1  2  3  |   Order by default

Feb 8, 2001, 7:56pm

Hi moria :-)

Disagreement? That's ok. Hey, after all it's an ng. :) I understand many of your points, but mainly would take a different tack on this one:

> Like any terrorist with a real or imagined war to fight, the casualties are
> the innocent, and those who have no real interest.. they have two
> choices... accept the fact by implication and just cringe when it happens,
> and hope it doesn't happen to them, or make a stand, and until people make a
> stand it will continue.

The particular *kind* of stand to make is the important thing, I think. If people feel strongly enough that a person's comments to others are too rude, too ugly, too "anything", then those people can always do just what you said - ignore it or speak up about it. If they are willing to speak up about it, preferably it's by pointing out publically, in the newsgroup thread, that the attack was unwarranted. Do I do that? No. I usually just read on; so, yes, I'm one who simply cringes with a "sheesh, why in the world doesn't he choose to deal with people in a polite, constructive manner".

I have seen many posters; however, speak up and defend people that Eep attacked unjustifiably. If that brings on a flame pointed toward the defender, that person is probably confident enough to deal with it however they wish. The rest can do what we always do if it deteriorates into a flame war - skip it or read it. Unlike on the real life street where we have no control over turning off the swearing *while it is happening* (unless we can handle it ourselves or help arrives), we do have the ability to immediately filter or start skipping or start speaking out against any poster in the ng who offends us.

You asked,
> Why do you think most long term users dont post here anymore??

Probably for a lot of reasons. For some, Eep. For others, probably any number of other reasons. The first big drop off that I noticed in posts from long term users was back during the time when these newsgroups were formally moderated.

Lara

[View Quote]

Feb 9, 2001, 12:14am

If I were voting, I would vote that Eep stay, but I won't even cast a vote in this for the following reasons:

1. If someone has broken the rules in the newgroup charter to the extent that they should be kicked out of the newsgroup, that's up to AWCI, not to a vote of the users.

2. Even *if* such a vote were a good idea (and it's not, imho) a hastily cobbled together vote with a 24 hour time frame is ridiculous. Many readers of the newsgroup may just check it once a week or every few days. Nothing fair, democratic or "*communities* decision" about it. Not that the "community" should even be deciding on removing ANYone's privileges to post in the newsgroup in the first place.

One employee's feelings get hurt when a citizen attacks him verbally in the newsgroup...leading to all this. And AWCI allows its company name to be attached to such a voting scheme? Astonishing.

Lara

[View Quote]

Feb 9, 2001, 2:40am

Since I abstained because I think that "vote" should never have been started in the first place:

Lara 60392 - Stop

[View Quote]

Feb 18, 2001, 2:04am

AW 23555.7N 23530.7W 0.2a

Thanks, Fac!

Lara

Feb 20, 2001, 7:50pm

I agree with Andras that the existing objects should NOT be changed. I like the idea of adding *additional* texturemode lit versions of the old walks, panels, etc.

As for what name to give the lit ones, I like Wing's idea of putting a designation in front of the new names. "tml" is fine, but I'd shorten it even more to just a lower case L. Using just "l" in front of the name would also fit them nicely into the alphabetical order of existing objects such as landa.rwx, which already can accept a light shining on it.

Lara

[View Quote] [View Quote]

Feb 20, 2001, 8:48pm

"l" as a prefix...at the front, please. I kinda' like names that start with an "L". ;-)

Lara

[View Quote]

Feb 21, 2001, 6:08am

Syntax, that probably would be the simplest way to handle it. However, I do wonder how it would affect literally thousands of already-built places in Alphaworld. Since Andras has kindly offered to do extra versions of the models which need texturemode lit, why not let him do the extras and leave the old objects alone? That "one tiny thing different" ... I guess I'd have to see several of my buildings both ways before I could really get a good idea of what it might do to existing builds on Alphaworld.

With just a small "l" in front of the new names, all the newly lit panels, walks, floors, etc., would be listed together, easy to find in the alphabetical list of AW models (objects).

At present, the L part of the list at http://objects.activeworlds.com/aw/models/ has only lamp01.rwx and the seven land objects.

Looks like a logical location for a long list of lit lobjects. Yeah, I deliberately put an "l" in front of "objects"...I was on a roll with the "L"s in that sentence. ;-) But seriously, I do prefer the idea of bunching the newly lit objects together alphabetically.

Which reminds me... yes, Rolu, your point about small "l" being confused with the letter "I" (and even more so with the numeral one) is well-taken. I think everyone would get used to recognizing it as a lowercase L fairly quickly.

Lara

[View Quote]

Mar 2, 2001, 2:28pm

A display of the "x" objects we can actually use is at AW 23555N 23530W

A website where you can find the names of ALL the AW objects (including the "x" objects) is at: http://objects.activeworlds.com/aw/models/

Note: some of the "x" objects are *not* available to us. You get a "registered objects" message if you try to build with any that are still restricted.

Lara

[View Quote]

Mar 11, 2001, 4:27am

Excellent points by both you, Bits, and by Imagine. There are plenty of quiet readers who enjoy coming across nuggets of good information or a good debate in the NG's, and who learn to ignore the flame-style posts. When a well-meaning new person gets bashed unfairly for mistakes we all make when trying something new or for having difficulty expressing himself in English, I've seen some people post words of encouragement to the newbie. Perhaps more of us (including me) will do that. :)

Lara


[View Quote]

Jul 13, 2001, 1:15am

I don't work for Active Worlds. I was not one of the earliest builders in Alphaworld. This program had been going almost a year before I started building. That said, I couldn't agree with you more, Sinew. Textures should never have been changed in Alphaworld, imho. Add new ones, sure. Add other versions of the old ones, fine. But *add* them. Don't change the old ones.

Lara

[View Quote] <snipped>

> If you won't consider my request because I'm a one in a million band wasting
> citizen peon scrawling my request, then please do it for the first original
> builders of Alpha World.

<snipped>

Jul 22, 2001, 9:10pm

Fac, I think it's great that you're making an effort to see if you can get some new objects added to Alphaworld. I hope no one will take what I'm about to say as throwing cold water on your offer.

While waiting to see what people submit to you, is there any chance that you, or someone else, could fix the encroachment problem for the following X objects that you kindly got put in for us, but which had to be removed later?

These x objects were removed - would be nice to see them "fixed" and put back in:

xaw22 xaw23 xaw24
(pp-size vertical solid picture panels)

xsign xsign1 xsign2

xaw26 through xaw36 (cloud/rain/lightning/puddle)


The ones below are capable of encroaching - need "fixing" before they get yanked out, too.

xsat (the jail cell)

xiggy4 (the large pyramid)

xaw8 xaw9
(oval shaped picture objects)

xaw2 xaw12
(large signs)

xwed1 (wedding pavilion obj)

Thanks for your interest in helping builders, Fac!

Lara

Jul 31, 2001, 7:18am

I knew there was a good reason why I've never posted in html. Anything that makes HenrikG snap can't be good. ;)

[View Quote]

Aug 3, 2001, 4:50pm

Hi Fac,

Lately I've noticed the Alphaworld welcome message is still mentioning the X objects. I understand that message to mean there have been rumors that ALL x objects are being removed. I've not received any telegrams or email with that kind of rumor . However, perhaps a sign I placed at my object yard was the inadvertent cause of your being flooded with emails and/or telegrams. If so, I'm sorry if people have misunderstood my sign at my object yard which says:

"We're losing many of the most useful X objects!!! :-((( Click here to see what's happening."

The click takes them to my X object yard at AW 23557.5N 23530.6W 0.2a where they land squarely in front of this sign:

"Objects listed below were available for awhile but were removed (or probably will be) because they can encroach. If you want to ask Facter to please fix them and put them back in, email him at: fletch at activeworlds.com
facter at activeworlds.com"

Under that statement, another sign lists the *specific* X objects that *have already been removed* since February (when you so kindly put them in for our use.) Another lists the specific X objects which are still available but are capable of encroaching.

The object names on both signs are the same ones I listed for you in my email to you on July 22.

I'm sorry, Fac, if your mailbox has filled up with messages from people who misunderstood my signs to be referring to ALL X objects in general. Each sign clearly was talking about *some* of the X objects - not ALL of them.

"many of the most useful"
"Objects listed below"
"These x objects were removed - need to be "fixed" and put back in:"
"These are capable of encroaching - need "fixing" BEFORE they get yanked too."

Fac, in one of your ng posts, you mentioned that the modellers at AWC will be working on fixing the encroachment problems when they can get to it. I fully understand the modellers have far more important things to work on than just fixing some X objects. I *personally* don't care one way or the other if we can use *any* X objects. (To me, just a handful of vertical borderless picture panels and more sizes of the horizontal pictwlkh.rwx would be far more useful in Alphaworld :-) However, I realize people have been building with some particular X objects that AWC later removed because of encroachment problems. Builders do get a tad upset when all of a sudden they can no longer use their favorite X object, especially if they were using it extensively.

You may have been getting telegrams about a rumor - I get tons of telegrams about fact: "WHY CAN'T I USE x___.rwx ANY MORE?" That's why I posted a sign about it at my object yard ... to let builders know the names of objects that certainly *are* subject to removal at any moment - without notice - should the Garbage Elimination Team (GET) or AWC receive complaints about encroachment .

If/when the encroachables get fixed and are available again, I'd love for you (or someone at AWC) to send me an email or tele, so I'll know to put those objects back on display at my X object yard and take the signs down. If the email I sent July 22 to fletch at activeworlds.com (subject: encroaching X objects) has been lost, I'll be glad to re-send it to you. Or, you can pop out to AW 23557.5N 23530.6W 0.2a to read the names off the signs. ;-) Thanks for everything you do, Fac!

Best regards,
Lara

Aug 3, 2001, 6:03pm

one or two?
I guess your email gets messed up sometimes. Maybe you never got this, which I sent July 22, 2001 to fletch at activeworlds.com
__________________________________________________________________________________________
These x objects were removed - need to be "fixed" and put back in:

xaw22 xaw23 xaw24
(pp-size vertical solid picture panels)

xsign xsign1 xsign2

xaw26 through xaw36 (cloud/rain/lightning/puddle)


These are capable of encroaching - need "fixing" before they get yanked too.

xsat (the jail cell)

xiggy4 (the large pyramid)

xaw8 xaw9
(oval shaped picture objects)

xaw2 xaw12
(large signs)

xwed1 (wedding pavilion obj)


__________________________________________________________________________________________

Perhaps this also got lost. I emailed this Mar 2, 2001 to: facter at activeworlds.com

Fac, I really hate to report these, since they are some of the best x objects available to us. :-(( But, they do encroach. :( My suggestion would be to not remove them, though. They are just too good to take out. They are big sign and picture objects. I don't know how much trouble it would be to tinker with them so they can't encroach (never have made objects, myself), but if they can be fixed rather than removed, that would be a better solution. :-)

Lara

xaw7.rwx xaw8.rwx xaw9.rwx xsign.rwx xaw2.rwx xaw12.rwx xaw22.rwx xaw23.rwx xaw24.rwx
_____________________________________________________________________________________________

About a month later xaw22, 23 and 24 were indeed taken out. Then the cloud objects. Then about a month ago xsign (along with xsign1 and xsign2) also bit the dust.

Thanks Fac! :-)

Lara


[View Quote]

Aug 5, 2001, 6:09pm

I think you're definitely on the right track, Goober. If you pick calm, intelligent, sensible people for the 5 representatives, it doesn't really matter how wild and wooly the open meetings might be. Let everyone talk at will - whether saying something intelligent or something totally off the wall. Off-topic, bashing, flaming, silliness...whatever. Don't bother trying to make people adhere to a protocol of "!" or "?" or waiting to be recognized before speaking. Just give 'em free rein at the open meeting. The good ideas will hit the chat window (along with everything else.) :-)

If the C.U. reps are worth their salt, the fast scrolling chat at a wide open meeting isn't going to bother them at all. The reps (and anyone else) can always go back through a chat log later, to find the gold, as you put it. :-) If extraneous chatter bothers others... well, that's what the good old Mute feature is for. :-)

I'd suggest the open meetings be held at a very empty location in AWUniv world. Empty - so no one will have a problem arriving at a laggy download. No stage, no "decorations" no "mini-gz", no building.
Just one sign, perhaps, saying "Citizens Union Open Meeting - day and time". After all the people who attend will be all the decoration needed! :-)

You're really trying to make a difference, Goober King. Thanks! :-)

Lara

[View Quote]

Aug 7, 2001, 10:22am

Do it both ways. Have judges (who do NOT have any entry in ANY category) award the CY's. Let the people continue to vote, but call the people's award a PY (for "the people's CY award".) Yeah, I know the word "PY" isn't really an acronym, but it's easy to say.

Acknowledge the PY winners during the ceremony, but have acceptance speeches only from the CY winners. No CY statues for the PY winners - perhaps a plaque or certificate object.

Think of it as having your cake and eating it too, or... PY in the CY. ;)

Lara

[View Quote]

Aug 8, 2001, 7:49pm

Hi moria,

I'm getting a bit lost. I understand your response about custom avatars not being the greatest idea at this time. I didn't, however, quite understand how this automatically follows:

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

As I understand Goober's idea (regarding a Citizens Union - nothing to do with anyone else's specific ideas about custom avatars), the Citizens Union would be open to everyone. The C. U. would announce a meeting that anyone could attend, perhaps once a month. AWC people could be there, of course - or not be there. It doesn't really matter whether AWC attended the big open meetings or not. No one expects AWC to sit in on the open Citizens Union meetings or answer questions there at all.

It's *after* the open meeting, that 5 representatives of the C U (still no involvement yet for AWC) would sit down and thoroughly look at what was brought up at the wide open meeting. Discarding (or at least setting waaaay aside) any patently silly ideas and ideas they already knew absolutely could *not* be implemented. Sifting through the big meeting chat log to find suggestions that at least appeared *possible, maybe*, in order to come up with a couple of the most likely things (not necessarily the most requested things) to present to AWC.

I don't want to speak for Goober King, but again, as I understand it, he's not talking about trying to push a whole wish list forward at once. It seems to me he plans to have just a few reasonable, knowledgeable citizens (the 5 C.U. representatives, whomever they might be) meet privately in-world with anyone AWC chooses, to have a civilized, quiet, rational discussion something like this:

"Here are a couple of things quite a few people are asking for...any chance you guys could work this into the program? If so, roughly when? If not, we'd like to be able to tell people why this particular thing can't be done, or perhaps could be done someday, but not in the foreseeable future."

Very much like what you have said right here, Moria, about *why* custom avatars is not a feature to be expected. A reason. Expressed by AWC itself to the 5 C. U. representatives in a private meeting. Not at a big open meeting.

If there is a misunderstanding that Goober King's idea is to set up a group to fight with AWC - to demand "you add this feature because the loudest shouters want it", I'd agree that would never work. I don't think that's what Goober King is proposing at all. I'd think AWC would welcome having *formal* and *reasoned* (not argumentative) input from 5 C. U. representatives - representing not their own personal agendas, but what the 5 C. U. reps had distilled from the wide open meetings of the Citizens Union and from responses to the C. U. website each month.

As for "putting foward ideas not completely researched", I think just hearing a researched reason from AWC's point of view as to why a specific request (presented by the 5 C. U. reps) is a "no go" or a "not right now", would go a long way toward helping regular users understand why something many might want was not going to happen. Sure, you'll still have people arguing ad infinitum, but it won't be the 5 C. U. reps arguing with AWC over things, or the C. U. website bashing AWC. The C. U. reps would simply present a request or two at a time in private, hear AWC's reponse, perhaps discuss the pros and cons a bit with them, accept AWC's decision, publish AWC's reason on the C. U. website and move on to the next item the next month. I see it as a way of letting people actually see AWC's reason for doing or not doing something instead of having people get third or fourth-hand info from "someone who heard that someone on the newsgroup said that someone at AWC said..." this or that.

Of course AWC owns the software and has no obligation whatsoever to give any reason to any customers about anything AWC chooses to do or not do. I think, though, that AWC does understand the value of the "community" aspect of this program. The majority of users may not think of it as a community. The majority probably go about their business of enjoying whatever they enjoy out of it quietly - with never a word or a request. On the other hand you'll always have some who heckle, badger and bash, no matter what. It's the community minded, regular users that I think the Citizens Union is really aimed toward - an effort to be a bridge between what many people would like to see happen and what AWC can or can't do. A voice (via the C. U. website) for people to see actual *reasons* why AWC will or won't implement something, rather than feeling a request has simply dropped between the cracks or received no further attention than a "thanks for your input, your opinion is valued, we'll
consider it." Seeing a request discussed and dealt with (albeit buffered from the madding crowd ;) just between the 5 C. U. reps and "whomever" from AWC.

Possibly the C U website eventually might come to be regarded almost as a features FAQ sheet. :-) Once AWC had gone on record with reasons given to the 5 C U reps in private meetings, people who continued to ask for features that had already been covered by the AWC-CU Reps could be referred to the C U page to see WHY a particular feature wasn't on the drawing board - might be "someday" - or might never be.

Possibly workable?

Best regards,
Lara


[View Quote]

Sep 25, 2001, 2:11pm

*blowing the dust off my reading glasses*
I moved this from worldbuilders to community since there are a good many oldies still observing the "community" both in the ng and in AW itself.

Perception and semantics - such interesting subjects. :-)
(I do understand your point, sw chris, but still chuckling here.)

Here's to all the oldie "observers" out there! If you're still reading... thanks for the thousands of great posts you used to write!

Lara

[View Quote] Hi binarybud, long time no see!

HenrikG, another oldie gathering dust
___________

Dec 6, 2001, 5:36am

I'm curious. What is the distinction between worlds owned by Active Worlds Corp and ones sponsored by Active Worlds Corp? I thought the letters AW at the beginning of a world name were reserved for worlds owned by Active Worlds Corporation, but I may be wrong about that.

Lara

[View Quote]

Jan 6, 2002, 4:31am

Svern Arenforge's entire post was excellent. I hope Mr. Noll and Mr. McCormick will think very long and hard about this sentence:

[View Quote] > Personally, I would never have considered entering AW
> under the current pricing as I don't give out credit card info in order to
> try out software.

<snipped>
>
> With respect,
>
> Sveren Arenforge

Feb 11, 2002, 2:22am

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

[View Quote]

Feb 8, 2002, 5:16am

J.P. made it very clear, in no uncertain terms, that <NAC> property would NOT be touched. His reason for leaving it alone (and rightfully so, imho) was that citizens whose accounts had expired before January 2, 2002 (when the first new price plan was announced) would not have had any knowledge that their property could be deleted if they left Activeworlds.

He also made it clear that property of registered citizens whose citizenships expired on or after January 2, 2002 *would* be in danger of being deleted if they don't renew within 60 days of expiration.

Kinda' makes one wish there had been advance notice about that. Some builders might have asked that they be allowed to voluntarily "expire" a current citizenship on January 1, 2002.

Perhaps AW Corp could have made a bit of extra money had they just thought up another twist to the plan - some people might have been willing to pay a "handling fee" for the privilege of taking early retirement on one account on Jan. 1 and having their remaining time transferred to a new (or second already existing) account.

Lara

[View Quote]

Feb 19, 2002, 5:14pm

Whoa! :-) I usually agree with your ideas, kellee, but not on this. Granted I've become very discouraged with many of the business decisions AWC has made. As I've told you before, as much as I love building in this program (and on Alphaworld in particular) I could uninstall and walk away from all this, including my buildings on Alphaworld, without a backward glance. However, as long as the activeworlds program exists (and I hope it will continue a long, long time) I really would not want to see Alphaworld closed to continued building.

Some see "eyesores" and "rubbish" all over Alphaworld. I see creative things still going up on Alphaworld constantly. Alphaworld is vast enough to hold it all. 99% of Alphaworld is still bare land, or so I've heard.

Alphaworld is still the public building world of choice for most builders who don't own a world themselves. And why is that? Maybe it's precisely *because* of the eclectic mix of objects and textures (old, new, newer, newest) that people can choose to build with. Maybe it's the sheer size of the world - big enough to hold both rubbish (eyesores to some, unique virtual history to others) as well as beautiful work (again, in the eye of the beholder). Even after all these years and many other "prettier" worlds people could choose to build on, Alphaworld continues to "live, breathe and grow" very vigorously.

To me, Alphaworld holds a unique place in a very unique program. As the first, oldest, and for quite awhile, "only" world, *all* of Alphaworld is an *ongoing* virtual "historical" event. I personally have always felt that "rubbish" on Alphaworld should be left intact - not "cleaned up" as so many have called for so many times.

If Alphaworld is a drain on the resources, then "community" is a drain on the resources, too. The existing builds by "Tourist", NAC, and by hundreds of expired cit names/numbers all over Alphaworld, even if the build consists of nothing more than a couple of overlapping floors or a sign saying "So and So was here", ALL are part of the history of this most unique program.

I know you are not saying delete them, kellee. You are saying just close down Alphaworld to continued building. Let people just "bot" their builds to another world if they want to. (I would not.) Certainly AWC could open up yet another public building world and promote it as the "main" public building world. Anyone who wants to "move on" to another public building world can sure do that. But you know what? I'll bet Alphaworld would still remain the most popular public building world, no matter what. AWC could even go so far as to hide the world name "AW" from the worlds list, take it off the teleport gate, not ever mention Alphaworld again. But as long as Alphaworld exists for public building, I'll betcha' the majority of people (new registered people, too) who don't own a world will find their way there to build...on good old Alphaworld, warts and all.

You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink. If the day ever comes that public building is disabled on Alphaworld, that will be the last day I doubleclick the Activeworlds icon on my desktop.

Lara

[View Quote]

May 31, 2002, 12:56am

Truly the end of an era. Perhaps everyone who enjoyed hearing Roland's calm, intelligent talks will gather for a farewell tomorrow at the site of his old Tech Talks - AWUniv world 30n 30w Friday, May 31, 8:00 p.m. VRT. Roland, if you see this, please be with us there one last time - just for a few minutes - to let us tell you how much we users have appreciated what you've done (and wanted to do) for us over the years.

Lara

[View Quote]

Nov 8, 2002, 7:47pm

This might not work for everyone (I use Netscape as my news reader), but has sure made those awful downloads after reindexing more bearable for me:

When I see that there are thousands of posts, I UNsubscribe from each newsgroup (beta,community,worldbuilders, general.) Then I resubscribe to just ONE of them. When that one ng appears and I click on it, a box comes up telling me there are (e.g.)3,500 headers. The ticked default line says "Download all". But there is also a different line where I can fill in the exact number of headers I want to download. I tick THAT line and ask for 50 or 100 headers, depending on how active I estimate that particular newsgroup has probably been since I last looked at it. And... this is important... I check the box that says something like "Mark the remainder as read" so that those thousands of ancient headers won't be downloaded at all.

Presto - only the most recent 50 or 100 messages get downloaded...instead of the thousands of old ones! The downside is that if I want to dig out a realllllly old message I would have to make it download more, but I don't usually want to read old stuff again.

I resubscribe to the other ng's the same way.

Lara

Feb 8, 2003, 3:12pm

I dunno. I kinda' look at it from the perspective of how I was 7 years ago when I first came into AW. I was very interested in building, but it took quite awhile for me to practice building to the point where I would have paid to register and keep using the program. There are worlds where tourists can practice building, sure, but the the risk of deletion is high. I don't think I'd have gotten interested at all if I had worked hard learning to build a house for a few days only to come back to find it all gone. I'd have said, "to heck with this" and uninstalled.

The unique thing about Alphaworld (back when tourists could build there) is that serious prospective builders could really get hooked on building in AW. They could take their time - weeks, months, whatever - to explore, get ideas, and get good enough at building that they enjoyed it. The more time they spent out in the boondocks of alphaworld building a big project, the more they wanted *someone* else to see it, which meant a risk of deletion. *That* was the incentive to register, for many tourist builders in the past.

With the higher registration fee now, it's all the more important (imho) to let tourists build in Alphaworld. It may take even longer now for people to get addicted enough to building to shell out the money. Those tourists are the future world owners.

Lara

[View Quote]

Feb 27, 2003, 9:03pm

I am one of the "backwards thinkers" who enjoys building in Alphaworld
"as is." :)

Rick Noll (E N Z O) speaks of "changes made in the past" bringing on
complaints. Well, the biggest complaint I can remember during the past
several years (other than the price change/tourist access issue) was
back when management subjected good old Alphaworld to weeks on end
of fog/light experiments and bot-driven rapid "time of day" cycles.
*Those* experiments took the fun out of building and detracted
from the appearance of existing builds.

Most builders have no objection to new features being added to
Alphaworld IF they don't harm old builds and DO make building more
creative and enjoyable. I wouldn't mind seeing rotate and move
enabled in Alphaworld as long as the Garbarge Elimination Team (GET)
is willing to clean-up any vandalism that might result.

I don't think many builders would object to a pretty daytime skybox
replacing the mountain backdrop. A day or two of steady "night" in
Alphaworld is fine on rare occasions, like they used to do in the good
old days; but gawd, please with a realistic night skybox...not with
that monstrous rising-earth backdrop! :-)

If E N Z O is truly interested in adding things that *builders* want in
Alphaworld - things that would result in cheers rather than jeers - all he
has to do is add a few new objects every month. For example: new trees,
new plants, a car or two, some animals, train tracks, varied hill sets,
more poles with different angles, more furniture/appliances that match
the size of the old furniture sets.

Lara

sw comit wrote (quoting E N Z O):
>


>
> Ahh I wanna know who these backwards thinkers are, they need a good smacking
>
> Honestly, half a dozen people can make a lot of noise, I've seen it many a
> time =0
>
> *walks away nodding head in disbelief*

Feb 28, 2003, 4:12am

Heheh, no, that's not all of it...not by a long shot. However, I'd be
willing to bet that the aggravating TOD bot *would* have been installed
permanently in Alphaworld had so many builders not objected to it.

Those every-6-hours changes were happening during the entire month of
November (as best I can recall) of whatever year that was (which I can't
recall.) The sickly orange fog that accompanied every
sunrise/sunset/whichever near about ruined the look of all the
magnificent SW City structures, don'tcha remember? ;-P

You say that just couldn't have been AWI's idea of a world improvement for
Alphaworld because....... "It made no sense at all."

lol, well, not going there, me. ;)

Lara

[View Quote] > That's it? Gimme a break that's a really bad example (not directing that to
> you Lara). So they were experimenting with fog and backdrops and color. I
> never for an instant that it was permanent, and if it was...why? It made no
> sense at all. I don't think, and I sure don't want to believe, that that
> was AWI's idea of a world improvement. There's a pretty big different
> between letting us rotate our objects vs. fog re-configuring every 15
> minutes =\
>
> btw I think it was only a week and a half, maybe 2 tops.

Feb 28, 2003, 6:11am

Want to see Alphaworld (and Active Worlds in general) thrive and
grow?
imho: People = activity Activity draws in more people.
1. Let tourists back into Alphaworld - with building rights.
(Yes, "with".)
2. Drop the price of citizenship to $35 per year.
3. Let people chat freely at Alphaworld gz with the CA
monitoring for flooding and blatant obscenity.
Peer pressure and "mute" can work wonders.
4. Allow world owners to let tourists back into their worlds at
no extra charge.
5. Do what it takes to make sure Active Worlds pops up at or
near the top on search engines for as many of these things as
possible: 3D Chat, 3D Communities, 3D Building,
Virtual Worlds, Virtual Communities, Virtual Chat, Virtual
Life, Online Communities
6. Get free interviews - again, again and again. Never stop
lookig for free ways to get the word out about Active Worlds.

I can think of lots more things, but that will do for starters.

Technical goodies are fine, but will never matter as much as
the community factor. Gotta have people in there, including ones
who remain perennial tourists. The always-a-tourist types should
not be regarded as free-loaders, but as what they really are...
more of the sheer number of users it takes to make Active Worlds
*active*.

Oh and yeah, while I'm at it, sw comit is right - I'd vote
to let Alphaworld have the special commands. I can just imagine
what cool things would happen in the factories of SW City. :-)

Lara

P.S. Sticking my head back out of the hidey-hole long enough
to wave at Chris. :-)

[View Quote]

Apr 23, 2003, 11:39pm

I was pleased with 3.4.... until Build 480. The greyed-out Object Properties window on other people's builds does not allow us to copy action commands off other's builds in Alphaworld. I hope other Alphaworld builders who have always liked the convenience of copy/pasting complex commands will politely (I'm having a really hard time being polite about *this* change) ask AWI to fix this back the way it was.

Lara

1  2  3  |   Order by default