|
|
worlds and citizenships (Community)
worlds and citizenships // Community
Jan 2, 2002, 8:42pm
Firstly this is only going to be an issue when your citizenship is next up
for renewal. That means that the vast majority of people bitching and crying
about this aren't even going to be affected for some time.
Secondly, citizens have been paying a pittance for AW since it was first
charged for ... $20 a year ... $1.65 a month. Its high time the "community"
paid their way.
Thirdly, high value "potential clients" don't often come from public forums
.... its called "Sales and Marketing" - corporations need to be SOLD things
like this, they rarely just land in your lap.
Also, I don't see any other way to read a statement like "I think if a big
company could afford a uniserver then they might also be able to afford to
shoulder some of the burden being put on our backs.". They have been
carrying you so far ... and you're asking for that to continue. I don't see
any reason why.
[View Quote]"dotar sojat" <barsoom at my.activeworlds.com> wrote in message
news:3C33861D.F54658AA at my.activeworlds.com...
> Oh and as for that subsidized by others issue. Its not even part of the
point. If
> AW was in financial straits they should have let us know long before this.
If they
> had, maybe somethign acceptable to all parties could have been arrived at
by now.
>
> dotar sojat wrote:
>
interest
havign to
subsidised by
you're
less
not
those who
to
with
>
|
Jan 2, 2002, 8:53pm
You obviously miss my point. Oh well. Whats done is done, whats said is said.
When my cit expires in April, I will be finding another chat to call home,
unless AW comes up with a more reasonable pricing plan.
[View Quote]
> Firstly this is only going to be an issue when your citizenship is next up
> for renewal. That means that the vast majority of people bitching and crying
> about this aren't even going to be affected for some time.
>
> Secondly, citizens have been paying a pittance for AW since it was first
> charged for ... $20 a year ... $1.65 a month. Its high time the "community"
> paid their way.
>
> Thirdly, high value "potential clients" don't often come from public forums
> ... its called "Sales and Marketing" - corporations need to be SOLD things
> like this, they rarely just land in your lap.
>
> Also, I don't see any other way to read a statement like "I think if a big
> company could afford a uniserver then they might also be able to afford to
> shoulder some of the burden being put on our backs.". They have been
> carrying you so far ... and you're asking for that to continue. I don't see
> any reason why.
>
[View Quote]> "dotar sojat" <barsoom at my.activeworlds.com> wrote in message
> news:3C33861D.F54658AA at my.activeworlds.com...
> point. If
> If they
> by now.
> interest
> havign to
> subsidised by
> you're
> less
> not
> those who
> to
> with
|
Jan 2, 2002, 10:14pm
This is all true, Tony. Unfortunately, the poorly organized petition that's
floating around now is not going to get the job done. What executive would
listen to people who make posts like "F AWCOM over this!" I certainly
wouldn't.
What someone needs to do is write up a nice letter in a pleasant tone and
mail it via snail mail to Activeworlds with his or her opinion. If many
people wrote such letters, or even nicely written E-Mails, then AW would
listen. But as it is, people aren't organized enough to get anything done.
What's needed is someone with enough sense to lead the community to write
reasonable letters. The person could act as recipient of all the letters,
and then ship a large box filled with opinions to AW. But right now, that's
not happening, and these petitions are only making things worse....
[View Quote]"tony m" <fldmshl2013 at hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3c337743.51466750 at news.activeworlds.com...
> The global and permanent elimination of all tourists, I must agree, is but
a mere dream. Would it forever change the face of the AW
> community, if this dream were to become reality?
>
> The features of AW 3.3 will further enhance the face of AW, as Roland and
everybody else continues to say. But should the price of being
> able to see these features be $2 a week?
>
> Our choices appear to be either accept 3.3 as our final and last version,
or face the new pricing model. The community of AW has always had
> that third, invisible option: we can tell Rick (and co.) in our own words
that he must consider the opinion of the community. It is believed
> that the community is part of the decision in what goes on with AW. Can
the company possibly consider our point of view? Perhaps some lurker
> in the darkness is a marketing genious, and can think of a new and better
pricing scheme for AW to keep their boat afloat and to keep the
> community happy.
>
> The new pricing model introduces several problems. Not all people have a
credit card; if they wish to even see a triangle in AW they must
> imput a credit card number and be confined to two weeks to enjoy that
triangle and many more of 'em. It should also be considered that well
> over half of the AW community are but only teenagers, whose parents are
probably skeptical about the $19.95 a year they are paying for. Kids
> who come from families who do not generate a whole lot of income (such as
I) will find their visit to AW very short. It has been said that
> current citizens will not be affected for the time being, but what about
those tourists out there who have been ready for citizenship in so
> long that they become discouraged by this pricing schematic and leave AW--
possibly to never return.
>
> I have heard many better pricing schematics touring ground zeroes of
popular worlds. Perhaps one of them will fit us all.
>
> -- Tony M, citizen # 314753, registered February 2000.
|
Jan 2, 2002, 10:18pm
--------------030601010502000904020607
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Why are you beign so negative?
[View Quote]
>This is all true, Tony. Unfortunately, the poorly organized petition that's
>floating around now is not going to get the job done. What executive would
>listen to people who make posts like "F AWCOM over this!" I certainly
>wouldn't.
>
>What someone needs to do is write up a nice letter in a pleasant tone and
>mail it via snail mail to Activeworlds with his or her opinion. If many
>people wrote such letters, or even nicely written E-Mails, then AW would
>listen. But as it is, people aren't organized enough to get anything done.
>
>What's needed is someone with enough sense to lead the community to write
>reasonable letters. The person could act as recipient of all the letters,
>and then ship a large box filled with opinions to AW. But right now, that's
>not happening, and these petitions are only making things worse....
>
[View Quote]>"tony m" <fldmshl2013 at hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:3c337743.51466750 at news.activeworlds.com...
>
>a mere dream. Would it forever change the face of the AW
>
>everybody else continues to say. But should the price of being
>
>or face the new pricing model. The community of AW has always had
>
>that he must consider the opinion of the community. It is believed
>
>the company possibly consider our point of view? Perhaps some lurker
>
>pricing scheme for AW to keep their boat afloat and to keep the
>
>credit card; if they wish to even see a triangle in AW they must
>
>triangle and many more of 'em. It should also be considered that well
>
>probably skeptical about the $19.95 a year they are paying for. Kids
>
>I) will find their visit to AW very short. It has been said that
>
>those tourists out there who have been ready for citizenship in so
>
>possibly to never return.
>
>popular worlds. Perhaps one of them will fit us all.
>
>
>
|
--------------030601010502000904020607
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<html>
<head>
</head>
<body>
Why are you beign so negative?<br>
<br>
[View Quote]brant wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:3c33a270$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com">
<pre wrap="">This is all true, Tony. Unfortunately, the poorly organized petition that's<br>floating around now is not going to get the job done. What executive would<br>listen to people who make posts like "F AWCOM over this!" I certainly<br>wouldn't.<br><br>What someone needs to do is write up a nice letter in a pleasant tone and<br>mail it via snail mail to Activeworlds with his or her opinion. If many<br>people wrote such letters, or even nicely written E-Mails, then AW would<br>listen. But as it is, people aren't organized enough to get anything done.<br><br>What's needed is someone with enough sense to lead the community to write<br>reasonable letters. The person could act as recipient of all the letters,<br>and then ship a large box filled with opinions to AW. But right now, that's<br>not happening, and these petitions are only making things worse....<br><br>"tony m" <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:fldmshl2013 at hotmail.com"><fldmshl2013 at hotmai
l.com></a> wrote in message<br><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="news:3c337743.51466750 at news.activeworlds.com">news:3c337743.51466750 at news.activeworlds.com</a>...<br></pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">The global and permanent elimination of all tourists, I must agree, is but<br></pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->a mere dream. Would it forever change the face of the AW<br></pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">community, if this dream were to become reality?<br><br>The features of AW 3.3 will further enhance the face of AW, as Roland and<br></pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->everybody else continues to say. But should the price of being<br></pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">able to see these features be $2 a week?<br><br>Our choices appear to be either accept 3.3 as our final and last version,<br></pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->or face the new pricing model. The community of AW has always had<br></pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">that third, invisible option: we can tell Rick (and co.) in our own words<br></pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->that he must consider the opinion of the community. It is believed<br></pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">that the community is part of the decision in what goes on with AW. Can<br></pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->the company possibly consider our point of view? Perhaps some lurker<br></pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">in the darkness is a marketing genious, and can think of a new and better<br></pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->pricing scheme for AW to keep their boat afloat and to keep the<br></pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">community happy.<br><br>The new pricing model introduces several problems. Not all people have a<br></pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->credit card; if they wish to even see a triangle in AW they must<br></pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">imput a credit card number and be confined to two weeks to enjoy that<br></pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->triangle and many more of 'em. It should also be considered that well<br></pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">over half of the AW community are but only teenagers, whose parents are<br></pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->probably skeptical about the $19.95 a year they are paying for. Kids<br></pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">who come from families who do not generate a whole lot of income (such as<br></pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->I) will find their visit to AW very short. It has been said that<br></pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">current citizens will not be affected for the time being, but what about<br></pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->those tourists out there who have been ready for citizenship in so<br></pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">long that they become discouraged by this pricing schematic and leave AW--<br></pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->possibly to never return.<br></pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">I have heard many better pricing schematics touring ground zeroes of<br></pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->popular worlds. Perhaps one of them will fit us all.<br></pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">-- Tony M, citizen # 314753, registered February 2000.<br></pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!----><br><br></pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>
|
--------------030601010502000904020607--
Jan 2, 2002, 10:21pm
I'm writing them a letter as we speak.. and I am not supporting the
petitions or those who use terms that shouldn't be used when talking to
someone else.
--Bowen--
Jan 2, 2002, 10:29pm
tell them that they should make it like 5 dollars a month instead! :)
[View Quote]bowen <bowen at omegauniverse.com> wrote in message
news:3c33a413$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> I'm writing them a letter as we speak.. and I am not supporting the
> petitions or those who use terms that shouldn't be used when talking to
> someone else.
>
> --Bowen--
>
>
|
Jan 2, 2002, 10:49pm
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0017_01C193C5.89BBC830
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I'm being negative?! Look at the posts on the petition, lol - and then =
you'll see who's being negative. I don't care who you are - that's just =
not an acceptable way to act in public.
[View Quote] "icey" <icey at altavista.net> wrote in message =
news:3C33A1C9.30508 at altavista.net...
Why are you beign so negative?
|
This is all true, Tony. Unfortunately, the poorly organized petition =
that'sfloating around now is not going to get the job done. What =
executive wouldlisten to people who make posts like "F AWCOM over this!" =
I certainlywouldn't.What someone needs to do is write up a nice letter =
in a pleasant tone andmail it via snail mail to Activeworlds with his or =
her opinion. If manypeople wrote such letters, or even nicely written =
E-Mails, then AW wouldlisten. But as it is, people aren't organized =
enough to get anything done.What's needed is someone with enough sense =
to lead the community to writereasonable letters. The person could act =
as recipient of all the letters,and then ship a large box filled with =
opinions to AW. But right now, that'snot happening, and these petitions =
are only making things worse...."tony m" <fldmshl2013 at hotmai
[View Quote]l.com> wrote in messagenews:3c337743.51466750 at news.activeworlds.com...
The global and permanent elimination of all tourists, I must agree, is =
but
a mere dream. Would it forever change the face of the AW
community, if this dream were to become reality?The features of AW 3.3 =
will further enhance the face of AW, as Roland and
everybody else continues to say. But should the price of being
able to see these features be $2 a week?Our choices appear to be either =
accept 3.3 as our final and last version,
or face the new pricing model. The community of AW has always had
that third, invisible option: we can tell Rick (and co.) in our own =
words
that he must consider the opinion of the community. It is believed
that the community is part of the decision in what goes on with AW. Can
the company possibly consider our point of view? Perhaps some lurker
in the darkness is a marketing genious, and can think of a new and =
better
pricing scheme for AW to keep their boat afloat and to keep the
community happy.The new pricing model introduces several problems. Not =
all people have a
credit card; if they wish to even see a triangle in AW they must
imput a credit card number and be confined to two weeks to enjoy that
triangle and many more of 'em. It should also be considered that well
over half of the AW community are but only teenagers, whose parents are
probably skeptical about the $19.95 a year they are paying for. Kids
who come from families who do not generate a whole lot of income (such =
as
I) will find their visit to AW very short. It has been said that
current citizens will not be affected for the time being, but what about
those tourists out there who have been ready for citizenship in so
long that they become discouraged by this pricing schematic and leave =
AW--
possibly to never return.
I have heard many better pricing schematics touring ground zeroes of
popular worlds. Perhaps one of them will fit us all.
-- Tony M, citizen # 314753, registered February 2000.
|
------=_NextPart_000_0017_01C193C5.89BBC830
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!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 6.00.2712.300" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I'm being negative?! Look at the =
posts on the=20
petition, lol - and then you'll see who's being negative. I don't =
care who=20
you are - that's just not an acceptable way to act in =
public.</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"icey" <<A =
href=3D"mailto:icey at altavista.net">icey at altavista.net</A>>=20
[View Quote] wrote in message <A=20
=
href=3D"news:3C33A1C9.30508 at altavista.net">news:3C33A1C9.30508 at altavista.=
net</A>...</DIV>Why=20
are you beign so negative?<BR><BR>brant wrote:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE cite=3Dmid:3c33a270$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com =
type=3D"cite"><PRE wrap=3D"">This is all true, Tony. Unfortunately, the =
poorly organized petition that's<BR>floating around now is not going to =
get the job done. What executive would<BR>listen to people who make =
posts like "F AWCOM over this!" I certainly<BR>wouldn't.<BR><BR>What =
someone needs to do is write up a nice letter in a pleasant tone =
and<BR>mail it via snail mail to Activeworlds with his or her opinion. =
If many<BR>people wrote such letters, or even nicely written E-Mails, =
then AW would<BR>listen. But as it is, people aren't organized enough =
to get anything done.<BR><BR>What's needed is someone with enough sense =
to lead the community to write<BR>reasonable letters. The person could =
act as recipient of all the letters,<BR>and then ship a large box filled =
with opinions to AW. But right now, that's<BR>not happening, and these =
petitions are only making things worse....<BR><BR>"tony m" <A =
class=3Dmoz-txt-link-rfc2396E =
href=3D"mailto:fldmshl2013 at hotmail.com"><fldmshl2013 at hotmai
l.com></A> wrote in message<BR><A class=3Dmoz-txt-link-freetext =
href=3D"news:3c337743.51466750 at news.activeworlds.com">news:3c337743.51466=
750 at news.activeworlds.com</A>...<BR></PRE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type=3D"cite"><PRE wrap=3D"">The global and permanent =
elimination of all tourists, I must agree, is =
but<BR></PRE></BLOCKQUOTE><PRE wrap=3D""><!---->a mere dream. Would it =
forever change the face of the AW<BR></PRE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type=3D"cite"><PRE wrap=3D"">community, if this dream =
were to become reality?<BR><BR>The features of AW 3.3 will further =
enhance the face of AW, as Roland and<BR></PRE></BLOCKQUOTE><PRE =
wrap=3D""><!---->everybody else continues to say. But should the price =
of being<BR></PRE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type=3D"cite"><PRE wrap=3D"">able to see these features =
be $2 a week?<BR><BR>Our choices appear to be either accept 3.3 as our =
final and last version,<BR></PRE></BLOCKQUOTE><PRE wrap=3D""><!---->or =
face the new pricing model. The community of AW has always had<BR></PRE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type=3D"cite"><PRE wrap=3D"">that third, invisible =
option: we can tell Rick (and co.) in our own =
words<BR></PRE></BLOCKQUOTE><PRE wrap=3D""><!---->that he must consider =
the opinion of the community. It is believed<BR></PRE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type=3D"cite"><PRE wrap=3D"">that the community is part =
of the decision in what goes on with AW. Can<BR></PRE></BLOCKQUOTE><PRE =
wrap=3D""><!---->the company possibly consider our point of view? =
Perhaps some lurker<BR></PRE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type=3D"cite"><PRE wrap=3D"">in the darkness is a =
marketing genious, and can think of a new and =
better<BR></PRE></BLOCKQUOTE><PRE wrap=3D""><!---->pricing scheme for AW =
to keep their boat afloat and to keep the<BR></PRE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type=3D"cite"><PRE wrap=3D"">community happy.<BR><BR>The =
new pricing model introduces several problems. Not all people have =
a<BR></PRE></BLOCKQUOTE><PRE wrap=3D""><!---->credit card; if they wish =
to even see a triangle in AW they must<BR></PRE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type=3D"cite"><PRE wrap=3D"">imput a credit card number =
and be confined to two weeks to enjoy that<BR></PRE></BLOCKQUOTE><PRE =
wrap=3D""><!---->triangle and many more of 'em. It should also be =
considered that well<BR></PRE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type=3D"cite"><PRE wrap=3D"">over half of the AW =
community are but only teenagers, whose parents =
are<BR></PRE></BLOCKQUOTE><PRE wrap=3D""><!---->probably skeptical about =
the $19.95 a year they are paying for. Kids<BR></PRE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type=3D"cite"><PRE wrap=3D"">who come from families who =
do not generate a whole lot of income (such =
as<BR></PRE></BLOCKQUOTE><PRE wrap=3D""><!---->I) will find their visit =
to AW very short. It has been said that<BR></PRE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type=3D"cite"><PRE wrap=3D"">current citizens will not =
be affected for the time being, but what =
about<BR></PRE></BLOCKQUOTE><PRE wrap=3D""><!---->those tourists out =
there who have been ready for citizenship in so<BR></PRE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type=3D"cite"><PRE wrap=3D"">long that they become =
discouraged by this pricing schematic and leave =
AW--<BR></PRE></BLOCKQUOTE><PRE wrap=3D""><!---->possibly to never =
return.<BR></PRE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type=3D"cite"><PRE wrap=3D"">I have heard many better =
pricing schematics touring ground zeroes of<BR></PRE></BLOCKQUOTE><PRE =
wrap=3D""><!---->popular worlds. Perhaps one of them will fit us =
all.<BR></PRE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type=3D"cite"><PRE wrap=3D"">-- Tony M, citizen # =
314753, registered February 2000.<BR></PRE></BLOCKQUOTE><PRE =
wrap=3D""><!----><BR><BR></PRE></BLOCKQUOTE><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTM=
L>
|
------=_NextPart_000_0017_01C193C5.89BBC830--
Jan 2, 2002, 10:52pm
This is beign negative to me...
>brant wrote
But right now, that's
not happening, and these petitions are only making things worse....
Jan 2, 2002, 10:58pm
Read that how you will ... but its true all the same. The posts on the
petitions just go to show what an influx of braindead spoilt brats AW has
had to endure in recent months. A large number of them are Tourists who are
just pissed at not getting something for free anymore.
[View Quote]"icey" <icey at altavista.net> wrote in message
news:3C33A993.6090106 at altavista.net...
> This is beign negative to me...
>
>
> But right now, that's
> not happening, and these petitions are only making things worse....
>
>
|
Jan 2, 2002, 10:58pm
As I have mentioned before, I would much rather pay $10 a month US for
MMORPG's than to chat/build.
--
_________________________________________
Anduin Lothario
ICQ#:17962714
SMS: (Send an SMS message to my ICQ): +278314217962714
More ways to contact me:
http://wwp.icq.com/17962714
http://www.anduin-lothario.com
_________________________________________
[View Quote]"dotar sojat" <barsoom at my.activeworlds.com> wrote in message
news:3C338432.C7AA0421 at my.activeworlds.com...
> $9.50 US funds a month. Thats worse than almost any other chat on the net.
>
> cozmo wrote:
>
set
if
($2.50),
to
set
of
good
annoying
new
can
whether
10PM
probably
not
if
even
"last
not
and
fire
that
inboxes,
situation
there
is
into
500
question
the
is
most of
much
like
for
this
*watches
with
>
|
Jan 2, 2002, 11:08pm
Not really, AW 3.3 as the last version (or at-least until they figure out a
way around dit) isn't so bad after all. We get to keep out home, and they
keep charging $20US per year for cit renewals and don't need to hire more
staff, it's not so bad as it actually sounds. As well as maybe even lower
world prices to what they "use" to be would generate more worlds as people
can AFFORD them. Also, take out the 3d homepages and you solve another
problem. Free cits are not so much of an issue, as long as they make those
people enter a credit card number, stops people getting more than 1 free cit
from different locations, unless they have even more cards.
Maybe after figuring out the problem, they can start working on a NEW
version of AW. They never upgraded so fast in the past, but now make new
versions like nothing.
I don't care much for the technology, I care for the community side and
being able to come in here, chat, and build.
--
_________________________________________
Anduin Lothario
ICQ#:17962714
SMS: (Send an SMS message to my ICQ): +278314217962714
More ways to contact me:
http://wwp.icq.com/17962714
http://www.anduin-lothario.com
_________________________________________
[View Quote]"cozmo" <b.nolan2 at verizon.net> wrote in message
news:3c3388cc$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> if we just exept 3.3 as our last version it will become obsolete or AW
will
> go out of business, whichever comes first
>
> tony m <fldmshl2013 at hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:3c337743.51466750 at news.activeworlds.com...
but
> a mere dream. Would it forever change the face of the AW
and
> everybody else continues to say. But should the price of being
version,
> or face the new pricing model. The community of AW has always had
words
> that he must consider the opinion of the community. It is believed
> the company possibly consider our point of view? Perhaps some lurker
better
> pricing scheme for AW to keep their boat afloat and to keep the
> credit card; if they wish to even see a triangle in AW they must
> triangle and many more of 'em. It should also be considered that well
> probably skeptical about the $19.95 a year they are paying for. Kids
as
> I) will find their visit to AW very short. It has been said that
> those tourists out there who have been ready for citizenship in so
AW--
> possibly to never return.
> popular worlds. Perhaps one of them will fit us all.
>
>
|
Jan 2, 2002, 11:27pm
It's quite a mistake for them to charge as much an as rpg. Even if it was
$5-8 a month it would be in a price bracket below that of a profesional
game... and aw still feels "in progress" to most poeple. Not worth the 10+
price bracket.
Jan 2, 2002, 11:31pm
the petitions will completely FAIL. they are NOT brought about in an acceptable manner, and the truth of the matter is AWCOM (or whatever
they want to call themselves) picked a good time to tell us-- less than 24 hours before it goes into effect!
[View Quote]On 2 Jan 2002 19:52:13 -0500, "icey" <icey at altavista.net> wrote:
|
>This is beign negative to me...
>
>
>But right now, that's
>not happening, and these petitions are only making things worse....
>
>
--
Tony M (fldmshl2013 at hotmail.com)
http://tonyhttp.s5.com
Jan 2, 2002, 11:38pm
That would make
..... *counting all my credit cards* ....
no citizenship for me. (Well, I have one now)
[View Quote]anduin lothario wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> Free cits are not so much of an issue, as long as they make those
> people enter a credit card number, stops people getting more than 1 free cit
> from different locations, unless they have even more cards.
>
> [...]
|
--
"_
|
/\
\ /
__/ /_
Jan 3, 2002, 12:59am
Having AW 3.3 as the last version is simply not an option. If AW 3.3 was
the last version, then nobody would stick around as AW becomes more and more
obsolete.
I might stick around if asked to pay $9.95, but I'm definately not going to
stay if AW 3.3 is the last version when competing companies are developing
their software further.
[View Quote]"anduin lothario" <anduin at NOSPAM.anduin-lothario.com> wrote in message
news:3c33af00 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> Not really, AW 3.3 as the last version (or at-least until they figure out
a
> way around dit) isn't so bad after all. We get to keep out home, and they
> keep charging $20US per year for cit renewals and don't need to hire more
> staff, it's not so bad as it actually sounds. As well as maybe even lower
> world prices to what they "use" to be would generate more worlds as people
> can AFFORD them. Also, take out the 3d homepages and you solve another
> problem. Free cits are not so much of an issue, as long as they make those
> people enter a credit card number, stops people getting more than 1 free
cit
> from different locations, unless they have even more cards.
>
> Maybe after figuring out the problem, they can start working on a NEW
> version of AW. They never upgraded so fast in the past, but now make new
> versions like nothing.
> I don't care much for the technology, I care for the community side and
> being able to come in here, chat, and build.
>
> --
> _________________________________________
> Anduin Lothario
> ICQ#:17962714
>
> SMS: (Send an SMS message to my ICQ): +278314217962714
> More ways to contact me:
> http://wwp.icq.com/17962714
> http://www.anduin-lothario.com
> _________________________________________
>
> "cozmo" <b.nolan2 at verizon.net> wrote in message
> news:3c3388cc$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> will
> but
> and
> version,
> words
Can
> better
a
are
> as
about
> AW--
>
>
|
Jan 3, 2002, 1:36am
As it stands, there are NO competing companies and AW is horribly obsolete
as it is. Hasn't made a damn bit of difference yet.
[View Quote]"brant" <awteen at shoemakervillage.org> wrote in message
news:3c33c8f7$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> Having AW 3.3 as the last version is simply not an option. If AW 3.3 was
> the last version, then nobody would stick around as AW becomes more and
more
> obsolete.
>
> I might stick around if asked to pay $9.95, but I'm definately not going
to
> stay if AW 3.3 is the last version when competing companies are developing
> their software further.
>
> "anduin lothario" <anduin at NOSPAM.anduin-lothario.com> wrote in message
> news:3c33af00 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
out
> a
they
more
lower
people
those
> cit
is
Roland
> Can
have
> a
that
> are
(such
> about
leave
>
>
|
Jan 3, 2002, 4:12am
Thats still $60 and too much!
[View Quote]
> tell them that they should make it like 5 dollars a month instead! :)
>
[View Quote]> bowen <bowen at omegauniverse.com> wrote in message
> news:3c33a413$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
|
Jan 3, 2002, 3:57pm
alot of UNIX shell hosts are USD$5/mo-- and they're quite a popular business. if we're forced to do monthly payments, AW is really only
worth <= USD$5
[View Quote]On 3 Jan 2002 01:12:30 -0500, "dotar sojat" <barsoom at my.activeworlds.com> wrote:
|
>Thats still $60 and too much!
>
--
Tony M (fldmshl2013 at hotmail.com)
http://tonyhttp.s5.com
Jan 3, 2002, 5:34pm
you wouldnt pay it all at once...makign it every month 3 months or 6 months
ora year would make it easier for evryone to pay becuase not evenone can pay
so frequantly or every year in one big fat sum
[View Quote]dotar sojat <barsoom at my.activeworlds.com> wrote in message
news:3C33F487.618E7613 at my.activeworlds.com...
> Thats still $60 and too much!
>
> cozmo wrote:
>
to
>
|
Jan 3, 2002, 5:58pm
I know I cannot afford to have them hitting a credit card every month for my
citizenship. First off that would be bad on interest rates, secondly no CC
anyway, I hate the things and will nto use them.
[View Quote]
> you wouldnt pay it all at once...makign it every month 3 months or 6 months
> ora year would make it easier for evryone to pay becuase not evenone can pay
> so frequantly or every year in one big fat sum
>
[View Quote]> dotar sojat <barsoom at my.activeworlds.com> wrote in message
> news:3C33F487.618E7613 at my.activeworlds.com...
> to
|
Jan 3, 2002, 7:00pm
Brant, I can understand why you're defending them, as you're the CT of
AWTeen... therefore, I suggest you shut up, because you're talking crap.
Sorry to say so, because you allways seem very nice and sane in AW :-))
KAH
[View Quote]"brant" <awteen at shoemakervillage.org> wrote in message
news:3c336edc$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> I disagree. $100 a year isn't a lot for many teenagers. Around here, if
> you go to the movies ($8.50) and buy a popcorn ($4.00) and a soda ($2.50),
> as well as pay for gas and car maintenence in getting to the theater
> ($1.00), the total comes to about $16.00 for one night. Thus, a trip to
the
> movies that lasts two or three hours is almost 1 and a half times more
> expensive than a subscription to AW for a month.
>
> The question isn't whether most people can afford to pay (anyone can set
> aside $2.00 per month) - it's whether people will want to pay instead of
> buying other things that they can afford. Personally, if 3.3 is as good
as
> AW makes it sound, I'd definately put out the money. Heck, the
elimination
> of tourists isn't that bad after all - there won't be any more annoying
> tourists at GZ who only cause trouble and can't be kept out. With the new
> system, everyone is responsible for his or her own actions, and people can
> still try AW for free.
>
> I lied there. What's going to determine whether I pay or not is whether
> everyone else will put aside the money, not whether I will. If AW's
> community loses interest and there's only 100 citizens logged on at 10PM
VRT
> on a Sunday evening (which seems to be AW's busiest day), then I probably
> won't pay.
>
> AW made a big mistake not by proposing the price change but by stating
that
> 3.3 could possibly be the last version if such a pricing scheme was not
> implemented. Everyone knows that 3.3 can't be the last version of AW if
> they want to continue as a feasible company. Technology changes, and
after
> a year or so AW would start to become obsolete, and people wouldn't even
put
> out the lower $20.00 a year for citizenships anymore. 3.3 being the "last
> version" is something that simply isn't an option.
>
> By the tone of the letter, this plan is far from finalized yet, so I'm not
> going to spam AWGate protesting mindlessly like a lot of people are,
> especially since nobody, not even the posters to this newsgroup, knows
what
> the pricing for current citizens will be. Everyone needs to calm down and
> talk about this change reasonably after they know ALL the facts, not fire
> off two-sentence letters consisting of obscenities to ENZO screaming that
> they disagree with the price change.
>
> The people starting these ridiculous petitions that have one-sentence
> justifications, spamming telegrams to AWC staff members, flooding inboxes,
> and screaming and yelling at ground zeroes are only making the situation
> worse.
>
> "bowen" <bowen at omegauniverse.com> wrote in message
> news:3c336577$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
would
is
> still
can't
to
extremely
the
> renewing
it
feel
it.
> I
new
> the
>
>
|
Jan 3, 2002, 7:00pm
very true, I believe you're quite old, Brant (18, 17?), which gives you the
advantage of being able to work legally, and get more money than younger
teens... I'm going to have to wait 5 months before I'm even old enough to
apply for the job as "paper boy", and if AW goes that expensive there's no
chance I can stay a cit... Been pondering about getting a world, and buying
more hardware, but on low teen wages you can't afford a lot if they're gonna
take $114 a year... I say someone write a good, proper letter (proofread and
everything), giving everyone the opportunity to write their name, citnum,
cit pass at the bottom, then print out and sign, before posting it with
snail mail to the AWC... that way they could really see that the cits can't
take this price-jump, and that they're serious about it...
KAH
[View Quote]"bowen" <bowen at omegauniverse.com> wrote in message
news:3c337574 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> I agree with dotar. Just because it's not a lot for you or other teens in
> your area doesn't mean it isn't for all the rest of us.. minimum wage
isn't
> exactly "easy" to live off of, especially when it's $5 an hour where I
live.
> And not all teans can work 40 hours a week. Not all teens can get jobs
> either.. competition for the 10 work spots at burger king LoL. I pay for
> everything, haircuts, clothes, medical visits, all except room and board,
> then there's college for me coming up at the end of this year.. it's kinda
> hard for me, not to mention anyone else. :\ Why not lower do other things
> which could increase revenue (3d homepages gone like dotar said)?
>
> --Bowen--
>
> "dotar sojat" <barsoom at my.activeworlds.com> wrote in message
> news:3C33719F.DE61CB6D at my.activeworlds.com...
> the
to
> chat
AW),
> and
> helps,
those
> of us
for
> one
> stay
> loss, then
> if
> ($2.50),
to
> the
set
of
good
> as
> elimination
annoying
> new
> can
whether
10PM
> VRT
> probably
> that
not
if
> after
even
> put
> "last
> not
> what
> and
> fire
> that
> inboxes,
situation
> would
there
> is
is
> can't
> into
500
> to
> question
> the
> extremely
is
> the
most
> of
> much
like
> it
> feel
for
> it.
this
> new
> *watches
> with
>
>
|
Jan 3, 2002, 7:00pm
wake up! they have to get someone else to pay more, because most ppl can't
afford $114 a year for some crappy shit like AW!
KAH
[View Quote]"grimble" <grimble2000 at btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:3c33850e at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> Man that is warped. Pay for what you use, don't expect to be subsidised by
> those in a better position to pay. Has it occurred to you that maybe
you're
> just being asked to pay your way?? With less public cits AW has one less
> revenue stream, but without the real business there IS NO AW!! Its not
> difficult.
>
>
> "dotar sojat" <barsoom at my.activeworlds.com> wrote in message
> news:3C337F87.D369571D at my.activeworlds.com...
who
> can
> company
> them?
>
>
|
Jan 3, 2002, 7:00pm
accepting 3.3 and leaving to current AWC to die could be an option to save
AW... the AWC would go bust, and would be wanting to sell AW (especially if
Rick really means that he loves AW) off, and one could do the same thing as
COF did in 97, but learn of their mistakes... I'm sure staff like Roland
would accept to work for a new company as long as they get good wages.
Something to think about...
KAH
[View Quote]"cozmo" <b.nolan2 at verizon.net> wrote in message
news:3c3388cc$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> if we just exept 3.3 as our last version it will become obsolete or AW
will
> go out of business, whichever comes first
>
> tony m <fldmshl2013 at hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:3c337743.51466750 at news.activeworlds.com...
but
> a mere dream. Would it forever change the face of the AW
and
> everybody else continues to say. But should the price of being
version,
> or face the new pricing model. The community of AW has always had
words
> that he must consider the opinion of the community. It is believed
> the company possibly consider our point of view? Perhaps some lurker
better
> pricing scheme for AW to keep their boat afloat and to keep the
> credit card; if they wish to even see a triangle in AW they must
> triangle and many more of 'em. It should also be considered that well
> probably skeptical about the $19.95 a year they are paying for. Kids
as
> I) will find their visit to AW very short. It has been said that
> those tourists out there who have been ready for citizenship in so
AW--
> possibly to never return.
> popular worlds. Perhaps one of them will fit us all.
>
>
|
Jan 3, 2002, 7:00pm
good time for them lol, but it's not very nice to do that against your users
(customers if you like, lets forget about the tourists, they're the AWC's
loss anyway), it's what gives companies bad reputation... large companies
who have a bit more business sense warn customers often months in advance
before increasing the charges... one of the things is that Rick isn't
qualifyed for being a CEO, looking at the AWC's own list and description of
directors he's an educated artist, but has no education in business... seems
like JP is an educated businessman, but he doesn't show it very well (no
offence)... looking at the jobs page it seems they are looking for someone
to help them do good business (VERY wise!)... if they do this I doubt very
much that they'll be able to go on for more than a year...
KAH
[View Quote]"tony m" <fldmshl2013 at hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3c33b24b.4135137 at news.activeworlds.com...
> the petitions will completely FAIL. they are NOT brought about in an
acceptable manner, and the truth of the matter is AWCOM (or whatever
> they want to call themselves) picked a good time to tell us-- less than 24
hours before it goes into effect!
>
> On 2 Jan 2002 19:52:13 -0500, "icey" <icey at altavista.net> wrote:
>
>
> --
> Tony M (fldmshl2013 at hotmail.com)
> http://tonyhttp.s5.com
|
Jan 3, 2002, 8:12pm
Exactly. 3.3 Stays Brant, go back to AWTeen. What difference is it going to
make? Make LEGO world be able to move objects on a different axis aint gonna
do jack.
It IS an option over loosing 80% of the citizens in one go. At-least until
they have thought it over and KNOW a way to advance. Why spend money if they
don't have enough?
--
_________________________________________
Anduin Lothario
ICQ#:17962714
SMS: (Send an SMS message to my ICQ): +278314217962714
More ways to contact me:
http://wwp.icq.com/17962714
http://www.anduin-lothario.com
_________________________________________
[View Quote]"butterfly jess" <wing at systemrecall.com> wrote in message
news:3c33d1d0 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> As it stands, there are NO competing companies and AW is horribly obsolete
> as it is. Hasn't made a damn bit of difference yet.
>
> "brant" <awteen at shoemakervillage.org> wrote in message
> news:3c33c8f7$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
was
> more
> to
developing
> out
> they
> more
> lower
> people
> those
free
new
and
AW
agree,
> is
> Roland
own
AW.
> have
> that
well
parents
> (such
> leave
of
>
>
|
Jan 3, 2002, 9:41pm
3.3 stays, and gets boring after so long if it doesnt become so obsolete
people stop using it, not to mention the reaosn they did this in the first
place was because they are losing money. Based on that fact how long do you
suspect AW will have enough money to keep the uniserver running?
[View Quote]anduin lothario <anduin at NOSPAM.anduin-lothario.com> wrote in message
news:3c34d766 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> Exactly. 3.3 Stays Brant, go back to AWTeen. What difference is it going
to
> make? Make LEGO world be able to move objects on a different axis aint
gonna
> do jack.
>
> It IS an option over loosing 80% of the citizens in one go. At-least until
> they have thought it over and KNOW a way to advance. Why spend money if
they
> don't have enough?
>
> --
> _________________________________________
> Anduin Lothario
> ICQ#:17962714
>
> SMS: (Send an SMS message to my ICQ): +278314217962714
> More ways to contact me:
> http://wwp.icq.com/17962714
> http://www.anduin-lothario.com
> _________________________________________
>
> "butterfly jess" <wing at systemrecall.com> wrote in message
> news:3c33d1d0 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
obsolete
> was
and
going
> developing
figure
another
> free
NEW
> new
> and
or
> AW
> agree,
> own
> AW.
lurker
and
people
> well
> parents
Kids
what
zeroes
> of
>
>
|
Jan 3, 2002, 10:03pm
If its shit .... walk away!
[View Quote]"kah" <kah at kahnews.cjb.net> wrote in message
news:3c34c65a$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> wake up! they have to get someone else to pay more, because most ppl can't
> afford $114 a year for some crappy shit like AW!
>
> KAH
>
> "grimble" <grimble2000 at btinternet.com> wrote in message
> news:3c33850e at server1.Activeworlds.com...
by
> you're
> who
with
>
>
|
Jan 4, 2002, 3:14am
Im willing to bet 10 bucks (American Dollars) that in a year or less that
Activeworlds Corp will die off or go out of busness because of the new
pricing system... any takers???
--
TrekkerX
Commatron & Athnex
http://www.commatron.com
http://www.athnex.com
[View Quote]"dotar sojat" <barsoom at my.activeworlds.com> wrote in message
news:3C336833.B89BB85C at my.activeworlds.com...
> Well for my own opinion...
>
> This new "pricing model" will effect the income of AW.com Inc in a bad
way. By
> requireing a credit card number for ALL new users and eliminating tourist
mode
> entirely, they will be cutting their own throats. not everyone on the net
has a
> credit card, or is willign to send the credit info over the net. What
about the
> people who want to pay with a check and be a tourist while they wait for
the
> check to arrive at AW.com? Thats how I paid, and how I will continue to
pay.
>
> bowen wrote:
>
would
is
still
can't
to
extremely
the
renewing
it
feel
it. I
new
the
>
|
Jan 4, 2002, 5:48pm
what makes you so sure they are stupid enough to keep it after 98% of the
citezins leave...
[View Quote]trekkerx <zac at commatron.com> wrote in message
news:3c353a3d$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> Im willing to bet 10 bucks (American Dollars) that in a year or less that
> Activeworlds Corp will die off or go out of busness because of the new
> pricing system... any takers???
>
> --
> TrekkerX
> Commatron & Athnex
> http://www.commatron.com
> http://www.athnex.com
> "dotar sojat" <barsoom at my.activeworlds.com> wrote in message
> news:3C336833.B89BB85C at my.activeworlds.com...
> way. By
tourist
> mode
net
> has a
> about the
> the
> pay.
> would
> is
> still
> can't
into
> to
question
the
> extremely
> the
of
much
> renewing
> it
> feel
> it. I
> new
*watches
> the
with
>
>
|
|
