1  ...  2  3  4  5  |   Order by default

Jun 22, 2001, 8:24pm

Facter:)) good luck:)

its real easy to come up with the bad things ya know.. thinks like
citizenship is far to cheap.. worlds are far to cheap ya know that obvious
stuff, but the good things... try a few of these...

1) Having the software to start with, and keeping it running, no matter
how many ways a minority actively try to kill it off.

2) Actually having a tech support group that does get back to people
quickly.

3) Talking to the users.

4) Allowing the users to play an active part (those that want to anyway)

5) Working with other companies around the world to achieve a global
future, rather than a local one.

6) Ensuring the product stays in line with what the majority want, not
just listening to the very vocal minority which would be the much easier
route.

Future plans... Although much is good, I do feel that some ideas get
missed, which although seem trivial, have much broader implications. I'm
not talking little amendments to this and that, or even broad sweeps
changing the entire focus of the product, I'm talking foundation stuff that
although they seem trivial could have a huge impact if used properly. I
think its easy to loose a global perspective (not talking countries) in the
trivia of minutae. I would recommend forming a real user group.. a group
of people who can see beyond their own wishlist to a global future for long
term development and planning. Each of those clients, be they individuals or
corporations probably have very similar wishlists which should form part of
the future development plans of the product, at the very least it would be
an avenue for people to submit well thought out, justified ideas to a group
who could then correllate and quantify them.

Its easy to say the product should go this way or that, but its much harder
to say why, and until you can say why and justify it, then it just becomes
more hot air.

A small group (10 -20) of users both individual and corporate users should
be formed to look at placing recommendations for future development, and
these recommendations should be quantified, both in terms of cost and
benefit, and responded to by the controlling management as to acceptance,
rejection and timescale of implementation if accepted. They should also act
as a focus point for other people to submit ideas through, again which have
been completely thought out.. not just I think so and so should happen.

There would be no requirement to make any accetances from the group, but you
may well find that outof this comes some obvious bits and pieces that are
seen as important by many and could have negligable development times for
great benefit. By having an insistance on doing a full cost benefit
analysis on each, it avoids any one group yelling louder than others and
seeming to have a majority, it provides hard facts and figures as to why it
should be looked at.

Hope some of that makes sense anyway as a start:)

Moria

..
[View Quote] <snipped cause weve read it on a few posts now>

Jun 23, 2001, 3:57am

[View Quote] > <chuckle> I can't believe you actually believe the shit you spew. If that
majority is calculated by money, perhaps, but not in terms of head count. 5
corporations are a minority compared to thousands of citizens, zippy.

and in terms of head count you are ONE person compared to thousands, so zip
it dork

Moria

Jun 23, 2001, 4:28am

If you believe that was the context of the comment go ahead and believe it
:)

Have a nice day.

Moria


[View Quote]

Jun 23, 2001, 7:40am

then filter me and go preach your gospel to someone who believes you, cause
its not me.

I notice you always tire of those you have no real argument with, or cannot
prove they are wrong. (virtually everyone)

So you even copied your improvements page from someone elses work? ever
done anything origional except moan and invent a few silly swear words?

All your web pages have errors on them, even when AW tries to correct them
you slam them and say heyyyy you coppied me booo hoooo without correcting
yours.. your so called knowledge is little more than that copied from
others, and your so called list of improvements are nothing more than a
wanna be crybaby getting outof their pram saying "they wont do it my way
and I'm right but I'm not prepared to actually put up or shut up. I cant
argue my case rationally so I will swear at everyone till they shut up so it
looks like I am right, and if needed I'll stamp my feet and scweam and
scweam and remove some of my web site till someone listens"

Get a clue eep, no matter how good anything on your web pages may or may
not be, not everyone gives a damn cause of you and your attitude, and your
still only one person, with one vote, no matter how much you swear and
shout, although you are very very funny :)

Once you can actually back up anything you say with facts as opposed to
opinions, then perhaps you may get listened to, till then enjoy dreaming up
new words and swearing at people while the rest of us get on with having fun
and improving the product.

Personally I believe AW has a way to go and some important things to do, but
surprisingly, or perhaps not, only one of those is on your web pages, and in
fact its one of the few throw away comments you obviously heard and didnt
understand or you would have expanded on it and realise just how important
that one thing is. Again, that however is only my opinion based on my
usage but we have just proved its need and its return with our own costs and
will be submitting the full reasoning and cost justification to AWCOM. If
they decide to do it, fine, if not fine, theres ways round it if we need
it.

Have a nice day.

Moria


[View Quote] > Quit being a dork, Moria, and wake the FUCK up and get a clue already. I
tire of your incompetence.

Jun 23, 2001, 2:11pm

[View Quote] >
cannot
>
> Nope. I usually just get tired of dealing with idiots, like you. However,
you seem to at least have SOME things worth responding to interspersed
throughout your otherwise mindless banter...

Ohhhh almost a compliment, please don't.

>
>
> No, my AW improvements page is BASED on Rolu's which was MUCH shorter and
not anywhere NEAR as detailed as mine is. Just about everything I DO is
original, so fuck off.

How soon you get lost in your own arguments. based on.. plagiarised from,
just how many words does it take to be a copy or based on?

>
> OH GOD A FEW INTENTIONAL DEAD LINKS OH NO WHAT EVER WILL I DO OH BOO HOO
CRY FOR ME MORIA

sign of a bad site.. crying for you.

> <roll eyes>
>
>
> AW(CI) has tried to correct errors on my web pages? <chuckle> That's
funny...when?
>
correcting
>
> What the fuck are you babbling about ya fuckin' Brit? Make some sense and
lay off the booze.

okay one example for the simplistic minded :-

Latest incident.. your tips page.. where AW based their page on yours but
added more (bit like your improvements page from Rolu's work) where you
screamed they copied me.. your statement..

Note: 1 byte = 1 ASCII character. AW cell data (byte) limits: "normal" =
1400

correct version on AW page "normal"= 1500

way
>
> Um, how much can I put up without putting up the code to do it? I'm not a
programmer, dipshit.

and until you are, you can in no way prove what your saying only have
opinions on it without really knowing.

may
your
>
> I get compliments all the time on my website, objects, etc. <shrug>

yep, no doubt, not the point.

>
>
> Facts are stated all over. Open your eyes and perhaps you'll see them.
<shrug>

nope opinions are stated all over, not facts, major difference.


fun
>
> <chuckle> You WISH you could improve AW, but are you one of the
programmers? Nope. Are you in charge of AW's developmental direction? Oops,
nope again. Sit down, twit.

If you were a programmer, which your not, you would realise that the base
product is only a starting point. As a programmer you can change the
"system" behind the product in a huge number of ways to do what you want.
Are you a programmer? nope. so sit down twit.

>
but
and in
didnt
important
and
If
need
>
> Blah blah blah, you're so full of hot air you're "point" (if any) is
floating away, sport. As you stated above, put up or shut up. <chuckle>
Putz..
>

I already have, and succesfully. Of course, if you knew anything about AW
you would know that, but surely since you do know everything, you do know
that.. right?

Have a nice day :)

Moria

Jun 24, 2001, 7:29am

ummm 1250 citizens at $20 = £25000 not uniserver cost of $10000 that all
other parts of the argument were based around which would be 500 citizens.

Hence my suggestions earlier in the thread for accurate cost analysis rather
than just biased opinion put forward as fact.

when you can get basic maths right, perhaps you can try to teach tenets of
staying in business and elementary maths, till then windows has a neat
feature called calculator.. use it. It actually makes your argument better
the way youve written it even though its still warped and wrong.

Moria


[View Quote]

Jun 24, 2001, 7:32am

£25000 = $25000

M


[View Quote]

Jun 24, 2001, 10:32am

[View Quote] > How is it "warped and wrong" aside from the
oops-I-forgot-to-adjust-the-citizen-count-don't-sick-Timmy-on-me-please
"mistake"? <roll eyes>


because you've only taken the parts of the argument into account that
support your theory, youve not looked at all the additional factors that are
needed to actually make the equation work.

Theres additional costs, time and expenses and savings that have to be
factored in to all of the three examples you gave, which all vary based on
the option you select, which you havent mentioned or considered, thus making
the argument worthless and incomplete. Once again, you haven't stated ALL
the facts, just some, the rest is opinion based on incomplete facts. Get
all the facts and THEN show the result, and perhaps you'll be listened to.

If you wish I will explain fully and show you some accurate results, but
that comes under consultation, and there will be a charge. This of course
is a clue to some of what you have ignored to try and prove your point.

Moria

Jul 14, 2001, 7:52am

what is this person on?? reported to abuse at activeworlds.com for spamming

[View Quote]
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4522.1800" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE>BODY {
MARGIN-TOP: 25px; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; MARGIN-LEFT: 10px; COLOR: #0033cc; =
FONT-FAMILY: Arial, Helvetica
}
</STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff=20
background=3Dcid:002c01c10c12$1de55d00$93431e18 at mw.mediaone.net>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#ff0000 size=3D5>I agree.&nbsp; I don't see why =
people complain=20
about html posts.&nbsp; It gets away from the drab black and white=20
text.</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"kmissile583k" &lt;<A=20
href=3D"mailto:Kmissile58 at hotmail.com">Kmissile58 at hotmail.com</A>&gt; =
wrote in=20
message <A=20
=
href=3D"news:3b4fafe8 at server1.Activeworlds.com">news:3b4fafe8 at server1.Act=
iveworlds.com</A>...</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT><FONT color=3D#ff0000><FONT size=3D5>Did =
you ever=20
notice...</DIV>
<HR>

<DIV></FONT></FONT><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D3>Did you ever notice =
that the=20
people who have the most off-topic things to say waste the most space =
and=20
downloading time?&nbsp; Notice Eep.&nbsp; He wastes 32kb of space and=20
downloading time to try to make a point of not posting in html.&nbsp; =
Can't=20
everyone just stick to the topic of the post and stop complaining =
about=20
everything else.&nbsp; If people like Eep and Wing stopped complaining =
about=20
the pointless things in everyone's posts it would save us a headache =
and a lot=20
of downloading time.&nbsp; When people complain about this, it just =
makes=20
everyone have to download more posts.&nbsp; Why not think of that the =
next=20
time you complain about posting in html or another pointless off-topic =

thing.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D3>
<HR>
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000>Kmissile583K</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000>AWTeen Head Builder</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000><A=20
=
href=3D"mailto:Kmissile58 at hotmail.com">Kmissile58 at hotmail.com</A></FONT><=
/DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT =
color=3D#000000></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_001_0032_01C10BF0.96DB5E20--

------=_NextPart_000_0031_01C10BF0.96DB5E20
Content-Type: image/jpeg;
name="Clear Day Bkgrd.JPG"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-ID: <002c01c10c12$1de55d00$93431e18 at mw.mediaone.net>

Jul 20, 2001, 1:14pm

interesting:)

lets see as a flying starter...

teleports, seperate worlds, higher cell limits, new avs, sdk, lighting,
move commands, new building worlds, worlds for specific purposes granted
free, new objects built by citizens, gatekeepers, peacekeepers, hardware
rendering, firewall support, skyboxes, universes, new object sets free,
evolving browser, z object usage...

that list took 10 seconds ALL of which were trigered by community requests
over the years, 2 of which are about to be introduced in the next release.

enough yet, or just none that are on your personal wish list?

Moria


[View Quote]

Jul 26, 2001, 10:17am

it does look good when you wander around it though :)

Moria

[View Quote]

Jul 27, 2001, 6:12am

Not true,

Sir Isaac Newton (who lived from 1642 to 1727) discovered that a force is
required to change the speed or direction of movement of an object. He
realized that the force called "gravity" must make an apple fall from a
tree. Furthermore, he deduced that gravity forces exist between all objects.
He found that some objects required more force to move than others. For
those who are mathematically minded: the force needed to push an object at a
given acceleration rate was proportional to the object's mass. Newton's most
famous formula says that the force (F) needed to move an object of a given
mass (m) at a specific rate of acceleration (a), was equal to the product of
the mass and the rate, or F=m·a. Newton also proposed that an artificial
satellite be made to circle the Earth, if it was given enough speed (not
spin) in the correct direction.

The speed of rotation of the earth actually produces a Coriolis force or an
artificial gravity which can be used to simulate gravity, or in our real
world example counteracts the true Gravity to enable us to survive, as
postulated by Einstein (who lived from 1879 to 1955).

These two effects are not the same. Gravity is not a product of the world
spinning or the force which makes the earth spin, so yes you did make a
funny, but an incorrect one as usual:)

As to why the earth spins, this is a question that goes all the way back to
when the planet was formed. Since the original cloud out of which the solar
system formed had 'angular momentum' it is believed that all of its
components locked away a bit of this original motion resulting in the spin
of the final products, which is currently decreasing, by an amount of
approximately 0.00007 seconds per year, induced by the efect of the moons
tidal pull, and increasing the distance between the moon and the earth by a
small amount each year.

Moria



It sure as hell doesn't make the world go around--gravity does that. Wee, I
made another funny.

Jul 31, 2001, 9:31pm

Actually at todays rates $70 will equal 639.7 Kroner which will equal
£49.03 sterling even allowing for a double interbank transfer. Where you
get 1000Kroner from, or even convert that to £100 is purely a figment of
your imagination.

If you take $70 to pounds directly on todays rates you would get $49.35 but
with one transfer, so your better off.

if your gonna state facts bloated just to fit your case, why should we think
any of the other "facts" you state are relevant, rather than just
manipulated so you can have a go because you want people to think you know
something.

But of course, if you can do better than AWCOM, please do so.. the test
will be in how many users you still have after 7 years, in fact whether you
still even have a product or a company.

Moria


[View Quote]

Jul 31, 2001, 9:34pm

see my comments to your comments, your flaws dont hold up, the maths is
completely wrong.. again:) You are the only one trying to propogate a
trick by deliberately quoting erroneous conversion rates to make it look
like you have got an argument.

As mentioned elsewhere in this thread, if you can do better do it, but I
suspect all you can really do is whine.

You obviously dont know the history of AWCOM, and are not prepared to learn
it.

Moria


[View Quote]

Aug 13, 2001, 5:23am

Casay greetings :)
>
> *Envisions going to work virtually someday and having meetings and such in
> an AW enviroment as opposed to MS Netmeeting as I have in the past.
*Newest
> addition to wish list... a white board* ;-)


I already know of at least three companies already doing this:)) Gotta be
cheaper than flying people around the world to meetings. A whiteboard would
be great but its actually easy to do a bit of custom code and add that
facility as a seperate proggy:)

Your vision is here already:)

and yes, I agree, corporate customers are already paying for useful
development for all:)

Moria

Aug 8, 2001, 3:20pm

and once again this is not followed through... sure the abililty to add a
url is easy... but what about the code to not allow custom avs in worlds
under worldowners control where they dont want custom avs.. what about
guarding against 100ft high genitals wandering around as a custom av, what
about all the intricacies of rendering if there 40 people around all trying
to download each others avs at the same time.. what about the protection
features for ratings on world, what about someone that decides its fun to
drop into a world and use a 500k polygon avatar to disrupt that world.

Its this type of stupid half assed "its easy to do" comment, which
completely destroys any credebility of putting forward ideas NOT completely
researched. THINK before you say something is easy from all sides, not just
your own myopic viewpoint.

This is a prime example of exactly why Goobers idea, excellent though it is
in concept will NEVER work.

Moria



[View Quote]

Oct 4, 2001, 5:48pm

Congrats Brant, well said:))

Moria


[View Quote]

Jan 12, 2002, 11:56am

Hiya SW.

Sounds just like AW to me :)

Screaming over a price rise, screaming over replaced textures,
screaming over what aw are doing to other universes, screaming that
new objects just might possibly not be for free elsewhere, and
screaming that all of their negativity is not listened to.

Staging protests and signing petitions and trying to raise the masses
with incomplete or incorrect facts.

Even the new objects were roundly condemned, and then people wonder
why they arent listened to :)

Forgetting to find out all the facts before screaming.

Forgetting the golden rule that every person has one mouth and two
ears and they should use them in that proportion:)

Forgetting the second rule that to assume makes an ass out of u and
me.

Has there been one topic raised that thanked AW for restoring the
textures removed by accident.

Has there been one post explaining whats happening in the other
universe and how it WASNT aw coms fault that there were problems?

Has there been one post explaining why some worlds went down in the
other universe and whos fault it was as opposed to assuming it was
AW's fault?

I guess now we'll have 100 threads from wanna be marketeers explaining
how AW are using their new subscriptions to buy a new company without
realising there are many ways to acquire a company without using
cash:)

never mind, one day they will be running companies too (maybe) and
can implement their own ideas and strategies.

Till then, is it any surprise that AWcom posts little in this
newsgroup. Perhaps the real voice of the majority is not contained
here?

Moria




On 12 Jan 2002 03:26:28 -0500, "sw chris" <chris at skywalkeronline.net>
[View Quote] >Arg.. every time AWC makes a move, people hate it. I think it's a fad
>nowadays.
>
>If this is the community's big failing, I'm glad to be with you guys. Some
>communities have it worse. If you'll allow me to go off on a tangent, read
>on. If not...
>
>SW Chris
>
>
>Ok.. where was I? Right. The last community I was in had a rather large
>failing, and that was that they (collectively) were so self-righteous with
>themselves that they couldn't stand to take any bit of criticism. Throw in
>that there were some in the community who just didn't "get it" that
>political and religious discussions were inflammitory, an Eep-like dude who
>had an uncanny ability to get most people to support what he said and you've
>got a powder keg.
>
>So if you think we've got it bad here, think again.
>
>SW Chris
>

Jan 12, 2002, 10:23pm

Hiya macb:)

[View Quote] >Well Moria, your posts are USUALLY sensible.....

thank you:) I see no reason to change the habit of a lifetime:)

>What other products that you have used have had a 600% price increase?

600% price increase, cant think of many, couple of programs I use
have done more than that over 5 years even on upgrade price but I
agree its rare.

>Public statements by JP less than a year ago said we have plenty of cash
>on hand for operations in the foreseeable future.

and so they may well have, that could and should be incidental to
changing the pricing structure. Operations includes much more than
just running the AW universe:) Good example is company acquisition,
no-one can seriously think this pricing increase has anything to do
with that based on how long these discussions last and how long ago
this must have been started:)

>
>Some of us are concerned not just about the increased price we will have
>to pay, but also on the total cashflow that this will produce further
>out. Without a significant change in the number of new users coming on
>board, that total cashflow is likely to be less. What will bring new
>users in now that the casual tourist is a thing of the past?
>Netbroadcaster.com maybe?

cashflow consits of many things, it is not just revenue in, its not
even just cash, although these play a part, they are not the total
formulae for cashflow.

As to new users, who knows, lets see what happens. Theres certainly
a good chunk of net users who would be happier joining something that
didnt allow free users and where everyone is accountable for what they
do, but will it be a big enough group.. dunno, we will see. If not,
then I am sure things will change, but I dont have accurate figures,
and I would guess very few have.

Some of those that probably do have accurate figures are those making
the decisions.

>
>Facts? Go to netbroadcater.com and read their own web page...then read
>the press accounts (that they had to copy to their own site because they
>were too old to still exist on the original sources). 10 employees...
>may be giving up their office space soon... 7th fastest of the NEW
>entertainment portals TWO YEARS AGO... No original content other than
>one short film they made... lots of hits but average stickiness 1.5
>minutes per user. Their domain name expires next month.
>

I think your facts are wrong here, good example...
The netbradcaster site states they were number 5 in March this year
and in November last year, therefore if your facts are correct, they
have grown in those 2 years when so many have fallen by the wayside.

Reference http://www.netbroadcaster.com/streaming_media2.html

In addition they are a portal, not just a streaming company, so some
comparisons with people such as real.com and napster.com are somewhat
tenuous, and explains the stickiness of 1.5 minutes, even though I
agree thats a tad low even for a portal:)

You provide an excellent example of facts being misused negatively.


>Facts are good. Let's have more. As a former insider maybe you can
>fill us in. Absent any facts but what I can find on the net I'll draw
>my own (pretty dang historically correct) conclusions.

Have you tried talking to people that know rather than relying on
urban ledgends on the net?

>
>"is it any surprise that AWcom posts little in this
>newsgroup?"
>
>Yes it is. They OWN this newsgroup and this is one of the best places
>to communicate with CORE users... people who know how to use the
>internet, are likely to have been around a while and are likely to stay
>a while. If there is a more representative collection of AW users let
>us know where they congregate.

I disagree, the only thing this newsgroup has displayed in recent
memory is total negitivity towards AWCOM. Its a place for people to
vent. Presence or lack of it hasnt changed that in the 5 years its
been running, and it wouldnt change now:)

>
>The people who offended AWcom originally and were supposedly responsible
>for AWcom's lack of participation have been BANNED!!!
>
>I'm tired of hearing that because someone got their feelings hurt over
>something three years ago AWcom will not communicate with its users.
>That attitude is not only pathetic, its also pathological.

I'm not talking three years ago, I'm talking today, look at the lists
of posts from the few that have made them and determine yourself if
the 20 or so that post here regularly are core supporters, or whether
anything AW would do is a crime:)

>
>AWCom has to grow up sometime... The sooner the better.

Perhaps they have, and maybe just maybe some of the users dont like
the adult AWCom, so they wont see it.

>
>If AWcom would post more to this group I would post less. That would be
>fine by me, and I suspect would be fine by them too.

>Make my day !
>

You'd hate that:)


Moria

Jan 16, 2002, 10:28am

Lioness,, greetings.

The response, as I saw it, was due to the origional post being based
on rumour and probably posted to try and get the sympathy of those who
are annoyed with anything AW does at the moment since there is no
basis in fact, which was what was trying to be said in the response.

As you say the freedom to free speech includes being against the
position as well as for it surely?

Its become a little fashionable in here to react to a post of the
opposite view being taken as from someone who works for AW, or someone
trying to earn brownie points (as if that was needed), or to take
that opposing view as being bad mannered or an attack. Believe me, an
attack would be obvious :)

Its definately popular to assume our own view is the majority view,
when in fact if we start saying things like you all seem to be
against my view, its usually probable that "my" view could be the
minority one however agrieved we personally feel:)

To the best of my knowledge, in 7 years here (when the groups been
open), no-one has EVER been banned from here for being against AW, or
posting about their SEC reports or their policies, or anything that
can be discussed by rational people whatever their view.

People have been banned from the newsgroups (and from AW itself) for
swearing, lying, slander, deliberate incorrect rumour spreading and
attacking other users directly using language composed of primarily
four letter words rather than by rational argument.

Often those attacking people or companies resort to using the very
things they will get banned for, so its common that many will say they
were banned for being against AW, which is not the actual reason they
were banned.

By all means carry on gripeing and complaining, thats your right, as
it is the right of others to disagree with that. And I am sure that
where needed we can all disagree politely without resorting to
attacks.

With regards to your comments about not everyone has bots to copy
their stuff, theres are freeware ones available which for the time
spent in downloading, and a little reading, can do that for you. So
yes everyone does have access to these.

In addition, whoevers hosting the world can run a propdump for you so
that if you do ever come back, it can be reinstated immediately.

As to the primary discussion as to what AW has done or not done,
thats not even part of this thread, so will stay away from using every
possible topic here to drag that back up. After all, some of us went
through all this 6 years ago with exactly the same arguments and
reactions then, so this is old news, even down to the I am gonna take
my toys away and close my world reaction.. been there seen it,
lived through it, maintained a world through it all too and will do
this time as well:)

PS it was a lot worse last time than this time:)

Yours

Moria

[View Quote] >This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
>
>------=_NextPart_000_0016_01C19E6B.1C536040
>Content-Type: text/plain;
> charset="iso-8859-1"
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
>Do you ALWAYS drag ppl over the coals when they speak their minds? Sorry =
>we're not as perfect as you hon. This IS an open forum, is it not??? =
>Everyone, though repetitive is allowed to comment on whatever they like =
>in the newsgroups. How dare you berate or belittle anyone on how they =
>percieve things?=20

Jan 16, 2002, 2:35pm

Hi Jcolbert, greetings. and answers below:)


[View Quote] >
>Hi all (again)
>
>Thank you all for these responses, pro and con.
>
>Moria said:
>
>"People have been banned from the newsgroups (and from AW itself) for
>swearing, lying, slander, deliberate incorrect rumour spreading and
>attacking other users directly using language composed of primarily
>four letter words rather than by rational argument."
>
>My response:
>
>"Lying" and "deliberate incorrect rumor spreading" are exactly the forms of
>speech that require protection.
>
>The obvious question here is; "lying" and "deliberate incorrect rumor
>spreading" defined by whom? Is there a procedure in place for these banned
>posters to appeal these decisions? Are these bans permanent? Is there a list
>available with the names of people who have been banned, and why?

Generally, if someone posts something and it is proven to not be so,
but they keep repeating it ad nauseum, and even going into AW and
saying it time and again and getting ither people to believe it even
when it has been proved, thats good enough:)

Bans are usually for a week the first time, a couple of weeks the
second time, and permanent thereafter :)

>
>I suspect the person who might best reflect my feelings about the recent changes
>to AW would be eep, but eep has been banned from these ng's. Why?

Eep was banned for persistant and repeated attacks on other citizens
using four letter words and bigotry and an inability to act like a
human being. He was finally reported to abuse at activeworlds.com and on
review, having been banned for short periods before, this time it
became permanent.

>Here's a rumor (that I hope won't get me banned): Has AWC management met with
>any particular group of citizens to discuss these recent changes?

Thats not a rumour, thats a question :)

I know of one small group and many individuals, there may be others,
that have sat down and talked calmly and coherently to AW management,
and I myself have spent some time on the phone with them talking:)

Regards

Moria

Jan 16, 2002, 3:54pm

Greetings:)


>
>My response:
>
>What group? If you were a participant in this meeting, would you be kind enough to
>share the chatlog with the other members of this list?

No for 2 reasons..

1) because it was in a private world as a conversation with private
individuals. A chat log then broadcasts that and invades peoples
privacy.

2) If I did post a chat log, theres enough people here that would say
it was forged if they didnt want to read the answers given.

If you wish to talk to AW about these changes, why not do so, dont
rely on second hand information, get it direct and put your thoughts
to them directly.

There is mail, phone and email, the options are many:)

Only that way will you know whats been said where no-one can deny it
or challenge it :)

Regards

Moria

Jan 16, 2002, 4:45pm

Greetings:)

I was not asked to keep it confidential, and I did not ask permission
to publish it.

Regards

Moria


[View Quote] >
>Back,
>
>Whoops! Sorry!
>Sent last msg early.
>
>To continue:
>
>Are you talking about an implied right to privacy? (An informal meeting
>of individuals, for instance)
>
>Or were you asked during this meeting to keep this information
>confidential?
>
>jcolbert
>
>
>

Jan 17, 2002, 6:54am

[View Quote] Hey Facter, touch base, lets get that Beer after all these years:)

Moria

>
>Anyways, I'm off to London in a week or three, I wont be posting much in the
>next 6 months or so - take care all :)
>
>Facter.
>
>

Feb 7, 2002, 10:33am

On 7 Feb 2002 02:02:45 -0500, "pc hamster" <pchamster at email.msn.com>
[View Quote]
>In short, I say what's good for the goose is for the gander!!! By that I
>mean either treat 3D Homepage AND tradional world owners EQUALLY or
>DISCONTINUE the 3D Homepage concept altogether.

/tongue in cheek on

Agreed:)

world owners are paying $59.95 annually for tourists.

3d home page worlds are only paying $24.00 annually for tourists.

Treat them all equally as you say.

Charge 3d Homepage owners $59.95 as well.

/tongue in cheek off


Moria

1  ...  2  3  4  5  |   Order by default