1  |   Order by index

Jan 29, 2002, 1:56am

I wish...
- there was no limit to privately-owned world size, especially for =
worlds not being hosted on AWC servers... all worlds should be the size =
of AlphaWorld and there should only be one world price, preferably a low =
price. Worlds that are not hosted on AWC servers don't use up much AW =
bandwidth, so why should larger worlds on independent hosts cost more? =
It doesn't cost AWC any more to provide the heartbeat for a large world =
than it does for a small world.

- citizenships were still free.

- the concept of "community" included everyone. The less fortunate =
souls who were with us and using v2.2 are now gone from our midst. =
People like to think they are doing something for the "community" when =
they are really doing things for themselves and their small group of =
friends,... and outsiders, the less fortunate, or the newbies are often =
shunned or made to feel that their input is not welcome. I've been =
around the 'net for a while, and I still remember a time when the =
internet was considered the Last Frontier... a place where people shared =
their skills and knowledge for the betterment of the technology, and to =
promote a real sense of community but without all the headaches of =
government (which is what we were actually trying to get away from), and =
the rules and regulations, etc., and people weren't just in it to get =
rich quick or to assume some kind of perceived power and control over =
others. Too often I've seen groups form, announcements of such groups =
being formed, only to go to the posted website(s) or the first =
organizational meeting to find that all of the so-called leaders had =
already been self-appointed, the agenda had already been decided, etc. =
It often reminds me of high school, or like when little kids form a =
clubhouse and only the COOL kids are allowed to join. You can often =
tell this kind of group is forming when the *Rules* are already written, =
and people have been appointed as *security*. I guess the insecure need =
to have security.

- people weren't so picky about spelling and grammar on these boards. =
We aren't getting graded on how well we write, the whole point of these =
boards is to share ideas and exchange knowledge and information, etc. =
If people feel they are being judged on how well (or how poorly) their =
written skills are, they are less likely to continue to post in these =
newsgroups. I've also noticed that the most vocal spelling and grammar =
correctors often have errors in their own messages... if you are not =
perfect, don't be so picky or whine at others who do not write =
perfectly... that makes you look like a hypocrite if you do that.

I'll probably get flamed for this post, but I don't care. It's my =
wishlist, and I can wish for what I want to... today I can, anyway... =
maybe not tomorrow.

--=20
=C1ine

Today's subliminal thought is:

Jan 29, 2002, 6:16pm

nice wishlist...but i just have to say that ActiveWorlds is just like any
other company and needs to make money, or it wont exist. I Kind of agree
with you on the worlds but that is also a major income source so making them
all low would make them lose money. I DEFINTILY afree that world sizes
should at least be doubled for their current price. Also cits are a major
source of income and cannot be free (im not commenting on the new prices...)

[View Quote] I wish...
- there was no limit to privately-owned world size, especially for worlds
not being hosted on AWC servers... all worlds should be the size of
AlphaWorld and there should only be one world price, preferably a low price.
Worlds that are not hosted on AWC servers don't use up much AW bandwidth, so
why should larger worlds on independent hosts cost more? It doesn't cost
AWC any more to provide the heartbeat for a large world than it does for a
small world.

- citizenships were still free.

- the concept of "community" included everyone. The less fortunate souls
who were with us and using v2.2 are now gone from our midst. People like to
think they are doing something for the "community" when they are really
doing things for themselves and their small group of friends,... and
outsiders, the less fortunate, or the newbies are often shunned or made to
feel that their input is not welcome. I've been around the 'net for a
while, and I still remember a time when the internet was considered the Last
Frontier... a place where people shared their skills and knowledge for the
betterment of the technology, and to promote a real sense of community but
without all the headaches of government (which is what we were actually
trying to get away from), and the rules and regulations, etc., and people
weren't just in it to get rich quick or to assume some kind of perceived
power and control over others. Too often I've seen groups form,
announcements of such groups being formed, only to go to the posted
website(s) or the first organizational meeting to find that all of the
so-called leaders had already been self-appointed, the agenda had already
been decided, etc. It often reminds me of high school, or like when little
kids form a clubhouse and only the COOL kids are allowed to join. You can
often tell this kind of group is forming when the *Rules* are already
written, and people have been appointed as *security*. I guess the insecure
need to have security.

- people weren't so picky about spelling and grammar on these boards. We
aren't getting graded on how well we write, the whole point of these boards
is to share ideas and exchange knowledge and information, etc. If people
feel they are being judged on how well (or how poorly) their written skills
are, they are less likely to continue to post in these newsgroups. I've
also noticed that the most vocal spelling and grammar correctors often have
errors in their own messages... if you are not perfect, don't be so picky or
whine at others who do not write perfectly... that makes you look like a
hypocrite if you do that.

I'll probably get flamed for this post, but I don't care. It's my wishlist,
and I can wish for what I want to... today I can, anyway... maybe not
tomorrow.

--
Áine

Today's subliminal thought is:

Jan 29, 2002, 8:59pm

> - there was no limit to privately-owned world size, especially for worlds
not being hosted on AWC servers... all worlds should be the size of
AlphaWorld and there should only be one world price, preferably a low price.

It'd be nice but many people dont have the boxes or the bandwidth for worlds
that large, and as stated by cozmo good $$$ source.

> - citizenships were still free.

Ditto as cozmo said.

> - the concept of "community" included everyone. <snip>

?????

- people weren't so picky about spelling and grammar <snip>

no I can't talk perfect english, but part of the reason some people are
picky is because half the time you can't understand what people are saying
because of their broken english.

> I'll probably get flamed for this post, but I don't care. It's my
wishlist, and I can wish for what I want to... today I can, anyway... maybe
not tomorrow.

This is my first amendment post, flame away.

Jan 30, 2002, 2:21am

I'll just comment on this one because it's the one I think people
understand the least. And perhaps the explanation is not intuitive to
some (Certainly not to AW management).


Some examples:

When I leave my electrical devices turned on all day an night whether I
am using them or not my electricity bill goes up. Because I consumed
more electricity.

When I buy a big luxury car instead of a small economy car, I burn more
gas, so I pay more to drive it.

When I decide to become an Microsoft Certified Systems Engineer and buy
$600 worth of study materials, the bookstore, or Microsoft is happy to
take my money.

These all make sense right? Things of value generally cost money to
produce. And those costs get passed on to consumers, with mark-up of course.

I take the test and get the MCSE, Microsoft sends me free copies of all
their software, and many other services at a discount.

What gives here? Why is MS suddenly so generous?

One more (fictitious) Example: Acme computer company prides itself in
making the best computer in the world. They are so sure its the best
that they only make one model, and sell it for $2000. Market research
tells them that some people would prefer the computer to be blue, rather
than the old standard off-white. So they come out with a second model
in blue, which costs them $5 more in manufacturing cost. They put it on
the market for $2500, because people who really want a blue computer
will be willing to pay that much.

Pretty good deal for Acme, until customers find out the manufacturing
cost is only $5.

Some of AW's pricing makes sense, some of it makes not so much sense,
some of it is downright stupid.

Unless someone can enlighten me, pricing for land size in AW is in the
stupid category for the most part. Reasons:

There is NO shortage of land in AW. I can build 'till the cows come
home in AW at no additional cost. AW, has to pay for that big database
where all my objects are being stored. If I use a bot to hog as much
land as I can in AW...no cost to me. Added cost to AW. Inconvenience
to other users who have to build around me.

If I decide to buy a world *within the AW Universe*, and host it on my
PC at home where I have as much disk space as AWLD... No additional
cost to AWLD. Its JUST a parameter in the authorization process for the
world. Anyone wanting to use it would still have to buy and AW
citizenship (now especially). People who built there would be eating up
MY disk space bandwidth and CPU resources not AWLD's. I would have an
incentive to convince people to use AW, and might decide to charge them
separately for space in my world etc. I would in effect become a sales
rep for AW citizenships. (Oh, that's why Microsoft gives so many
goodies to people who get MCSE's by the way, they become preachers to do
things the Microsoft way wherever they work.).

Why not buy a Universe? Well, they are prohibitively expensive for one
thing. Plus you have all of the aformentioned servers expenses. And
there is (to my knowledge) no guarantee that once you get a few thousand
users the license fee won't suddenly skyrocket making it AWLD's profit
rather than yours. In addition, every user you get is a user that AWLD
loses (or fails to get). I can't buy Coke from the Coca Cola company
and put my name on the label and resell it hoping to compete with the
Coca Cola company can I? That's exactly the position the Universe
owners have put themselves in unless they have a significant other
reason to do so (European users for Example/Network delay).

AWLD has unnecessarily divided the community in multiple ways, without
as far as I can tell, significantly improving market penetration of
their technology.

To sum up: When a company has to charge a lot for a part of their
product that costs them little, or nothing, (or a negative amount!) in
order to go from being not-profitable to be profitable... Think now...

It means that something else in their product line is being given away,
or is being sold at too low a cost. Or it may mean that their cost
structure is just out of line with reality.

In the long run, better to fix cost/revenue inequities in your business
model than to gouge one customer to make up for giving something away to
another. Customers don't like it, investors don't like it. You often
have to make sudden desperation price changes to cope with changes in
customer needs and your own cost of production. Bad pricing strategy to
start with can turn suddenly unsustainable as you price yourself out of
the market in one area, having lost track of what you are giving away
somewhere else.

Maybe that's what we are witnessing now.

*Zips up asbestos suit*

[View Quote] > not being hosted on AWC servers... all worlds should be the size of
> AlphaWorld and there should only be one world price, preferably a low price.
>
> It'd be nice but many people dont have the boxes or the bandwidth for worlds
> that large, and as stated by cozmo good $$$ source.
>

Jan 30, 2002, 2:40pm

[View Quote] A world the size of AlphaWorld takes no more "box" power than any other =
world. Storage space and X amount of bandwidth per month on a remote =
host to run the world, yes, but in that case, a world owner would be =
limited from building beyond his/her willingness to pay for bandwidth =
and storage capacity. In other words, just because you have the space, =
doesn't mean you HAVE TO fill it up. And yes, it's all a money game... =
jack up prices for something that costs you nothing, as MacB illustrated =
in his post. =20

As far as income goes, AWC makes no income from AWC-owned worlds, such =
as Alpha or Mars or Yellow. In fact, those worlds COST them money, so =
does the Educational Universe (generically speaking) and it's worlds. =
If money were the sole motivating force behind the recent changes (and =
perhaps it is), wouldn't it make more sense to eliminate the things that =
are costing you money every month and which are not producing income? =
Makes sense, right? So why does AWC continue to keep these non-viable =
worlds and universes running? Sentimental reasons? =20

If citizenships are a viable source of income, why make these drastic =
changes in citizenship pricing which will discourage people from buying =
new citizenships or renewing old ones? Eliminating tourists... I can =
see both sides to the reasoning behind this -- they are a drain on =
resources and produce no immediate income, but, on the other hand, most =
citizens started out as tourists (I know *I* did), and having tourists =
is like having a gateway through which you attract people into buying =
citizenships and becoming actively involved in ActiveWorlds, and thus, =
having Tourists is a long-term income producer but not an immediate =
income producer. If you want to sell more citizenships, you don't jack =
the price up 500+% and in doing so, discourage people from buying them. =


It's advertising, forming key partnerships with other related =
corporations (B2B), and marketing your product from one end of the 'net =
to the other that will produce income. Right now, we have over 1700+ =
worlds and 95% of them have NO USERS in them at any given time. Do you =
think this encourages people to buy a world when there are so many =
worlds already there with no users? Come this time next year, if =
something regarding these new citizenship prices doesn't change =
drastically, there will be even LESS users in all those worlds. This is =
income-producing and is perceived as a way to "save the company"? =20
=20
>=20
> Ditto as cozmo said.

Sorry to disagree, but I believe that the day they started charging for =
citizenships (and thus, dividing up the "community" into Tourists and =
Citizens) was the day the downward spiral of finances began. That =
"divide and conquer" mentality continued with the forming of the PK's =
and GK's and the entire hierarchy and pecking order that came from all =
of that. =20
=20
>=20
> ?????

It doesn't include everyone... that's the reality of the situation. If =
you think it does, then likely, you are a part of the problem. If this =
program is a "community," then the "community" would have a voice in =
what the corporation decides to do. It doesn't. Even among the smaller =
groups within the "community" (beta testers? cy awards? avvies?) there =
are usually no more than half a dozen people making all the decisions =
and rules/regulations for that group, and deciding who should and =
shouldn't belong. It isn't like there is a random lottery system in =
place, nor even an unbiased voting booth.
=20
> - people weren't so picky about spelling and grammar <snip>
>=20
> no I can't talk perfect english, but part of the reason some people =
are
> picky is because half the time you can't understand what people are =
saying
> because of their broken english.

The biggest problem I see is that many people who live in the United =
States think that everyone in the world should act like and conform to =
the expectations of U.S. people. We are very U.S.-centric here, and we =
have to get out of that mode of thinking. Face it, we live in a world =
of diverse people who may be coming into this program from Russia, =
China, Zimbabwe, Korea, etc. They don't all have English as a first =
language, and they should be admired and respected for even attempting =
to communicate in our language, not put down and belittled because they =
have trouble communicating in writing their thoughts and ideas to us.
=20
> wishlist, and I can wish for what I want to... today I can, anyway... =
maybe
> not tomorrow.
>=20
> This is my first amendment post, flame away.

I try not to flame, for the most part (though sometimes that can't be =
helped, depending on the level of idiocy I'm dealing with at the time. =
hehe) I enjoy debate, though, and I try to encourage people to voice =
their thoughts

Jan 30, 2002, 2:57pm

Some good points raised in your input there, I especially agree with your
remarks regarding the differences in culture. Those that know me will tell
you I have always spoke on this point that aw has to see itself as diverse
in its approach to its way of thinking. What goes for USA does not necessary
go for other cultures.

Yes there is worlds that cater for international users, but in that point
should aw be international in the first place? Yes

As you state if English is not your spoken language, you are lost.

There is a demand for a Universe that caters for the differences in culture,
but not divide the community, they can co-exist.

My own interests have been to create interest in the instigation of a
European Universe to cater for the diversity, despite its failing from
backers on certain aspects of operational considerations, the concept was
considered to be proven.

Yes aw has to think global not a local USA based bussiness, past events have
proven this to aw. But then its there bussiness.

Again good points you raised ^^

Jan 30, 2002, 5:56pm

if they got rid of aw owned worlds like AW and AWTeen it would most likely
create a huge uproar and destroy the community. A lot of peoples aw
experiancce is just building or town runnign in worlds liek that. I think
that the useless worlds liek the millions of test servers they have and the
useless clones called "3d homepages" should go. That would save a lot of
world list space and free up some names and also bandwidth (since they host
them all).

[View Quote] [View Quote] A world the size of AlphaWorld takes no more "box" power than any other
world. Storage space and X amount of bandwidth per month on a remote host
to run the world, yes, but in that case, a world owner would be limited from
building beyond his/her willingness to pay for bandwidth and storage
capacity. In other words, just because you have the space, doesn't mean you
HAVE TO fill it up. And yes, it's all a money game... jack up prices for
something that costs you nothing, as MacB illustrated in his post.

As far as income goes, AWC makes no income from AWC-owned worlds, such as
Alpha or Mars or Yellow. In fact, those worlds COST them money, so does the
Educational Universe (generically speaking) and it's worlds. If money were
the sole motivating force behind the recent changes (and perhaps it is),
wouldn't it make more sense to eliminate the things that are costing you
money every month and which are not producing income? Makes sense, right?
So why does AWC continue to keep these non-viable worlds and universes
running? Sentimental reasons?

If citizenships are a viable source of income, why make these drastic
changes in citizenship pricing which will discourage people from buying new
citizenships or renewing old ones? Eliminating tourists... I can see both
sides to the reasoning behind this -- they are a drain on resources and
produce no immediate income, but, on the other hand, most citizens started
out as tourists (I know *I* did), and having tourists is like having a
gateway through which you attract people into buying citizenships and
becoming actively involved in ActiveWorlds, and thus, having Tourists is a
long-term income producer but not an immediate income producer. If you want
to sell more citizenships, you don't jack the price up 500+% and in doing
so, discourage people from buying them.

It's advertising, forming key partnerships with other related corporations
(B2B), and marketing your product from one end of the 'net to the other that
will produce income. Right now, we have over 1700+ worlds and 95% of them
have NO USERS in them at any given time. Do you think this encourages
people to buy a world when there are so many worlds already there with no
users? Come this time next year, if something regarding these new
citizenship prices doesn't change drastically, there will be even LESS users
in all those worlds. This is income-producing and is perceived as a way to
"save the company"?

>
> Ditto as cozmo said.

Sorry to disagree, but I believe that the day they started charging for
citizenships (and thus, dividing up the "community" into Tourists and
Citizens) was the day the downward spiral of finances began. That "divide
and conquer" mentality continued with the forming of the PK's and GK's and
the entire hierarchy and pecking order that came from all of that.

>
> ?????

It doesn't include everyone... that's the reality of the situation. If you
think it does, then likely, you are a part of the problem. If this program
is a "community," then the "community" would have a voice in what the
corporation decides to do. It doesn't. Even among the smaller groups
within the "community" (beta testers? cy awards? avvies?) there are usually
no more than half a dozen people making all the decisions and
rules/regulations for that group, and deciding who should and shouldn't
belong. It isn't like there is a random lottery system in place, nor even
an unbiased voting booth.

> - people weren't so picky about spelling and grammar <snip>
>
> no I can't talk perfect english, but part of the reason some people are
> picky is because half the time you can't understand what people are saying
> because of their broken english.

The biggest problem I see is that many people who live in the United States
think that everyone in the world should act like and conform to the
expectations of U.S. people. We are very U.S.-centric here, and we have to
get out of that mode of thinking. Face it, we live in a world of diverse
people who may be coming into this program from Russia, China, Zimbabwe,
Korea, etc. They don't all have English as a first language, and they
should be admired and respected for even attempting to communicate in our
language, not put down and belittled because they have trouble communicating
in writing their thoughts and ideas to us.

> wishlist, and I can wish for what I want to... today I can, anyway...
maybe
> not tomorrow.
>
> This is my first amendment post, flame away.

I try not to flame, for the most part (though sometimes that can't be
helped, depending on the level of idiocy I'm dealing with at the time. hehe)
I enjoy debate, though, and I try to encourage people to voice their
thoughts

Jan 31, 2002, 3:54pm

[View Quote] Like, what they haven't already done HASN'T created a huge uproar and =
destroyed the "community"?
The 3D homepages should definitely go, and many of them already have. =
Just in the last two weeks, 300+ are now gone.


--=20
=C1ine

..........................................................................=
....................................
"But I don't want to go among mad people," Alice remarked.
"Oh, you can't help that," said the Cat: "we're all mad here.
I'm mad, you're mad."
"How do you know I'm mad?" said Alice.
"You must be," said the Cat, "or you wouldn't have come here."
--Lewis Carroll, _Alice_In_Wonderland_
..........................................................................=
....................................

Feb 1, 2002, 1:23pm

think bout it, what would be more annoying, if the goverment suddenly
increase taxes by another 500% or if they knock down ur house just to save
some money? t more taxes wouldnt accully make u leave that fast, but them
knocking down the things u worked so hard to create will.
[View Quote] [View Quote] Like, what they haven't already done HASN'T created a huge uproar and
destroyed the "community"?
The 3D homepages should definitely go, and many of them already have. Just
in the last two weeks, 300+ are now gone.


--
Áine

.............................................................................
.................................
"But I don't want to go among mad people," Alice remarked.
"Oh, you can't help that," said the Cat: "we're all mad here.
I'm mad, you're mad."
"How do you know I'm mad?" said Alice.
"You must be," said the Cat, "or you wouldn't have come here."
--Lewis Carroll, _Alice_In_Wonderland_
.............................................................................
.................................

Feb 2, 2002, 1:07am

The analogy doesn't apply in this case because the government/AWC =
already owns your house in their worlds. They can do whatever they like =
to your house, it is not your legal property. This is one of the =
fallacies that a lot of people apparently seem to buy into, that what =
they create in a world (any world, unless you are the world owner of =
that world) somehow *belongs* to you. Not true... building does not =
confer any sort of ownership or legal rights to the builder. Now, there =
*might* be a case for the ownership of intellectual property (how you =
put together AWC's models into a specific build), but this would need to =
be taken into the court systems and tried, and I don't see that =
happening any time soon.

=20
--=20
=C1ine

We clasp the hands of those that go before us,
And the hands of those who come after us.
We enter the little circle of each other's arms
And the larger circle of lovers,
Whose hands are joined in a dance,
And the larger circle of all creatures,
Passing in and out of life,
Who move also in a dance,
To a music so subtle and vast that no ear hears it
Except in fragments
- Wendell Berry=20

[View Quote]

Feb 5, 2002, 11:37pm

i agree, too many people compare active worlds to a govornment.. awc is a
private company that provides a service, we purchase their service.. we have
no say in anything they say or do.. we simply use their service.. like a
hair salon, we go their to get their haircut, they are free to put whatever
signs or remodel their building as they choose without our "vote" or
"petition" i don't see why we think aw should take our words so seriously
and strongly, if we are not happy with their service, we can stop using it.
simple.


[View Quote]
--
Áine

We clasp the hands of those that go before us,
And the hands of those who come after us.
We enter the little circle of each other's arms
And the larger circle of lovers,
Whose hands are joined in a dance,
And the larger circle of all creatures,
Passing in and out of life,
Who move also in a dance,
To a music so subtle and vast that no ear hears it
Except in fragments
- Wendell Berry

[View Quote]

Feb 6, 2002, 1:13am

But we do choose our own hair style. Unless it's just me, I don't trust
them to make my decisions on what I want.

--Bowen--


[View Quote]

Feb 6, 2002, 12:04pm

let me correct u there, does aw not sell stocks? emm yes it does, on nasdaq
to be exact. so that doesnt make it very private now does it?

[View Quote]

Feb 6, 2002, 7:20pm

[View Quote] They make the decision on what services to offer, then you decide if
it's worth it not. Nobody is making a decision for you, only offering
choices.

D.

-------
Visit our search engine! http://www.interimbooks.com/pagescout/
-------

Interim Books | 322 Pacific Ave | Bremerton, WA | 98337
fairwater at hurricane.net | (360) 377-4343 | http://www.interimbooks.com/

Feb 6, 2002, 7:21pm

[View Quote] >let me correct u there, does aw not sell stocks? emm yes it does, on nasdaq
>to be exact. so that doesnt make it very private now does it?

'Private industry' means 'Not Goverment', no more, no less. The term
covers everything from tiny one-man operations like myself, to GE or
Boeing.

D.

-------
Visit our search engine! http://www.interimbooks.com/pagescout/
-------

Interim Books | 322 Pacific Ave | Bremerton, WA | 98337
fairwater at hurricane.net | (360) 377-4343 | http://www.interimbooks.com/

Feb 6, 2002, 7:23pm

Yes, but a company that sells stock, must listen to the shareholder's
decisions.

--Bowen--

[View Quote]

Feb 6, 2002, 7:25pm

Well they don't choose the hairstyle they want to cut with your hair,
because it's your money. If I were paying to use a service, I'd want things
I choose to be implemented ;). At least that vote thing is a good idea, I'd
say the top 3 features should get implemented, if not more. :)

--Bowen--

[View Quote]

1  |   Order by index