1  |   Order by index

Jan 14, 2002, 7:52pm

If you want to protest against new AW's politics, please read :
http://caretakers.alterlinks.com




Thank you for joining us in this protest !
Best regards,
Niki

--
E-Mail: niki at niki.be
Website: http://www.niki.be
[http://www.webmaster-du-net.net/]

Jan 15, 2002, 5:03pm

There's so many of these, I'm not even going to respond anymore. It just
wastes my time. LOL, but basically AWC doesn't give a shit. They want your
money, not your support.
[View Quote]

Jan 15, 2002, 6:36pm

To get money, they'd need support.

SW Chris


[View Quote]

Jan 15, 2002, 7:53pm

no, they get the money anyway :-P Many many people are too attached to AW,
sorry to say. People pay $120 a year for Everquest and that game is total
shit too. It's graphics look like AW :-P At least they did 2yrs ago when I
played it! haha
[View Quote]

Jan 15, 2002, 7:57pm

I just got this e-mail. Not sure if he wants me to post it or what but
iether way, it is well thought out. Take a gander:

AWC removed my right to post in this NG, I have sat and read every post tho
and now I have something
to say.


Tourists: How does AW propose it's going to get new members without them? In
the past few weeks I
have asked that question, no one seems to have an answer. I compared it to
you needing a credit card
to get into one of those porn sites, most people won't go in and keep
looking for the free pics no
matter how good the advertisement looks. 100% of the people I spoke to said
they wouldn't have
entered AW before knowing about it if they had to use a credit card.

3.2: A complete and utter disaster and if this is what AWC is claiming we
need to pay more for I can
see now why people are upset. I had nothing but problems with it from the
get go and it hasn't
stopped since. Even one of the so called new objects a ctable1 & 2 they
offered up to us as some
kind of resolution to all this when I put it near a wall the glass top made
it so I could see right
thru my wall all the way down to the color of the backdrop. Masked objects
and transparent objects
are a builders nightmare now. I don't think we ever had that problem in 3.1.
Lighting is splotchy at
best and makes zbuffering even on overlaped textures now prominent when
there was no zbuffer before
when the textures were aligned properly and brightness simply means I want
to turn every untextured
object in the area white. Speaking of white any objects that were not
texture mapped when they were
made also now have a problem, for example the chess pieces we all loved to
use in our builds can no
longer be textured in gold for example because the object simply turns
white. The glass objects with
the black border and the doorway objects with the black border, same problem
turns white.

New Pricing Scheme: Couldn't have named it better actually since one of it's
deffinitions is a
secret plan or plot, a plot deffinitely one thikening quite well but is
going to cost AW alot of
money in the long run from what I see.

So in conclusion, I don't understand the way AWC does things, seems to be
one stupid mistake or idea
after the other with absolutely no planning whatsoever. The Sims another
major online 3D service
which is free btw when you buy the software and add-ons in the store atleast
has a marketable
product and if they put objects or textures with the same names on them
people would most likely try
to return it saying it is worthless when all the files are named the same.
See you all think that
because AWC gives you something you haven't paid for it, quite contrary if
you look at it from The
Sims perspective, we have paid for it, many years of it for some and paid
for it when we buy a world
too. It has been paid for, problem is what we are getting from AWC is pure
crap now. Not worth the
packaging it comes in. Paying to get in to see the fine builds we have with
a credit card is like
trying to get more porno from one of the many porn sites with a credit card
now. But who is going to
give out their credit card for something like this, no one. And if 3.2 is
any indication of what's
to come I don't want to pay those programmers saleries because for me 3.2
has been a complete
nightmare and still is and no one has offered any solutions to the many
problems I have stated. So
for me I will be renewing my world and changing over to this account perhaps
and as far as my many
builds in AW, ohwell I guess I build some more to replace them but I will
not spend $114 dollars a
year for something that doesn't even work right and increase the salaries of
programmers that messed
up a good thing when we had it with 3.1. I can goto the store tomorrow and
spend $114 on The Sims
and 1 add-on and then use it free forever. What makes AWC think they have
something better to offer
here that you can't get anywhere else for the same money and not have to pay
again? Well all I can
say is the people running this circus act are a bunch of clowns to think
people are so gullible. And
I am personally insulted that AWC has stooped to such a low. That's all I
have to say now, and I
believe everything I have said to be true. Later, Chucks Party :)

Jan 15, 2002, 9:44pm

Ugh, you got his drivel too? He must've sent that to every person who's
ever posted in the NGs.

As for what was actually said, he once again has demonstrated his
amazing talent to say a lot about nothing. I think we've long since come
to the conclusion that the so-called problems with 3.2 are on the user's
end, not AWC's, and as for his porn site comparisons, well, let's just
say apparently some things never change. :P

The main problem with his entire argument (if you can call it that) is
that he, along with a lot of other people who have similar arguments,
seem to like lumping AW in with other things (i.e. Sims, Everquest, and
now apparently porn sites *boggle*).

Newsflash, people: AW is not The Sims. AW is not Everquest. AW is like
nothing else out there. Some call it a chat room, some call it a
platform for artistic expression, and some call it an entire
sub-culture. The great thing about AW is that it's all of those things,
and then some. There's no end to the possibilities that can be
accomplished with the AW idea, which makes it a unique beast in today's
3D market.

Now, whether that uniqueness is worth entering a credit card number in
order to try it out remains to be seen. While I do agree that entering a
CC number isn't exactly the most inviting way to great potential
customers, I do understand that it's just about the only way AWC can
guarantee that people don't try and leech off them (i.e. stay a tourist
forever). So rather than piss and moan about how much AWC sucks and
throw a fit saying "I'm leaving and AWC better care about it!!", why not
try to do something constructive and come up with *reasonable* solutions
to these problems. I'd like to think AWC would be more willing to listen
to those than the endless string of complaints...

[View Quote] > I just got this e-mail. Not sure if he wants me to post it or what but
> iether way, it is well thought out. Take a gander:
>
> AWC removed my right to post in this NG, I have sat and read every post tho
> and now I have something
> to say.
>
>
> Tourists: How does AW propose it's going to get new members without them? In
> the past few weeks I
> have asked that question, no one seems to have an answer. I compared it to
> you needing a credit card
> to get into one of those porn sites, most people won't go in and keep
> looking for the free pics no
> matter how good the advertisement looks. 100% of the people I spoke to said
> they wouldn't have
> entered AW before knowing about it if they had to use a credit card.
>
> 3.2: A complete and utter disaster and if this is what AWC is claiming we
> need to pay more for I can
> see now why people are upset. I had nothing but problems with it from the
> get go and it hasn't
> stopped since. Even one of the so called new objects a ctable1 & 2 they
> offered up to us as some
> kind of resolution to all this when I put it near a wall the glass top made
> it so I could see right
> thru my wall all the way down to the color of the backdrop. Masked objects
> and transparent objects
> are a builders nightmare now. I don't think we ever had that problem in 3.1.
> Lighting is splotchy at
> best and makes zbuffering even on overlaped textures now prominent when
> there was no zbuffer before
> when the textures were aligned properly and brightness simply means I want
> to turn every untextured
> object in the area white. Speaking of white any objects that were not
> texture mapped when they were
> made also now have a problem, for example the chess pieces we all loved to
> use in our builds can no
> longer be textured in gold for example because the object simply turns
> white. The glass objects with
> the black border and the doorway objects with the black border, same problem
> turns white.
>
> New Pricing Scheme: Couldn't have named it better actually since one of it's
> deffinitions is a
> secret plan or plot, a plot deffinitely one thikening quite well but is
> going to cost AW alot of
> money in the long run from what I see.
>
> So in conclusion, I don't understand the way AWC does things, seems to be
> one stupid mistake or idea
> after the other with absolutely no planning whatsoever. The Sims another
> major online 3D service
> which is free btw when you buy the software and add-ons in the store atleast
> has a marketable
> product and if they put objects or textures with the same names on them
> people would most likely try
> to return it saying it is worthless when all the files are named the same.
> See you all think that
> because AWC gives you something you haven't paid for it, quite contrary if
> you look at it from The
> Sims perspective, we have paid for it, many years of it for some and paid
> for it when we buy a world
> too. It has been paid for, problem is what we are getting from AWC is pure
> crap now. Not worth the
> packaging it comes in. Paying to get in to see the fine builds we have with
> a credit card is like
> trying to get more porno from one of the many porn sites with a credit card
> now. But who is going to
> give out their credit card for something like this, no one. And if 3.2 is
> any indication of what's
> to come I don't want to pay those programmers saleries because for me 3.2
> has been a complete
> nightmare and still is and no one has offered any solutions to the many
> problems I have stated. So
> for me I will be renewing my world and changing over to this account perhaps
> and as far as my many
> builds in AW, ohwell I guess I build some more to replace them but I will
> not spend $114 dollars a
> year for something that doesn't even work right and increase the salaries of
> programmers that messed
> up a good thing when we had it with 3.1. I can goto the store tomorrow and
> spend $114 on The Sims
> and 1 add-on and then use it free forever. What makes AWC think they have
> something better to offer
> here that you can't get anywhere else for the same money and not have to pay
> again? Well all I can
> say is the people running this circus act are a bunch of clowns to think
> people are so gullible. And
> I am personally insulted that AWC has stooped to such a low. That's all I
> have to say now, and I
> believe everything I have said to be true. Later, Chucks Party :)
>
>
>


--
Goober King
Guess we'll never truly be rid of him...
rar1 at acsu.buffalo.edu

Jan 15, 2002, 9:57pm

Doesn't anyone do anything unless they are forced to anymore? AW DO want the
support of the users ... WANT being the operative word here. Who the hell
wouldn't? ... but what sort of support have they EVER got from this frikkin
place??

So many people seem totally unprepared to look beyond their own perceived
loss to actually realise that just maybe they LIKE ActiveWorlds and WANT it
to continue ... maybe not in the guise as they know it today but there never
the less ... and support its moves forward.

You say "AWC doesn't give a shit" ... I say "Clearly, too many people do not
value AW enough to give a shit back".

Grims.

[View Quote]

Jan 15, 2002, 10:28pm

Me too ... but deleted it without reading it. Another kill file to add him
to.

Oh, and BTW ... Like the newsflash!

Grims

[View Quote]

Jan 16, 2002, 12:43am

I'm not complaining, but I don't plan on paying either.

[View Quote]

Jan 16, 2002, 3:34pm

lol,cool down. well i total agree with ya,except the last part, cuz i didnt
understand it. well unless u mean that the management dont know the true
value of AW technology then i also agree :)

[View Quote]

Jan 16, 2002, 9:12pm

You say "AWC doesn't give a shit" ... I say "Clearly, too many people do not
value AW enough to give a shit back".

Translated, it reads: You say "AWC doesn't care about us" ... I say
"Clearly, too many people do not value AW enough to give care back".

... or something like that.

SW Chris
[View Quote]

Jan 17, 2002, 12:58am

Pretty much ... but I was sticking to the terminology from the previous
thread :o).

Besides, its such a versatile word!

Grims

[View Quote]

Jan 17, 2002, 1:00am

Makes me mad ... and sometimes it shows. Nevermind eh?

Grims

[View Quote]

Feb 10, 2002, 10:17am

I mentioned in the community group but will mention here too as it seems
appropriate. Shameless promotion? Maybe. But when people complain about
what they dont like in life, why not do something about it rather than sit
and complain? Well I am doing my best to do this. While others have tried
and failed to create something "like" AW over the years, I can promise that
my project will be released and it will grow.

Find out more, visit www.seeray.com

What makes me think I can succeed where others have failed? I created
OuterWorlds and have the experience in multi-user networking to make it
happen. I also know the down falls of the AW technology as deep as the core
Universe software. To much overhead for the backend systems.

Anyway, if you are pissed, do something about it, if you can't do something
about it, look around for someone that is.

Thanks,
Derek Rayburn aka SeeRay
derek at cyboria.com

[View Quote]

Feb 10, 2002, 2:29pm

[View Quote] In case you didn't notice, lots of people HAVE come up with constructive =
and reasonable solutions. Those were, for the most part, ignored. You =
can go ahead and think AWC is willing to listen, and that it sees the =
creative potential in this software, but frankly, Goober, I don't have =
any confidence that that is true.

Aine

Feb 10, 2002, 5:42pm

In case *you* didn't notice, AWC revised their pricing plan based on
*our* constructive criticism. I'd say that's a good indication that
their willing to listen to our ideas more than our complaints.

[View Quote] [View Quote]
--
Goober King
Sometimes stating the obvious gets tiring...
rar1 at acsu.buffalo.edu

Feb 11, 2002, 2:22am

Goob, AWCorp suddenly unveiled the ill-fated price plan of January 2 on its users without warning and without asking for input from the community-at-large.

Does the February revision really indicate a willingness to listen to constructive criticism? Or is the revision better described as a sheer survival response? Droves of previously loyal citizens and world owners not only complained about the January price plan, but told AWCorp in no uncertain terms... "If you do this, we cannot/will not renew our citizenships or our worlds. Good-bye."

The February revision doesn't reflect a change in attitude toward the "community" at all, imho. Given the reaction to the January plan - the "complaints", if you will - the company had no choice but to try something else that the users might swallow. Or just pull the plug. You can bet that if they had NetBroadcast making money for them, the plug *would* probably already have been pulled on this browser/software.

Don't get me wrong. I understand full well that if ActiveWorlds (the program) can't make money for Activeworlds, Corp (the company) AWCorp will have to let this go. I don't expect any business to exist as an altruistic exercise. I would love to see this program rolling in the dough for them. I'm all for this program making money so the program itself can survive.

Many users probably did phone and write the company to offer constructive ideas (along with strident complaints) during January. However, the February revision hit the website the same way January's did. No draft for the userbase at large to look at ahead of time and critique before it went into effect. It's still a "we're the corporate executives - we know best what will make this program successful" attitude. That would be understandable in a large company doing a traditional kind of business. But this is a program with a "community" aspect to it which makes it not fit the usual business model. This program can succeed and be profitable only if that's fully recognized and capitalized upon. I still don't see that management learned much of anything from the debacle of January 2nd about how to make a program like this succeed financially.

Does management really think the majority of people who said "you need tourists back" meant it's good for tourists to be corraled in AWGate world with no opportunity to try out building? The February plan doesn't allow tourists to enter AWSchool world or any other AWCorp owned public building world. As one person at the Gate said, "it's like letting them sit in the car but not giving them the keys for a test drive."

I seriously doubt that the majority of world owners who asked for return of tourists meant that they would pay an additional $59.95 fee in order to buy "permission" to make a world *they had already bought* tourist accessible again. The unfairness of that aside, management's idea that making it difficult for tourists to see worlds other than AWGate would be an "incentive" to get them to register, is ludicrous.

Perhaps the day will come before it's too late, that management will see the value of a good idea you tried to get going last year, Goober... a way to get "constructive" input from the community at large. Back then you meant it as a way to get ideas about how to improve the features. It's still a good idea today; however, with a focus now on brainstorming for ways to increase registrations and make the program profitable...able to survive and flourish in the long run.

However, if management continues to regard the "community" as nothing more than a virtual anthill, and looks upon the userbase as annoyances who just "don't understand business", there isn't much hope that the the rate of registrations will ever increase the way it could.

You know the popular phrase that most managers in every business have learned by rote: "we value you and welcome your input"? Well, I'll use Aine's phrase (below): "I don't have any confidence that that is true."

Lara

[View Quote]

Feb 11, 2002, 3:04am

Look at Coca Cola, anyone remember "New Coke"? AW pulled the same scam and
to a degree it is going to work. Change the product complety and take away
what everyone knew then after they get their bitching and moaning out change
the product back a "little" and the customers will be just as happy as they
were before. Granted Coke changed their product back to the same formula
but they also went up on the prices of coca cola and everyone swallowed the
change of price just so they could have their old coca cola back.

I have worked with the AW product from the beginning, I have been around
since Ron, Danny and others were still at Worlds, Inc on paychecks. I have
not only studied all possible business avenues for AW technology but I have
tried more than you can imagine while I was running OuterWorlds. I will
thank AW for two things,

1) I have spent enough time in AW to now know exactly what it takes to make
this type of business not only fully acceptable to the community but
extremely marketable while at the same time being attractive to an extremely
large user base. Without AW I would have never realized that.

2) I now realize that the only way I can fully see if my theory is correct
is going to be to write my own software. Management at AW does not want to
hear my suggestion and after what it has cost me to obtain "The Keys To The
Kingdom" (as my partners call it, who have seen my vision and they are as
excited as me), I would never offer my solution to AW's long standing
problem to them anyway.

I do love AW, I will always love AW, I will tell my grandchildren about AW
even after it is long gone. It is an amazing technology and it deserves so
much more. But some people just do not get it and unfortunately for us,
those people are running the company. Ron Britvich was fighting the same
battle we are all fighting now, a few years ago. He did not like the way
they were taking advantage of the users and ignoring the full potential of
the product and its future plans. Ron was a true visionary.

Sorry JP, but your antics and avoidance of me while I was paying you $25,000
for a universe was uncalled for. Sorry Rick, I remember helping you spell
check your letter to attract investors way back when but for some reason my
requests for you to contact me or consider my ideas has gone unacknowledged.
Roland your a great programmer! You have great visions for the Software and
I only wish some of the things you told me about 3 years ago would finally
make it into the software.

AW RULES!!!!! but I am soon to move on.

Oh yeah, if the new pricing plan is a result of user suggestions, would
someone step forward and send me a copy of your letter where you convinced
AW as a USER that what they are doing now is any better than the Jan 2nd
attack? I would like to be just as convinced as AW and maybe since the new
pricing structure was from suggestions and all, I would like to read the
original suggestion myself and see if it convinces me.

I don't think that person exists. I think its easy to say "we listened to
you and formed our new structure around what you suggested" when its hard
to pinpoint if anyone at all suggested the things they are now doing.
Especially with a few thousand users. (or are they still claiming to have
160,000 users?)

Thanks,
Derek Rayburn
derek at cyboria.com

[View Quote]

Feb 11, 2002, 3:14am

No, it's not going to work.

I will not renew my citizenship unless it's the usual $19.95 per year.

I'm pleased that I can still visit AW as a tourist. This will be the
downfall of AW.

[View Quote]

Feb 11, 2002, 7:44pm

[View Quote] I seriously doubt that the majority of world owners who asked for return of
tourists meant that they would pay an additional $59.95 fee in order to buy
"permission" to make a world *they had already bought* tourist accessible
again. The unfairness of that aside, management's idea that making it
difficult for tourists to see worlds other than AWGate would be an
"incentive" to get them to register, is ludicrous."


I have asked for AWSchool to be enabled for Tourists and i am awaiting
AWCorps reply. I trust that they recognise that Tourists will be more
willing to register if they are allowed to try building ( after all, does
one buy a house without checking to see if the appliances work?) So dont
write off AWSchool yet :o))

Feb 12, 2002, 3:45pm

> Sorry JP, but your antics and avoidance of me while I was paying you
$25,000
> for a universe was uncalled for. Sorry Rick, I remember helping you spell
> check your letter to attract investors way back when but for some reason
my
> requests for you to contact me or consider my ideas has gone
unacknowledged.
> Roland your a great programmer! You have great visions for the Software
and
> I only wish some of the things you told me about 3 years ago would finally
> make it into the software.

Mr. Rayburn,

I sure hope I never get so stuck on myself that I have to call down those
who previously helped me by pointing out their personal shortcomings when
times get rough.

I hope you and AW can work out your indifference. Working with you in a
positive manner is in their best interest as well as yours.

I agree with parts of Lara's statement.

I've said it before, I'm disappointed JP or E N Z O did not speak to the
citizens at AWDebate when AW was in such an uproar after announcing the
price increase and no tourists. And since that time, I've heard JP had a
discussion with the PK's, and part of the focus of this discussion was NAC
property and the like. HOW DARE JP release this information to the PK's,
which in turn allowed it to be leaked out/trickled on down to the citizens,
which ended up in a newsgroup post. If it weren't for Mauz, I don't know
that we would have ever known for sure what the correct information was. JP
should have faced the citizens head on with the information. It was done
with little or no regard for us and I'm very disappointed. As far as I'm
concerned, anytime anyone talks about wiping out someone else's build, for
whatever reason, it's of utmost concern. Without builds, all you've got is
a chat program. Also, back in January, I felt pushed a little too hard to
accept a new version of the software (as Calpentera stood at the gate
announcing). It was almost as though I were at a Jim Jones camp, forced to
drink the poison Kool-Aide with a gun to my head. I could not even sign
back onto AW after installation of the new version. I had to write to
support! What if I had been a GateKeeper trying to sell a tourist on
becoming a citizen as Calpentera marched in with all of his world privs?
And Calpentera, if you are reading this, don't you do that again!!!! I mean
it!!!!!! It was dead wrong!!!! I don't care if you were instructed to do
it, we should get notice plenty ahead of time before we are forced to take a
new version of the software. Don't you guys up there in the AW office ever
take up for the citizens? How about the potential citizens (tourists)?
There are times when a paycheck means nothing when you see injustice taking
place!

At the same time I can see that a price increase is in order, especially if
it means more toys, because I really enjoy building and am willing to
support new features by paying more.

[View Quote]

Feb 13, 2002, 4:57am

[View Quote] ::::snip::::

I must interject .. at the risk of being argumentative, <and not meaning to
be mind you> I must say that the meeting <tho long over and a dead issue at
that> was originally a GK meeting.. PK's were invited last minute... and if
you read back a ways <header is Active Worlds and originates from tyberius
on 2/3/02, bodhitah's post is dated 2/4/02 at 5:21pm and is the second
reply to the original post.> , you'll see where the leak was.. someone
posted it in these newsgroups. The person that posted that .. no PK knows
who that person is..

So please, before you accuse.. do everyone right and be sure :)

Ra

Feb 13, 2002, 4:21pm

Oh don't worry, I don't think anyone has any problem with the PKs and GKs.
It's the fact that it seems JP didn't bother to mention it to everyone else
and that there has as yet been no explaination from on high as to why this
new policy is being implemented.

SW Chris

[View Quote]

Feb 14, 2002, 11:07pm

I know AWSchool teachers where not invited ( the ones that try to answer
citizens questions when asked and where probably promising some poor sucker
that their objects , if not objectionable, would never be deleted at the
time the meeting was held)

I wonder if the G.E.T or AWHS was? I would think that they would have a
mild interest in all this, But i KNOW that AWSchool certainly would have
done.



[View Quote] > I've said it before, I'm disappointed JP or E N Z O did not speak to the
> citizens at AWDebate when AW was in such an uproar after announcing the
> price increase and no tourists. And since that time, I've heard JP had a
> discussion with the PK's, and part of the focus of this discussion was NAC
> property and the like. HOW DARE JP release this information to the PK's

1  |   Order by index