1  |   Order by index

Feb 10, 2002, 11:41pm

Hi everyone

I hinted on the group list last night that I had an alternative idea to 3D
Homepages, and after some much needed rest in the wake of my "trip", I'm now
posting my deas here. Feel free to comment on them if you wish.

I was passing some WONDERFUL (and not-so-wonderful) builds as I raced back
ON FOOT from about 24,000 N 24,000 W all the way abck to GZ (took me a
little over 24 hours to do it though), I began to wonder WHY is ActiveWorlds
charging for 3D Homeages (which have *very little* #D functionality) when in
fact they could *easily* (and more feasibly) charge for space on AlphaWorld
instead???? I mean, they've only *begun* to fill in the space there!!! How
can they afford to just simply let all that land simply go to waste????
It's beyond me....

Now hear me out on this, okay.....

Granted there are works of art on there and some builds which you wonder why
they even exist at all. However, I believe that some pre-set guidelines
will cure that.

Once a person gets the space, they get all the objects and building tools
currently afforded to 3D Homepage Owners. In addition to that, we would
have access to the AlphaWorld Building Yard as well as an object compiler
(to make the moving of duplicated objects easier). We could build on as
mcuh (or as little) of the space as possible (up to a P-10). Plus, they
would all be inter-connected via the roadways on Alpha World so one can just
simply go from town to town just like driving out in the country.

Speaking of driving, see my post script at the end of this message.....

However though, here are some suggested guidelines.....

Any bulding MUST be COMPLETELY built (and furnished!). No incomplete
structures will be allowed or they will be deleted within a certain length
of time not to exceed 30 calendar days. We would also have 10 calendar days
to AT LEAST begin with construction, though any space left under
construction for six months would be re-allocated to someone else and all
objects imported would be deleted.

We would get all this for the current price of $6.95

Hypertext links could be changed whereas instead of going to some 3D
Homepage, surfers are taken to wherever GZ used to be in the 3D Homepage
(post 3D Homepage applicants wouldn't need to know this though because they
never had a 3D Homepage before).

Finally, to match all the particular themes out there, I think the current
AlphaWorld could easily be rendered suitable for all current 3D Homepage
themes except for Atlantis (these owners would fall into a new Alpha world
called Aw-Atlantis or something like that). Seperate Alpha worlds can later
be created to better match the theme.

So guys, have I gone totally beserk or am I on to something????

Your tuen to comment....Cheers... :-)

Patrick Cook
Owner - Hamsterville (as known in the Immigration Officer greeting - Pub
102X otherwise)
pchamster at msn.com
Denver, Colorado

P.S.: Is there some reason why there isn't a CAR in the Avatars pull-down
menu on AlphaWorld???? I mean if AlphaWorld is going to be made into a near
replica of America's fascination with roads, we ought to at least have the
option of being a car as we drive down the roads. Can AW answer this one???
If no one does, I bring it up when I take up some others matters with AW.
In the meantime Cheers....Patrick :-)

Feb 11, 2002, 12:10am

paying for land is a stupid idea. you already pay for it with a cit, if you
do not get it what's the point of buying a cit in the first place.. visiting
worlds is not worth the price we are going to pay. I do not understand what
this object compiler is just right click on an object, and change their name
and it's a different object. time limits are another thing people hate.
builders don't like to be forced to pump out buildings in a limited time,
creativity doesn't work on a timeline.

it's hard to understand what you are trying to convey to us, it is too
abstract for me anymore. I certainly would not pay for any of this. no
offense.

-silenced

[View Quote] > option of being a car as we drive down the roads. Can AW answer this
one???
> If no one does, I bring it up when I take up some others matters with AW.
> In the meantime Cheers....Patrick :-)
>
>

Feb 11, 2002, 2:09am

Umm.. no. I build at my leasure. Myself and a lot of other people would not
like the idea of having AW delete land (and hard work) just because I got
busy working on a project during my 10 days and could not complete my build.

AlphaWorld wasn't built in 10 days... It's taken years (about 6 now?? since
1995 correct?) for it to fill up as much as it has. How could you expect
people to complete builds in one day when it's taken that long to fill .7%
of the land?

-J

--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jeremy Booker
JTech Web Systems
(www.JTechWebSystems.com -- Coming Soon)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[View Quote]

Feb 11, 2002, 7:07am

Hi everyone:

You misread what I was saying, you build at your own leisure BUT you would
have to START building within the 30 days.

And if could *probably* sum up why it's taken 7 years just to fill 7% of the
land in a nutshell, that nutshell would have to me MARKETING (or lack
thereof!).

If I'm mistaken, then I'm mistaken and will stand most humbly corrected.
:-)

Now does it make more sense???

Patrick

[View Quote]

Feb 11, 2002, 9:07am

Below ...

Grims

[View Quote] Not sure how you work this out. 3D Homepages are just as much 3D as the rest
of activeworlds - all the functionality is permitted (unlike AlphaWorld),
you have total control over lighting and skyboxes, can set the rights for
individual users and can use your own Object Path. Its a World - an
environment you can control and have privacy in. What more do you want than
*everything* that's on offer? The fact is that a 10x10 3D Homepage is
cheapest way to use that set of services as provided by AW. I think you're
obviously missing the point of having you're own world.

> ... when in
> fact they could *easily* (and more feasibly) charge for space on
AlphaWorld
> instead????

They do charge for space in AW - its now a monthly fee of $6.95 and you can
have as much as you like, as long as you're happy with the limitations
enforced on us to stop simple-minded people sabotaging your builds. The
right to build in AW is part of what you are paying your citizenship for.

> I mean, they've only *begun* to fill in the space there!!! How
> can they afford to just simply let all that land simply go to waste????
> It's beyond me....

"Land" in the AW environment can hardly be wasted. Its more that its not
using up storage space.

>
> Now hear me out on this, okay.....
>
> Granted there are works of art on there and some builds which you wonder
why
> they even exist at all. However, I believe that some pre-set guidelines
> will cure that.
>
> Once a person gets the space, they get all the objects and building tools
> currently afforded to 3D Homepage Owners. In addition to that, we would
> have access to the AlphaWorld Building Yard as well as an object compiler
> (to make the moving of duplicated objects easier). We could build on as
> mcuh (or as little) of the space as possible (up to a P-10). Plus, they
> would all be inter-connected via the roadways on Alpha World so one can
just
> simply go from town to town just like driving out in the country.
>
> Speaking of driving, see my post script at the end of this message.....
>
> However though, here are some suggested guidelines.....
>
> Any bulding MUST be COMPLETELY built (and furnished!). No incomplete
> structures will be allowed or they will be deleted within a certain length
> of time not to exceed 30 calendar days. We would also have 10 calendar
days
> to AT LEAST begin with construction, though any space left under
> construction for six months would be re-allocated to someone else and all
> objects imported would be deleted.
>
> We would get all this for the current price of $6.95

As I said ... you already get this. If you don't want your own world and
just want to build in AlphaWorld, you can do that now. Since you're focussed
on the "suburban" theme in the 3D Homepages, you already have at least the
vast majority of those objects now available for building in AlphaWorld.
What you're suggesting seems to represent features of the subscription being
taken away from citizens by applying some very odd restrictions on people
that are paying for the right to enjoy themselves in AW. No more learning AW
by trial and error ... you now have to complete your homework assignment by
the end of the month or it'll be discarded - whether you know you're doing
or not ;o)

Sorry ... can't see any benefits in it.

<snip the rest>

Feb 11, 2002, 9:17am

Not what you said ...

[View Quote]

Feb 11, 2002, 5:01pm

having empty land in AW is cheaper than having developed land in AW...
remember that what matters is the stuff that's actually built which takes up
HD space, not areas with nothing on, this is a digital world, not the real
world where the size would actually matter ;-))

KAH

[View Quote]

Feb 11, 2002, 9:09pm

Don't you EVEN begin to suggest THAT!

SW Chris

[View Quote]

Feb 11, 2002, 10:21pm

Wait...you want to replace a bad idea with a bad idea? *boggle*

As citizens, somewhere in our bill of rights state that land claim in public
world is free to whomever gets it. I don't think anyone would be happy with
that idea. You do touch off a good idea for private world owners, especially
large private world owners, such as !Friends, A'Tuin, Broadway, and the
like. With a new financial pinch because of raised prices, and since
bandwith these days cost more than Bill Gates himself, your idea for
charging a small pay for a lot is economically logical and still morally
right. If a world doesn't feel it needs to, they don't. But everyone
sensible enough would understand that these worlds have to pay to maintain
their world somehow, why not let their frequent citizens help pitch in. I'm
surprised it hasn't been courtesy in such worlds for users to PayPal donate
5 dollars or so to private worlds they visit often. It would keep the world
running longer and better, as I see it. With Alphaworld, it's useless
because AWC is already charging us for us to use the world in our cits.
We're already directly paying for land, get me?

Nornny

[View Quote]

Feb 11, 2002, 11:13pm

Hi everyone:

[View Quote] Okay....obviously it WAS a bad idea (or at least *not* a very well conceived
one), so I won't suggest it. And you're right Grims. One CAN build on AW
for the same price. They just need to get building rights. So if this is
already offered, then even *if* I *did* suggest it, even ActiveWorlds would
concede to being redundant charging.

In which case I stand most humbly corrected. :-)

> You do touch off a good idea for private world owners, especially
> large private world owners, such as !Friends, A'Tuin, Broadway, and the
> like.

1). !Friends isn't a private world and 2). The private world owners on the
Yahoo list were a LYNCH MOB compared to you guys. At least you guys had the
prescence of mind to be civil about your disagreement. :-) I have since
left the aforementioned Yahoo! Group (may they boast their Cys while the
rest of us do something CONSTRUCTIVE to save AW! Can you believe they were
planning a large protest on AWGate???? While the idea was a good one, I
thought AlphaWorld would make a better choice. Naturally, as with all my
other ideas I brought up on there, they shot it full of holes and cast me
off as being "clueless").

> With a new financial pinch because of raised prices, and since
> bandwith these days cost more than Bill Gates himself, your idea for
> charging a small pay for a lot is economically logical and still morally
> right. If a world doesn't feel it needs to, they don't. But everyone
> sensible enough would understand that these worlds have to pay to maintain
> their world somehow, why not let their frequent citizens help pitch in.
I'm
> surprised it hasn't been courtesy in such worlds for users to PayPal
donate
> 5 dollars or so to private worlds they visit often. It would keep the
world
> running longer and better, as I see it. With Alphaworld, it's useless
> because AWC is already charging us for us to use the world in our cits.
> We're already directly paying for land, get me?

Yeah. Like I said, perhaps it wasn't such a well-conceived idea after all
as its already been thought of (albeit indirectly). I shall forget the idea
even popped into my head and move on. :-)

On that note.....Cheers :-)

pull-down
> near
the
> one???
AW.

Feb 12, 2002, 4:57am

[View Quote] > Hi everyone:
>
[View Quote]

**** stuff deleted******


>
>
> 1). !Friends isn't a private world and 2). The private world owners on the
> Yahoo list were a LYNCH MOB compared to you guys. At least you guys had the
> prescence of mind to be civil about your disagreement. :-) I have since
> left the aforementioned Yahoo! Group (may they boast their Cys while the
> rest of us do something CONSTRUCTIVE to save AW! Can you believe they were
> planning a large protest on AWGate???? While the idea was a good one, I
> thought AlphaWorld would make a better choice. Naturally, as with all my
> other ideas I brought up on there, they shot it full of holes and cast me
> off as being "clueless").

***** stuff deleted ******

!Friends *IS* a private world. Owned by Steller.

You shouldn't take criticisms thrown out in newsgroups too personally.
It's well known that people say things to other people in such forums
that they would never have the nerve (or ill manners) to say in person.
I include myself in that (even though I try to do better).

Sorry I haven't been following your idea, or the protest ideas too
closely. I think when people feel strongly about something they should
express themselves in whatever way is available to them.

I'm not sure what "constructive" things can be done to save AW. I think
there is a shortage of money because the money has been spent poorly. I
could be "constructive" and send them a donation of $1000, but it would
still get spent poorly. My reason for being against the price increase
is not that I don't have the money to pay, its because I think the money
that is flowing in already is not being used wisely. I also think the
new pricing will drastically cut the size of the users base. That to
me is intolerable. I don't know anyway to protest that constructively.
I've posted my views here, as have others. At least new users don't
read this stuff, and potential users can't. So only "hard-core" AW
users and management (if they choose) will see my "protests". That's
about as constructive as I can be.

If AW management hasn't come to their senses by the time my ID is up for
renewal, I will let it expire. I know many other people that are
planning to do the same thing. My "protest" in this case is to announce
that here, in advance. Once I am gone, I will be gone for good though,
as I think most people will be. There are other programs that are
coming along, and with more users to support them will come along
faster. Once I have committed to one of those programs (probably
Atmosphere) I won't want to turn back. It's not an easy decision to
make either. I am truly heartbroken that things have come to this.

In my opinion AWLD doesn't listen to or care about their users. It's
been that way for a long time... so I don't expect it to change.

I think the best thing that could happen for AW would be for AW
management to conclude that they just can't make enough money off of it
to satisfy themselves, and then maybe they would look for someone to buy
the technology from them. Leaving them to do whatever they plan to do
with Netbroadcaster. I don't expect it to get to that before my ID
expires though, so, I'm probably history.

If AWLD is reading this they are probably thinking: "Good riddance!"

:)

Feb 12, 2002, 7:00pm

Hi everyone:

Not to get picky or anything, but.....

[View Quote] Then how is it I am able to get on without any problem at all???? Stellar,
did you add anybody to the list or is it now a public world????

> You shouldn't take criticisms thrown out in newsgroups too personally.
> It's well known that people say things to other people in such forums
> that they would never have the nerve (or ill manners) to say in person.
> I include myself in that (even though I try to do better).

JFTR....I wasn't taking it personally at all. Critcisms which are politely
posted that I can't argue with I just simply read without replying. I don't
(or try not to) take such critisms personally at all. I'm no perfectionist
by any means (who is these days?? :-) *LOL!*), though I do try to do my
best not to come off sounding too "brash" or "cocky" as it were (at least I
like to *think* I do. :-) *LOL!*).

> Sorry I haven't been following your idea, or the protest ideas too
> closely. I think when people feel strongly about something they should
> express themselves in whatever way is available to them.

The protest wasn't my idea, though I do believe the email group which I just
left is going about it all wrong by using the *wrong* world as The Gate
isn't where AW does all its advertising. It's AlphaWorld. We all know
that. Only by hitting AWLD in the WALLET do we evwer stand a chance of
seeing some positive change. Add to the fact that they are WAY out of touch
with the community (unlike their counterparts at Live365, which is *very
much* in touch with its community) and AWLD's doom is all but certain. As
for NetBroadcaster.com I don't think I need to go into what will most likely
happen to it. :-)

> I'm not sure what "constructive" things can be done to save AW. I think
> there is a shortage of money because the money has been spent poorly. I
> could be "constructive" and send them a donation of $1000, but it would
> still get spent poorly. My reason for being against the price increase
> is not that I don't have the money to pay, its because I think the money
> that is flowing in already is not being used wisely. I also think the
> new pricing will drastically cut the size of the users base. That to
> me is intolerable. I don't know anyway to protest that constructively.
> I've posted my views here, as have others. At least new users don't
> read this stuff, and potential users can't. So only "hard-core" AW
> users and management (if they choose) will see my "protests". That's
> about as constructive as I can be.

See above.

> If AW management hasn't come to their senses by the time my ID is up for
> renewal, I will let it expire. I know many other people that are
> planning to do the same thing. My "protest" in this case is to announce
> that here, in advance. Once I am gone, I will be gone for good though,
> as I think most people will be. There are other programs that are
> coming along, and with more users to support them will come along
> faster. Once I have committed to one of those programs (probably
> Atmosphere) I won't want to turn back. It's not an easy decision to
> make either. I am truly heartbroken that things have come to this.

AWLD will most likely be out of business by the time my cit expires next
February unless......

> I think the best thing that could happen for AW would be for AW
> management to conclude that they just can't make enough money off of it
> to satisfy themselves, and then maybe they would look for someone to buy
> the technology from them. Leaving them to do whatever they plan to do
> with Netbroadcaster. I don't expect it to get to that before my ID
> expires though, so, I'm probably history.

.......They sell out to someone like Yahoo! who could work wonders with 3D
and integrate their current chat system. Maybe only then our cits, worlds,
builds, etc. will be saved in the long run. One can only hope anyways.
:-)

AWLD, if you're reading this, PLEASE consider this. Don't just "sweep it
under the corporate rug" while you add another "Dot Com" to add to your
casualty list. It's well documented all over the web by now that you can't
afford to keep this cherade (sp?) up forever.

Patrick Cook
Owner - Hamsterville (officially known as Pub102X)
pchamster at msn.com
Denver, Colorado

Feb 12, 2002, 7:12pm

> In my opinion AWLD doesn't listen to or care about their users. It's
> been that way for a long time... so I don't expect it to change.

I am thinking that with this compromise over the new prices, it is beginning
to sound like they're listening.

SW Chris

Feb 12, 2002, 9:42pm

>
> Then how is it I am able to get on without any problem at all????
Stellar,
> did you add anybody to the list or is it now a public world????

Privately owned. Not private as in red dotted. All green worlds are open
to all. If it's restricted it'll still be red even if you have enter.

I don't have any comment on the rest of the stuff.. :)

-silenced

Feb 13, 2002, 4:23am

I hope they listen some more though. Like this NAC policy. What's up with
that?

Airline food, anyone?

SW Chris

[View Quote]

Feb 13, 2002, 5:36am

I totally agree with your idea that there should be a limited building size on AW. We're just spoiled because we're used to the
freedom we've had, but it was just a stupid decision, or lack thereof. Anyone could cripple the whole world with sparse objects
everywhere using a bot...
We just don't need that much room.

Fox Mc Cloud

"pc hamster" <pchamster at email.msn.com> a écrit dans le message news: 3c67215c$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> Hi everyone
>
> I hinted on the group list last night that I had an alternative idea to 3D
> Homepages, and after some much needed rest in the wake of my "trip", I'm now
> posting my deas here. Feel free to comment on them if you wish.
>
> I was passing some WONDERFUL (and not-so-wonderful) builds as I raced back
> ON FOOT from about 24,000 N 24,000 W all the way abck to GZ (took me a
> little over 24 hours to do it though), I began to wonder WHY is ActiveWorlds
> charging for 3D Homeages (which have *very little* #D functionality) when in
> fact they could *easily* (and more feasibly) charge for space on AlphaWorld
> instead???? I mean, they've only *begun* to fill in the space there!!! How
> can they afford to just simply let all that land simply go to waste????
> It's beyond me....
>
> Now hear me out on this, okay.....
>
> Granted there are works of art on there and some builds which you wonder why
> they even exist at all. However, I believe that some pre-set guidelines
> will cure that.
>
> Once a person gets the space, they get all the objects and building tools
> currently afforded to 3D Homepage Owners. In addition to that, we would
> have access to the AlphaWorld Building Yard as well as an object compiler
> (to make the moving of duplicated objects easier). We could build on as
> mcuh (or as little) of the space as possible (up to a P-10). Plus, they
> would all be inter-connected via the roadways on Alpha World so one can just
> simply go from town to town just like driving out in the country.
>
> Speaking of driving, see my post script at the end of this message.....
>
> However though, here are some suggested guidelines.....
>
> Any bulding MUST be COMPLETELY built (and furnished!). No incomplete
> structures will be allowed or they will be deleted within a certain length
> of time not to exceed 30 calendar days. We would also have 10 calendar days
> to AT LEAST begin with construction, though any space left under
> construction for six months would be re-allocated to someone else and all
> objects imported would be deleted.
>
> We would get all this for the current price of $6.95
>
> Hypertext links could be changed whereas instead of going to some 3D
> Homepage, surfers are taken to wherever GZ used to be in the 3D Homepage
> (post 3D Homepage applicants wouldn't need to know this though because they
> never had a 3D Homepage before).
>
> Finally, to match all the particular themes out there, I think the current
> AlphaWorld could easily be rendered suitable for all current 3D Homepage
> themes except for Atlantis (these owners would fall into a new Alpha world
> called Aw-Atlantis or something like that). Seperate Alpha worlds can later
> be created to better match the theme.
>
> So guys, have I gone totally beserk or am I on to something????
>
> Your tuen to comment....Cheers... :-)
>
> Patrick Cook
> Owner - Hamsterville (as known in the Immigration Officer greeting - Pub
> 102X otherwise)
> pchamster at msn.com
> Denver, Colorado
>
> P.S.: Is there some reason why there isn't a CAR in the Avatars pull-down
> menu on AlphaWorld???? I mean if AlphaWorld is going to be made into a near
> replica of America's fascination with roads, we ought to at least have the
> option of being a car as we drive down the roads. Can AW answer this one???
> If no one does, I bring it up when I take up some others matters with AW.
> In the meantime Cheers....Patrick :-)
>
>

Feb 13, 2002, 10:57am

Only problem is that limited building size per cit means limited growth of
AW ...

Grims

[View Quote]

Feb 13, 2002, 4:18pm

Yeah, speak for yourself, Fox. :)

SW Chris

[View Quote]

Feb 13, 2002, 8:49pm

How about a limit per user per month? That way only old timers could have huge buildings ;)
Anyway this isn't going to happen in AW, everyone would be unhappy about it...

Fox Mc Cloud

"grimble" <grimble2000 at btinternet.com> a écrit dans le message news: 3c6a62d7$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> Only problem is that limited building size per cit means limited growth of
> AW ...
>
> Grims

1  |   Order by index