been documented and can be used as evidence in a court of
law.
>
> I wont ask you to retract your comments because I know you are too bitter
> and arrogant to do so. From here on, all communications will be via my
> solicitor.
>
> I hereby formally request to start legal proceedings on the charge of
> industrial and commercial slander and I will proceed to prosecute you to
the
> full extent of the law.
>
> No Regards,
>
> Luke Twydell.
>
> Please forward all legal documents to:
>
> Mr L A Twydell
> HiLine Computer Services LTD
> 13 Rowlands Close
> Foxton
> Cambridgeshire
> CB2 6SQ
> United Kingdom
>
> Tel: +44 (0)1223 571076
>
> "punky feople" <derek at cyboria.com> wrote in message
> news:3c674c17 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
why
> the
> technology
> can
> distributing
Guardian
> hack
somewhere.
> Universe
> start
sends
> that
company
needed
quite
light
The
once
responsible
patch
sure
has
exert
server
happened.
and
to
shame
> (Which
> EXE
> past.
and
he
> your
access
I
> 10,
....
> L
being
> in
> them
worlds.
from
> close
> friends.
> help
> Software.
> in
> universe
> that
> invitation
> that
>
>
|
Feb 12, 2002, 7:08am
I Agree Chris. Should be funny.
--
Thanks,
Derek Rayburn
derek at cyboria.com
[View Quote]"sw chris" <chrisw10 at nckcn.com> wrote in message
news:3c684ebc at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> Let us know how it turns out. This one, should be interesting, if not a
bit
> ridiculous. In either case, I'm still curious.
>
> SW Chris
>
> "gavroche" <gav at vrg8.com> wrote in message
> news:3c6787a5 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
me,
> cant
if
> one.
the
server
this
> law.
bitter
> the
> why
on
I
> Guardian
also
> somewhere.
had
> sends
to
they
> company
> needed
> quite
it,
> light
> The
the
> once
of
> responsible
> patch
> sure
upgrades,
let
support...
would
> has
> exert
> server
> happened.
> and
somewhere.
When
things...
> to
> shame
other
the
and
no
remember
> and
that
> he
of
> access
if
> I
AWST
> ...
> being
the
allowed
> worlds.
> from
and
seen
the
was
>
>
|
Feb 12, 2002, 5:01pm
You know this all started by me telling people to stop bitching about AW
because if they had unanswered complaints then they should do something
about it, like start a new piece of software. Seems simple to me. That
statement is actually in AW's defense.
As for me trying to take OW for everything they had, you obviously have no
clue what OW was or is or who created it.
Tried more than once to create my own versions of AW software? Show me
because for the life of me I can't remember ever programming any of that. I
would love to see something I have done in the past that I dont even
remember.
As for court, well that is so funny I wont even go there. If I receive
notice I Will be there. hehehe
--
Thanks,
Derek Rayburn
derek at cyboria.com
[View Quote]"robbie" <robbie at oriox.com> wrote in message
news:3c694c5f at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> Derek, you really are pathetic...Gav is going to kill you in that court,
and
> I'll be there to back him up, and don't be suprised if Roland is too.
>
> You really are immature somtimes. When it bares down to it, your just a
> bitter miser who attempted to take OW for everything they had, and has
tried
> more than once to create your own versions of Active Worlds software.
>
> I can't wait to see you in court, idiot.
>
> -Robbie
>
> "punky feople" <derek at cyboria.com> wrote in message
> news:3c68db71$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
a
> with
about
> you
anyhow,
> even
cracking
to
on
of
my
of
you
> to
> and
> restrictions
> enough
how
> to
He
> World
Gav
> to
now
attempts
> out
responsible
browser
get
do
to
it.
in
> things,
> some
Microsoft
a
making
then
> AWLD
to
don't
> else,
"educational
> the
> applied
a
or
party.
of
date
> the
> accepted
> universe
> possession
sign
> my
have
citizenships
> Gavroche,
of
caused
Worlds
> universe
> server
protocol
> universe
volunteered
> to
> "cloned"
hacks
> to
not
> worlds.
cloned
> created
in
what
>
>
|
Feb 12, 2002, 5:10pm
I am not going to sue him, never mentioned it myself. I could care less if
he hacks AW. I simply said "I would testify in a court of law" as a show of
how I know for a fact that he distributed a hacked universe server (through
email not on a webpage). Someone else has to care enough about AW to take
him to court then I will simply show up and testify.
Actually it seems that now he wants to sue me for saying things he didn't
like reading in a newsgroup. LOL boy a judge is going to love having his
time wasted on that one.
Its simple, like I mentioned before, I told people to stop bitching about
AW and do something about it if they felt that strongly about the crap going
on. Gav comes in and tries to discredit me...so if he had not opened his
mouth I would have let my knowledge of him slip away into the night but
instead he wants to start a pissing match. While he is pissing in every
direction, I simply say I know for a fact and could "for example" prove in a
court of law that he did distribute a hacked version of the aw universe. I
never said anything about OW and anyone that does is clueless, I never said
anything about protocols or XW or hosting universes or anything else, all I
said is what I know.
Have a nice day =^)
--
Thanks,
Derek Rayburn
derek at cyboria.com
[View Quote]"kah" <kah at kahnews.cjb.net> wrote in message
news:3c6957f6 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> unless the AW have patented the AW protocol (fat chance of that...) they
> have no rights over him, since he's just using a protocol that happens to
be
> compatible with the AW browser. Trillian are legal too, they just got the
> protocols, and wrote implementations of them. As long as Gav doesn't try
to
> abuse the knownledge of the AW protocol (for example using a modified
> browser in AW universes), he hasn't done anything wrong. Feople, I
wouldn't
> recommend trying to sue him...
>
> KAH
>
> "sw chris" <chrisw10 at nckcn.com> wrote in message
> news:3c6899f4 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> right?
> so
AW
> that
the
and
no
remember
> and
that
> he
of
> access
if
> I
AWST
> ...
> being
the
allowed
> worlds.
> from
and
seen
> the
> was
>
>
|
Feb 21, 2002, 2:29am
LOL ok SWE, besides it was Gav that wants to sue me because he doesn't like
something I said hehe.
Just waiting on him to sue me.
--
Thanks,
Derek Rayburn
derek at cyboria.com
[View Quote]"swe" <m_swehli at hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3c6ab431 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> oops, never mind, as i said, narrow minded boy me, misunderstode the
> wholeeee thing, please dont take notice to my last post :)
>
> "swe" <m_swehli at hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:3c6a9893 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> might
> bout
> or
AW
users.
> with
about
> you
anyhow,
> even
cracking
to
on
of
my
of
you
> to
> and
> restrictions
> enough
how
> to
He
> World
Gav
> to
now
attempts
> out
responsible
browser
get
do
to
it.
in
> things,
> some
Microsoft
a
making
then
> AWLD
to
don't
> else,
"educational
> the
> applied
a
or
party.
of
date
> the
> accepted
> universe
> possession
sign
> my
have
citizenships
> Gavroche,
of
caused
Worlds
> universe
> server
protocol
> universe
volunteered
> to
> "cloned"
hacks
> to
not
> worlds.
cloned
> created
in
what
>
>
|
Feb 21, 2002, 3:01pm
I dont work for AW nor do I wish to but I did run OuterWorlds for 3 years
and what KAH is saying is correct. I ran the universe software for OW which
is an exact copy of AW's universe software and Cit 1 has all privies in
every world so anyone acquiring the privs of cit 1 can do anything even if
your world is private.
--
Thanks,
Derek Rayburn
derek at cyboria.com
[View Quote]"milesteg" <MilesTeg at nerim.net> wrote in message
news:3c751d6f$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> I am waiting for a response from MrGrimm.
> No offense KAH but you are not working for AW so I doubt you can give us
any
> proof of what you re saying.
> if it is what you said then MrGrimm will confirm that :)
>
>
> if he doesn t answer, that would mean you could be right too .....
>
> Regards,
> MilesTeg
>
> "kah" <kah at kahnews.cjb.net> a écrit dans le message de news:
> 3c7502e5 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> it
> right?
ENTER
EVENT
>
>
|
Feb 23, 2002, 9:45pm
AWC does have control over your universe or galaxy if you buy one from them.
The universe/galaxy software communicates with AWC servers.
--
Thanks,
Derek Rayburn
derek at cyboria.com
[View Quote]"jey" <BoBo1186 at aol.com> wrote in message
news:3c76e33e at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> This is quite rediculous. They do not have to keep on giving you
> citizenships because you say they should. Just because you want something
> doesn't mean you should get it. Here is a little analogy, because everyone
> seems to like them. If you got a cell phone, and signed up for service
with
> Bob's Long Distance, and you got 100 minutes free as a sign on bonus, that
> doesn't mean every time you pay your bill you are going to get those 100
> minutes free. Thats the same with AW, the citizenships are a gift, a sort
of
> "sign on bonus." Companies aren't required to give free gifts, and if they
> do, they don't have to keep on giving them to people. The whole purpose of
> the free citizenships were for you to give to friends so they could check
> out Active Worlds, and maybe even get their own world and such. If AWC
> doesn't feel like giving out free citizenships anymore, they don't have
to,
> and they aren't required by the law to do so.
> As with this whole spider thing . . . you people are arguing about
> nothing. AW has any, and all right, to go into any world in the universe.
> They do not have to ask permission, since basically all worlds are theirs.
> You just pay a monthly fee to have land to build on, which you can
> customize. Now if you get a galaxy or a universe, it is a one time fee,
> meaning, AWC can't do anything to your galaxy or universe once you buy it.
> The worlds, you rent, so they can do whatever they please.
>
> Just my opinion, take it or leave it,
> Jey (302100)
>
> filmkr <nospam at privacy.com> wrote in message
> news:3C76A6F2.9BFC5CA8 at privacy.com...
software
> perhaps... that is really to be seen, but that aside,
> items became part of the advertised "Inducement to
are
> not allowed to claim rights to intellectual property
> they must abide by them! They sold worlds and
go
> back and change that unless they wish false
> them. Like I said, do what you want to new people but
with
> the world payments. Keep in mind the worlds were
> renewable part. The FREE Cits can NEVER be legally
> to hike prices for that reason the last thing they
> reasons that will gain them zero but cost them everything!
BLOOD
> Tactics of the past 45 days?
ya
> don't like what they do then go elswhere it's real
> it upon yourselves...:) lol
> news:3C75533F.5809FDC7 at oct31.de...
> their world
and
> posting
> evil and
>
>
|
|
