1  2  3  4  5  6  ...  16  |   Order by default

Apr 26, 2001, 11:07am

"5) If you change the extention of a txt file to a jpg file and try to open
it it crashes."

When would someone want to change an extension of a text file to a jpg?
(just curious)



[View Quote]

Apr 25, 2001, 1:17pm

I have 2 main questions. I have a build in one world that I want to copy
and build in a second world. I already know that there are objects I used
in the first world which are not allowed in the second, along with 3.1
commands which are not allowed as well. My question is: if I try to build
in world 2 from a project I made in world 1, can the Xelagot BOT determine
which objects are acceptable in the second world and just build with those?

My second question is an extension of the first. Assuming the Xelagot BOT
can build with objects that are only common, is it possible to tell the bot
to replace the objects which are not acceptable with ones that are? and if
so, can this be set up as a 1 step process or would I have to first build
the common objects in location 2, then do replacement builds for each object
or set of objects that weren't accepted?

Apr 29, 2001, 2:15pm

If you can go with Xelagot, I would do that. It's best I have seen.

[View Quote]

Aug 23, 2001, 4:51pm

Well Xelag, I have 2 citizenships which means I have 2 free trial worlds
which I haven't used. You are welcome to use them at your convenience for
those 2 months until mid-december (when the accounts close). I will not be
renewing my citizenship for either one until AWCOM listens to me as well.

This may help you or may not, let me know if it will. I can give you my
email if interested.

[View Quote]

Aug 23, 2001, 7:45pm

Possibly, but right now Xelag is the only one whom I have seen handle issues
concerning Active Worlds in not only a positive manner but productive.
Everything from emailing him for help on the Xelagot program to having a
program I can enjoy without being swindled for more cash.

For Active Worlds to not screen his name before worlds are able to be seen
on a worlds list so that something like which just happened is wrong. I
think instead of wasting the 2 months a world could be up for free, it
should go to someone that knows how to use it. Active Worlds can pay the
cost running it.

I am glad the issue got resolved, but if it happens again then what?

[View Quote]

Apr 13, 2001, 1:03am

I asked the maker of Xelagot to make something like this for bot greeters.
That way when you entered an area, one bot could be location specified with
one message and the same for another without having 2 bots message you as
soon as you enter the location. 2 weeks later I get an email from him
saying he included it and it works great.

I would like to see the same thing with AW, so people can build with me, but
they can't build outside of some perimeter.

Let me explain the possible danger. Let's say you have several places you
build at. One person could be helping you build in one location while
giving someone else your priviledge password. That other person could be at
another one of your builds and remove it without you realizing this. I
haven't had it happen yet to me, but it is possible.

Another way around this is to have a feature to only allow someone add to
your creations but they can't delete. This way, the worst case scenario,
you just have some deleting to do.

If the powers at be realize this and see it as much of a danger as I do,
feel free to remove this post since I don't want to be passing this info
onto someone who hasn't thought of doing this and wants to cause trouble.

Apr 13, 2001, 10:18pm

Yes, I like that idea. If the name weren't on list also, the person with
the list could get a request that a person is requesting to build with them.
This is kind of like an ICQ check to see if you want them to be on your
list.

My main concern is to disable the deletion rights. I want people to build
with me, and I would post my password so anyone can build even without me
knowing. I personally don't care what people add to my spot. I just don't
want them to delete what I or others put up.

Maybe an opposite list would be good. The list could block certain people by
account number. Then if you don't want someone to build, they will have to
buy another account lol

So far, no one has come to me that has destroyed anything thank god. Just
wonder why AW wants to allow others to destroy your builds. Seems like that
would have been the first thing on the list to avoid.




[View Quote]

Apr 13, 2001, 10:46pm

Well, ok, then maybe my other suggestion will work better. And that is....

Limit the priviledge building to 2 coordinates marking the corners (i.e.
134.5n 45e, 125.75n 50e)

When the person is done, you change the password to the next person you want
to allow.


[View Quote]

Apr 14, 2001, 11:26pm

I like that, if they get booted, then they usually go somewhere and do the
same thing.

[View Quote]

Apr 16, 2001, 6:27am

Have a newsgroup dedicated to only events coming up. This could be run by
AW where only people hosting events for AW could make new posts. Citizens
could then respond if they have questions regarding one of them.

Tonight, I must have seen the 15th advertisement for something 2 days later
than when it took place. I am sure it would be nice to have all events
posted in one location so we don't constantly have to search for signs that
might be out there advertising something in the future.

In the meantime I am working on something like that at my place where people
can also build if they want an area showcasing their event. The coordinates
are AW 123n 8000w (yes I do get "some" people coming).

However, that means you would to come to my place, an events group would be
more appropriate I think.

Apr 23, 2001, 1:31pm

Well, there is a difference between reading someone's message and actually
understanding it.

If I am a monomaniac for trying to have my intentions understood, then so be
it. It seems there is a misconception that I want to be able to change the
AW background for everyone. That is definately not the case. I am trying
to propose a way in which we can individually have a download section in our
area where people can choose to download a background or not.





[View Quote]

Apr 23, 2001, 4:21pm

Yes, you bring up good responses to what I am saying. As for any financial
suggestions, I just threw the $15 in as a figure. I am not saying that part
of it is anywhere concrete to getting the feature I am discussing
implemented.

Whoever decides to click a button and download a background will have that
background. From there, I see 2 possibilities.

One, that background could simply replace a default one AW has. If someone
wants to get the default back at a later time, all they would have to do is
go back to GZ and download the default. Cache problems already exist now,
and I am constantly clearing it already which active worlds themselves have
advised me to do. It hasn't caused me any problems so far and I don't see
how that would cause any major problems in the future.

Another way to deal with the download is to have about 3 total backgrounds a
person can have access to. Again, 3 is just a figure like the $15, it could
be 4 or 5 or whatever. This is how avatars are set up in any of the worlds.
You have a limited number of them to choose, and they don't get downloaded
and show up unless someone has chosen it.

I don't see why it has to be stored on AW's server. It may be stored there
now, but with "create picture" action, we can have the picture on any server
outside of AW's servers and download it there. Why can't we have a
background download in a similar fashion?


[View Quote]

Apr 23, 2001, 9:53pm

Wing, what do you get out of insulting people? just curious, I never found
it an attracting feature in people

[View Quote]

Apr 29, 2001, 7:06am

I have tried proposing an option to change background in public area using a
download feature at a reasonable fee. Right now the only way to do this is
to buy a world which offers features some don't need at a high cost. After
being told this would not be at the top of the list for consideration, I
have thought of an alternative solution.

Why not have a world where people who sign up as a PK, GK, or Teacher can
experiment with things like avatars, backgrounds, and objects. Those that
are helping Active Worlds promote the program would have an incentive to
continue this, and they could try out the features available in a world
without actually having to pay for it upfront without any experience. If
they liked it, then they would not only gain the experience, but they would
have objects as well to bring into a world they could buy after trying it
out.

Apr 29, 2001, 2:45pm

Giving back to the PK's, GK's, and Teacers ain't so bad either. I never
said people should only do it because they should have this opportunity. It
would be an incentive, not the full reward.


[View Quote]

Apr 30, 2001, 4:55pm

Actually I would be paying 69.95 for true space and if I liked what I made,
I would be buying a world. Look at what I am proposing and you will not see
I am proposing anything cheap. For you to think that, means you 1) not only
looked at the details 2) would be a prime candidate for what I am
proposing.

[View Quote]

Apr 30, 2001, 6:32pm

Most people go to other programs instead of persisting the way I am. Let me
go check here who is on in a world now.

885 worlds total. 566 worlds not private. 120 worlds that are not empty.
10 worlds with at leasy 10 people.

With data like that, I am not going to buy anything until I have some idea
of the services. This is just common sense.

765 people have been snookered into paying for worlds that aren't there, and
I don't want to be 1 one of them.

When I see the data change, my views will change.

[View Quote]

Apr 30, 2001, 7:07pm

"I think you forgot something called the trial world."
Please read up before you interject, people have been telling me it takes
them over a 1 year to fully get a world designed. The trial version is only
for 30 days, it doesn't provide enough time to actually develop objects and
build. I can account for just citizenship after 3-4 months. This is time
consuming and someone I knowhas been building a town for 8 months.


A LOT of people new to AW will take advantage and thus I bet about 100+
worlds on the list are trials, and some people keep their worlds private
except for events, and
some worlds are like SW City's paintball world where its owners use it for
events and thus not a lot of people are normally there. SO really if you
want a world just go for it.

I have signed up for citizenship for 3 months and the numbers are still the
same, the world names are still the same pretty much. Like with anything,
please present data when you are ready to assert such data exists. I think
Active Worlds should be the one to let us know so we can make an informed
decision as to how we want to spend our money.


[View Quote]

Apr 30, 2001, 7:09pm

"I think you forgot something called the trial world."

Please read up before you interject, people have been telling me it takes
them over a 1 year to fully get a world designed. The trial version is only
for 30 days, it doesn't provide enough time to actually develop objects and
build. I can account for just citizenship after 3-4 months. This is time
consuming and someone I knowhas been building a town for 8 months.


"A LOT of people new to AW will take advantage and thus I bet about 100+
worlds on the list are trials, and some people keep their worlds private
except for events, and some worlds are like SW City's paintball world where
its owners use it for events and thus not a lot of people are normally
there. SO really if you
want a world just go for it."

I have signed up for citizenship for 3 months and the numbers are still the
same, the world names are still the same pretty much. Like with anything,
please present data when you are ready to assert such data exists. I think
Active Worlds should be the one to let us know so we can make an informed
decision as to how we want to spend our money.

[View Quote]

May 1, 2001, 1:26am

Umm, read the post. I said nothing about the backgrounds exclusively in the
thread.

[View Quote] > in
> but
> after
>
>

May 1, 2001, 6:05pm

Let me see here, are you saying I should buy at lease one citizenship before
I post here?

[View Quote]

May 1, 2001, 6:32pm

Well, I don't know if Holistic realizes I needed to get a citizenship
somehow to post here. I was just having fun with his ignorance. Now I can
have fun with yours. Hey, since no one will actually respond addressing the
subject and instead attack a person I might as well enjoy the moment.

[View Quote]

May 2, 2001, 2:09pm

Yeah, I guess you did. Try moving up from baby talk. Try to present things
logically and lead to intelligent conclusions. The more you insult, the
less you have to bring to the table as far as a productive conversation.

You are 1 single person, and since we have established that we both
understand a person must attain a citizenship before posting here, you have
no idea what other people I come in contact with tell me who don't bother
finding out what a world offers let alone a citizenship.

They seem to like what I am presenting, and if Active Worlds listened to it
they might find more customers. I am responding to you on an automatic
business sense hoping that they are reading this and detecting my behavior.

In turn, I hope they see who is buying their product and behaving the way
you are here and use that for future decisions for Active Worlds as a whole.
It takes a nice man to insult, so I guess I have to bite the bullet here and
take it if I want what I am projecting across the table.

I wish I didn't. I wish we could talk nicer, but that's up to you part way.
Are you ready to present to me in an intelligent manner why incentives
aren't offered to citizens who become PK, GK, and teachers?

Other programs do this to their members.


[View Quote]

May 2, 2001, 4:05pm

Where did I ever say it would be a reward? Please look back. If you want to
assert something, please supply the data.

[View Quote]

May 2, 2001, 4:47pm

I hope you aren't taking any of this serious LOL.

[View Quote]

Jun 2, 2001, 8:13am

I agree

[View Quote]

Jun 5, 2001, 5:39pm

I was thinking the same thing the first time I read it LOL, I suspect they
meant 3.2


[View Quote]

Jul 3, 2001, 6:07am

I am no programmer by any means, so programmers please tell me about this.
I have seen a lot of encroaching problems within AW School and thought of an
idea.

What if we were able to use an object (flat, walk style)that wasn't used for
building but was designated to work in sync with motion commands and it
associated itself with other objects that would be built and seen in motion.

The motion commands of objects that would be built with and seen would be
relative to the center of this walk style object. This way, where ever you
could put this walk style object there would have to be unclaimed space.
You place a cap/limit on the radius of the walk style object so other
objects associated with this walk style object couldn't move past the
perimeter. You could use various sizes of walk style objects this way and
people would not be able to encroach a person's area using motion commands.
For example, if someone wanted an object to move 2 degrees, they would have
to get a walk style object 4 degrees in diameter and lay it down where there
was enough space. The question is, is 4 degree object used solely for
motion commands and not actually building doable or is this a rediculously
huge size and would never work?

Jul 3, 2001, 7:14pm

By "both programs" do you mean 2.2 and 3.1? or is there another program I am
unaware of?


[View Quote]

Jul 6, 2001, 8:48pm

I would support more things to be allowed in newsgroups if 1) they could
filter what is downloaded or 2) There was a seperate section only for these
additions. People go to it at their decision, but it wouldn't effect others
who want less downloaded.

The way it is now, it appears the file size is the issue and for whatever
reasons they can't filter out .jpg extensions and the like.

[View Quote]

1  2  3  4  5  6  ...  16  |   Order by default