1  ...  23  24  25  26  27  28  |   Order by default

Jan 18, 2002, 3:05pm

And gloat?? ;O)

Grims

[View Quote]

Jan 19, 2002, 10:11pm

Bye Bye!

[View Quote]

Jan 20, 2002, 5:34am

Chris, just let him make his little protest is he feels the need. The first
post smacked of paranoia as it was, and now this thread can at least die.

On a related issue, since our dear friend brought it up, red-spotting your
world seems something of an empty protest to me - lacking the conviction to
actually up-and-move to pastures new and leave the evil beast that is
apparently AW behind. To a certain extent, "operation red dot", or whatever
it is, suits the reasons they are doing it (whether I agree with it or not),
but making your world private because you think that AW are the Anti-Christ?
Where's the logic in that?

"Oooooh ... look, a bandwagon! Hmmmm ... now what shall we do with that??"

Anyway, with a bit of luck, that was the last of the anti-AW posts for a few
weeks, until the new pricies for the existing cits are issued ... at which
point I'm sure it'll start up all over again.

Grims


[View Quote]

Jan 26, 2002, 2:17am

I think its probably a safe bet that he doesn't use them either ;o)

Grims

[View Quote]

Jan 26, 2002, 2:41am

Sorry .. "Female Sanitation Products"

Grims

[View Quote]

Feb 5, 2002, 1:38pm

Hmmm This could be fun ... I'm thinking "Scale Model of London" and the
surrounding area ... you up for it SWE? ;o)

Grims

[View Quote]

Feb 5, 2002, 10:18pm

If you include my house that will be one exceptional model of London ... I
live about 35 miles outside of London ;o)

Grims

[View Quote]

Feb 4, 2002, 7:35pm

*Quietly sits, wondering whether to chime in with the old "World Champions?"
remark*

I think not - We'll save that for another day ;o)

Grims


[View Quote]

Feb 5, 2002, 10:17pm

I have a feeling everyone would fall asleep!!

Grims

[View Quote]

Feb 5, 2002, 10:54pm

LOL Each to their own

Grims

[View Quote]

Feb 5, 2002, 10:17pm

Maybe not TRYING ... but you certainly managed it!

Congrats

Grims

[View Quote]

Feb 6, 2002, 5:29pm

Can't believe I'm the first to have any comments on this ... very unlike you
lot!!

Anyway ... all I can say is "Fair enough!" ... No doubt plenty of people
will have a lot of issues with it still, I think it goes to show that AW
aren't the selfish, singleminded, evil ogres that so many people have
insisted on implying over the last few weeks.

Wonder what people are gonna say though ...

Grims

Feb 6, 2002, 7:49pm

The same could be said of those who fail to recognise a considerable
compromise on AW's part. Time to accept that things change, people!

Grims

[View Quote]

Feb 6, 2002, 10:29pm

All the views on the pricing and what would/would not be acceptable to
people was covered a few weeks ago ... so I'm not going to go into all that
again, or how individuals value a service they use.

The reason I snipped what you regarded as the "important bit" was because I
didn't have anything to say except that its a shame that people will always
find something to winge about. You might have seen that part of your post as
important ... I didn't.

And if you want to be picky about wording in that fashion ... I said
"could", and meant the same as your "would". Read it as you will.

Grims



[View Quote]

Feb 7, 2002, 2:09am

Umm ... no. English actually. Don't stereotype me pal!

And like I said in my previous post, which I thought was perfectly clear ...
I only remarked on the section of your post that I had any comment on. I
didn't and STILL DON'T have anything to say on what you find acceptable in
terms AW's pricing or how highly you value the services that AW provide and
you use. If I did have any relevant views, I would have shared them then.

Grims.

[View Quote]

Feb 7, 2002, 3:48am

[View Quote] Not me ...

> If nobody had complained we would still be looking at a 600% increase
> and probably doubled world prices. So I am not about to apologize for
> complaining.
>

Oh c'mon ... Now you're just guessing with the world prices.

> I personally don't see how the price increases are going to make lots of
> new users. Maybe there is a phase II of this plan that will make it
> all clear to me.
>

Not sure where the "price increases are going to make lots of new users"
concept comes from. If anything, investment and subsequent improvement in
the product will bring in the new users. Investment needs funding ... hence
the higher prices. My personal view is, as I have stated before, the price
hike is corrective action and actually goes to providing AW with some
credibility. Something other than the chat program that people like to call
it. I read $20 a year as "enough to cover our costs" ... not "investment in
the future". That has now been rectified and rightly so.

Feb 7, 2002, 1:05pm

Admittedly, in your position, I would be pretty pissed off right now.

Since you're desperate for an answer on the "Number of worlds" question ...
none (there are reasons for that).

Grims

[View Quote]

Feb 7, 2002, 1:10pm

As I replied on the the other thread, the effect of the new tourist policy
on the concept behind the 3D Homepages is quite staggering. Its difficult to
see how AW could implement the policy they clearly feel is necessary without
having this effect though.

When it comes to "3D Homepage Owners - TIME TO UNITE!!!!!!" ... (in a weary
voice) please don't. Have you asked AW how they can reconcile the tourist
policy with the "marketing" (pah!) concepts on which 3D Homepages are based?

Grims

[View Quote]

Feb 8, 2002, 6:45am

I think that if that was the case, then we'd be left with the $9.50 a month
price and a total ban on tourists ... which we aren't. Go figure.

As I've said before, this is a SIGNIFICANT compromise from AW's initial
business plan as described in January. A company doing this hardly strikes
me as a company that isn't interested in keeping its customers happy (as far
as economics allows).

Grims

[View Quote]

Feb 6, 2002, 7:56pm

The point is that the worldowners now have the ability to accept tourists
into their world as an additional service. If they want tourists in their
world, which seemed to be a major sticking point for some (*boggle*) then
its now in their hands instead of an across the board ban.

Shrewd move if you ask me.

Grims

[View Quote]

Feb 6, 2002, 8:24pm

Leave it out Cozmo ... They've just knocked a similar amount off the cost of
the citizenships - of which there are far more.

Grims

[View Quote]

Feb 7, 2002, 1:51am

Couple of interesting points there ...

Grims


[View Quote]

Feb 7, 2002, 1:57am

If you want to compare AW to basic chat/IM Applications, maybe you should
ask yourself why you paid all that money for all those worlds.

Grims

[View Quote]

Feb 7, 2002, 12:43pm

Marketing of AW is a topic that comes up in these threads quite a lot, and
for good reason. Since we are subjected to unsolicited e-mails and popup
adverts anyway, AW may as well get in there and raise the awareness of the
product.

You know by now I'm not going to bite on the pricing side of things ;o), but
at the end of the day AW can't provide ANY service if they don't have
sufficient income. That's why I have no problem with the prices they choose
to charge - they have to be decided on the basis of many facters. All those
other pay services on the internet that I DON'T subscribe to are too
expensive for me because I don't personally value them at the same rate that
the vendors do.

Going back to the original point (marketing), it has always seemed strange
that I never see advertisements for AW ... it seems to be the best kept
secret on the internet, which is a shame.

Grims


[View Quote]

Feb 7, 2002, 12:55pm

The tourist issues do seem to fly in the face of the concept behind the 3D
Homepages ... "Within just a few minutes, you will not only have created
your own personal 3D Homepage but you will find yourself standing right in
the middle of it, showing it off to all your friends" doesn't quite ring
true anymore.

"World owners can pay an additional $59.95 annually on their worlds if they
want to have Tourist Access enabled in their worlds." is what it states in
the announcement (http://www.activeworlds.com/letter.html). Is this
different for the 3D Homepages? They quote an annual cost here and its not
$24.

I am a bit confused on this (can you tell?). Do you pay annually for the
homepage (for the 6% discount)? I can see why they would not accept the
tourist charge en-bloc if you pay monthly for the homepage, otherwise you'd
have two payment plans on the go

Grims

[View Quote]

Feb 10, 2002, 3:15am

Unfortunately, even advertising won't work as well as it could at attracting
new people to AW all the time some of those that are already citizens are
bitching about the AW pricing policy and slagging off the company in totally
unrelated public forums!

That's just plain dumb!

Grims

[View Quote]

Feb 10, 2002, 7:25am

Maybe its English coloquialism coming out, sorry. "Slagging off" (although I
think you got it) meaning maliciously knocking.

It seems totally absurd to me that I should be reading through a support
forum for a totally unrelated product and see the same bitching I see (and
expect nowadays) in these newsgroups about AW. Totally unprompted ... just
volunteered into an existing thread. Its just a pointless exercise to me.

I was introduced to AW rather than reading about it or discovering it. I
have seen precious little about since (or beforehand for that matter - and
it would have caught my eye). I wasted a few pennies on a VIP membership to
Worlds.com because, as far as I knew, that was the top-of-the-line in 3D
internet packages. The reason I joined them was because they were being
shoved down my throat by my ISP and through a number of other routes. I
didn't even know AW existed, and probably still wouldn't.

Anyway, thanks for the info ... as usual, some of it I can understand and
agree with, other parts, maybe not. All I can say is that I don't believe
being upset with where AW is now compared to where it could have been
achieves anything - what's done is done and we have no choice but to work
with what we have (if you want to). "Slagging it off" outside the confines
of the group of people that it currently effects - i.e. within AW and the
related discussion groups - won't encourage new people to come and try it
out.

Grims

[View Quote]

Feb 13, 2002, 2:49am

This should explain it ... (SDK newsgroup) ... "icydee"
[View Quote] > I have written code to generate propdump files and then use XelaGot to
> build the objects. This has worked fine up to now. I have generated
> roads, monorails, domes and forests. (about 4 million objects)
>
> However this approach cannot remove objects that have already been
> built. For example if I run a new road through a forest I get trees
> growing through the asphalt (tarmac). You can see my problem at AW
> 23768N 18072W
>
> Ideally I need a bot that can survey an area, identify the road objects
> and remove trees and shrubs (but not manhole covers!) from the area
> covered by the road.
>
> Any ideas? I tried once to use the SDK and MS C compiler but did not get
> very far!
>
> IcyDee.
>




[View Quote]

Feb 13, 2002, 10:52am

Chris, don't be so mean the the guy/gal. Its says othing about copying
anyones work ... :O)

Grims

[View Quote]

Feb 10, 2002, 2:26pm

I'm gonna get hammered for this, but I don't care. This is rediculous. Where
do you get off posting this in an AW newsgroup?

Grims


[View Quote]

1  ...  23  24  25  26  27  28  |   Order by default