1  |   Order by index

Jun 6, 2001, 4:52pm

I've been around the Internet for awhile, and on almost every forum I see a
"general" category that allows people to post whatever the heck they want
(except for spam and other junk), be it off-topic or not. In fact, one of
the greatest "General" forums is at xwlegacy.net. Go there if you would
like an example, and be sure to look at the "Questions" thread. :)

I can't say the same for newsgroups, becuase I'm relatively new to that
scene. But the simplest solution for this eep vs. almost everyone else war
is to create a "general" newsgroup that folks like Avenger can post their
milk threads in. That way the "Community" newsgroup can stay on topic.

I think the reason forums have a general category is to keep flame wars like
this to a minimum. In the case of this Active Worlds newsgroup, I'm 100%
positive this is a solution acceptable for both parties. Your thoughts? :)

SW Chris

Jun 6, 2001, 6:34pm

Seems to me that should make the vast majority of ppl happy. But because of
the broad way in which the charter is written and therefore interpreted, you
may still get a percentage of "off-topic" posts. Give me ambiguity, or give
me something else...lol


~Syli~
[View Quote]

Jun 6, 2001, 6:36pm

This is the role of this Community NG but some people just can't grasp that
concept and want everything streamlined down to a freaking pin point in this
NG. It's utterly ridiculous. I see people complain even when it is an AW
event or something going on in AW. This is a Community NG, that means ANYONE
from the Community can post here about ANYTHING they want. This is a
Community NG, not a let's only talk about AW NG, or only talk about or offer
1 idea or conversation. Community NG means we are a Community and can post
what we want here. I am sick of people that can't seem to get over
themselves and grasp that concept. Until something else better comes along,
this is all we have and anyone that doesn't like it can go read another NG,
but this is for the Community to share ideas, thoughts, laughs,
conversation, basically whatever the hell we want becuase there is no where
else to post it. I am sick of being attacked here and will continue to block
those that choose to. I can debate something without being attacked but some
people enjoy attacking not debating then I have to get defensive and attack
back, but from now on, it will be click to block because I really don't need
to stoop to their level anymore here.


[View Quote]

Jun 6, 2001, 6:37pm

Um, if you want a general forum, GO to one outside of the AW newsgroups. Duh. Think, please...I know it hurts, but just give it a try, kids. GO ELSEWHERE FOR OFF-TOPIC FLUFF CRAP.

[View Quote] > I've been around the Internet for awhile, and on almost every forum I see a
> "general" category that allows people to post whatever the heck they want
> (except for spam and other junk), be it off-topic or not. In fact, one of
> the greatest "General" forums is at xwlegacy.net. Go there if you would
> like an example, and be sure to look at the "Questions" thread. :)
>
> I can't say the same for newsgroups, becuase I'm relatively new to that
> scene. But the simplest solution for this eep vs. almost everyone else war
> is to create a "general" newsgroup that folks like Avenger can post their
> milk threads in. That way the "Community" newsgroup can stay on topic.
>
> I think the reason forums have a general category is to keep flame wars like
> this to a minimum. In the case of this Active Worlds newsgroup, I'm 100%
> positive this is a solution acceptable for both parties. Your thoughts? :)

Jun 6, 2001, 6:47pm

eep.....what is your interpretation of the charter and idea of what's on
topic? You obviously are more interested in topics of a technical nature
because of your background and experience. Not everyone in the community
has had the same set of experiences and background. The charter lists many
other categories of appropriate posts, some of which I would say leave a lot
open to fluff and stuff. Maybe not your idea of what you would like to see
but still on topic - IMHO

--
~Syli
[View Quote]

Jun 6, 2001, 6:59pm

I think the problem is (and correct me if I'm wrong, Eep) that lots of posts recently and in the past have had nothing to do with *AW*.

-Agent1

[View Quote]

Jun 6, 2001, 7:06pm

I can see that in a few cases agent1, but I asked eep because i have seen
him become disturbed at posts that by my intepretation would be on topic. I
think this is the problem.....interpretation.

--
~Syli
[View Quote]

Jun 6, 2001, 7:06pm

Oh! Well you should make a complaint to activeworlds.com, why bothering
and post here? Don't you think? In the past the AW staff was taking part
to this NG, it was also moderated. Recently I saw more non sense posts
that have really nothing to do with anything
Have a good day
[View Quote]

Jun 6, 2001, 7:30pm

Reread the charter. While there is ONE (1) sentence that doesn't mention AW topics, explicitly: "Discussion of education, health, environmental issues , politics,
elections, etc.) in paragraph 2, it should be easily (and obviously) implied that such topics are to be related to AW. Yes I'm more interested in technical things, but do you see me complaining about the stupid "Newsgroup Survivor" threads? While I don't consider them worthy of inclusion in this newsgroup, they ARE AW-related.

Posts about ZoneAlarm (Tyrell), jokes (Goober King), milk (Avenger), and even cyberculture interest (Wizard Myraddin) are NOT on-topic for AW's newsgroups and should be taken elsewhere.

[View Quote] > eep.....what is your interpretation of the charter and idea of what's on
> topic? You obviously are more interested in topics of a technical nature
> because of your background and experience. Not everyone in the community
> has had the same set of experiences and background. The charter lists many
> other categories of appropriate posts, some of which I would say leave a lot
> open to fluff and stuff. Maybe not your idea of what you would like to see
> but still on topic - IMHO
>
[View Quote]

Jun 6, 2001, 7:38pm

I think there are two kinds of pertinence: first is a 100% relevance,
the second is 100% relevance + 100% sarcasm
Surely the second is more difficult to interpret

[View Quote]

Jun 6, 2001, 8:10pm

Ok, thanks for your explanation and not to beat a dead horse but phrases
such as "posts appropriate...include, but are not restricted to all aspects
of AW......is more what I was getting at. Your point is well taken..... and
much more easily I might add when I don't have to reach for the fire
extinguisher(s) at the same time.
~Syli~

[View Quote]

Jun 6, 2001, 8:48pm

Yes, that IS vague, but if AWCI won't moderate their newsgroups for off-t=
opic posts, I will. These newsgroups were full of fluff off-topic crap wh=
en I first came to them and they seem to revert to that state when I'm no=
t here, which allows an influx and growth of newbie idiots and moronicnes=
s to prosper here (and eventually spill over into AW). Well, sorry, but I=
don't think that's positive for AW's overall growth, unless AWCI wants A=
OL-level idiots infesting AW and bringing it down any lower than it alrea=
dy is. I would like AW's newsgroups (and AW) to remain semi-professional =
and actually worth the attention of 3D gamers (not just shooting, you kno=
w), 3D game developers/publishers, 3D modellers/artists, etc. Kids (and i=
mmature adults) can go elsewhere if they don't want to contribute to AW's=
growth and prosperity. There are PLENTY of other crappy mediums for such=
people to muck up, but not AW--I won't allow it--PERIOD.

[View Quote] > Ok, thanks for your explanation and not to beat a dead horse but phras=
es
> such as "posts appropriate...include, but are not restricted to all asp=
ects
> of AW......is more what I was getting at. Your point is well taken....=
=2E and
> much more easily I might add when I don't have to reach for the fire
> extinguisher(s) at the same time.

Jun 7, 2001, 8:31am

I think that is TOO general of term, and a general newsgroup should be
created for that. Community has just as much of a specific detail as does
beta, worldbuilders, and bots. It's not a place to socialize really, but
just to post and go. We're lucky enough to incorporate many discussions on
community topics in here (and I don't mean milking cows or porn) such as 3.2
and other things that affect the community. But, the reason why I think
AWCOM never made a more general newsgroup is that they didn't want the
newsgroup just to be spam and flames or the next Star Wars newsgroup. Just a
simple place to post if you need help, and get the help you need. :)

Nornny

[View Quote]

Jun 7, 2001, 2:37pm

Most messages forums tend to be somewhat moderated and that is why you
don't see SPAM OR JUNK in them. But i've been with NGS since 1987 and all
the general ones are far more off the wall than this will ever become.
YES there is off topic posts there... BUT since it is the wide open
GENERAL [COMMUNITY] discuss thing...
It is wide open & NO MODERATOR OF ANY KIND... you will see everything
including SPAM, JUNK, ADVERTISEMENTS, NUDES PICTURES of everything, A
ZILLION This Is A Test and a few zillion more with some type of attachment
& you will find the 50k lines of post that is nothing more than
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
I 80 characters wide & 50k lines long & at the very end of that mess...
It might either be a IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII HATE YOU
or IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Love You thing...
or the all to common
Message #1
I
message #2
Love
message #3
You
mess...that people love in the wide open NGS...
HERE... you don't see that as it is losely moderated to the slightest
degree and that is why you haven't seen all that stuff here. Besides the
fact that this one is more AW community related rather than GENERAL FREE
FOR ALL stuff in a regular NGS postings.
And if you ever decide to remove any filters in the regular NGS and you
get all 40,000 or more topics in the regular NGS...
You will certainly see a bunch of stupid topics follow a pattern there...
Dumb
Dumb.Dumb
Dumb.Dumb.Dumb
Dumb.Dumb.Dumb.Dumb
Dumb.Dumb.Dumb.Dumb.Dumb
Dumb.Dumb.Dumb.Dumb.Dumb.Dumb
Dumb.Dumb.Dumb.Dumb.Dumb.Dumb.ASS

Must be all the DUMB ASSes post in those types. lol
I still haven't seen any DUMB ASSes post here YET!!! lol

sw chris <chrisw10 at nckcn.com> wrote in <3b1e7be8 at server1.Activeworlds.com>:

>I've been around the Internet for awhile, and on almost every forum I see
>a "general" category that allows people to post whatever the heck they
>want (except for spam and other junk), be it off-topic or not. In fact,
>one of the greatest "General" forums is at xwlegacy.net. Go there if you
>would like an example, and be sure to look at the "Questions" thread. :)
>
>I can't say the same for newsgroups, becuase I'm relatively new to that
>scene. But the simplest solution for this eep vs. almost everyone else
>war is to create a "general" newsgroup that folks like Avenger can post
>their milk threads in. That way the "Community" newsgroup can stay on
>topic.
>
>I think the reason forums have a general category is to keep flame wars
>like this to a minimum. In the case of this Active Worlds newsgroup, I'm
>100% positive this is a solution acceptable for both parties. Your
>thoughts? :)
>
>SW Chris

Jun 7, 2001, 10:29pm

right back at you, kid. Fletch just e-mailed me and said they approved
something like this in one of their meetings. ;) Although they thought of
it at the same time as I did, so I really can't take credit for the idea.

SW Chris


[View Quote]

Jun 7, 2001, 10:59pm

<yawn> At least it'll keep you idiots from infesting the REAL AW newsgroups with your mindless drivel since you're too fucking incompetent to go to an appropriate forum outside of AW's newsgroups.

[View Quote] > right back at you, kid. Fletch just e-mailed me and said they approved
> something like this in one of their meetings. ;) Although they thought of
> it at the same time as I did, so I really can't take credit for the idea.
>
[View Quote]

Jun 7, 2001, 10:59pm

The decent people arn't going to get worse due to idiots. In fact, we NEED
those idiots. I always look at all of them as cash cows. Yeah they mess up
the NG's with pointless posts, fill AW with awfull worlds and terrible
content, but they give quite a large percentage of awcom's income. They are
just there to buy cits and worlds to give the company money to make the
program better for us. Sure they build like shit, their worlds are lapping
wastes of space, but you should't put them down too too much, because they
are financialy very important to aw. Well you can put them down, just don't
chase their business off. Welcome idiots with open arms, let them give
awcom their money, then just ignore em. I used to always recomend against
newbies buying big worlds, sick of seeing the terrible content they put up.
But now I encourage them, let them waste money to "much up" their own
worlds. It's not like they can affect our content, or put in charge of the
development of aw. As long as there is an inteligent core group of citizens
aw will be fine, money talks, but talking idiots can be muted or filtered.
Imagine if aw had a deal for cits with AOL. Sure the idiot factor would go
through the roof, but imagine what advances could be made in aw from the
money generated. There are enough decent cits in aw to help "guid" aw,
what we need now is money, and idiot aol kids and the like are the perfect
"target".

Jun 8, 2001, 12:46am

Judging me before you know me eh? You seem to have a real misunderstanding
about how a community is supposed to thrive. Usually it is that mindless
drivel that makes us a closer group.

SW Chris

[View Quote]

Jun 8, 2001, 1:13am

Bah, that's nonsense. I don't want to even have to DEAL with idiots, let alone have them infest AW just because they bring AWCI more revenue. Fuck that. That's as bad as AWCI kissing off its existing citizens just to woo new "meat" to suck $20 (or in some cases, $25K) out of. Fuck that. AWCI has already proven even if it DOES get money it doesn't know how to spend it wisely. Rick and JP don't need $150K/year salaries. What the FUCK do they do besides grind AW into the ground more? Roland, HamFon, and Shamus do most of the work anyway but they don't have much design direction--and Rick and JP sure as fuck don't.

And learn how to quote what you're replying too, Moff. And it's "muck" up, not "much" up; "guide", not "guid". At least you managed to get "affect" (vs "effect") correct, however.

[View Quote] > The decent people arn't going to get worse due to idiots. In fact, we NEED
> those idiots. I always look at all of them as cash cows. Yeah they mess up
> the NG's with pointless posts, fill AW with awfull worlds and terrible
> content, but they give quite a large percentage of awcom's income. They are
> just there to buy cits and worlds to give the company money to make the
> program better for us. Sure they build like shit, their worlds are lapping
> wastes of space, but you should't put them down too too much, because they
> are financialy very important to aw. Well you can put them down, just don't
> chase their business off. Welcome idiots with open arms, let them give
> awcom their money, then just ignore em. I used to always recomend against
> newbies buying big worlds, sick of seeing the terrible content they put up.
> But now I encourage them, let them waste money to "much up" their own
> worlds. It's not like they can affect our content, or put in charge of the
> development of aw. As long as there is an inteligent core group of citizens
> aw will be fine, money talks, but talking idiots can be muted or filtered.
> Imagine if aw had a deal for cits with AOL. Sure the idiot factor would go
> through the roof, but imagine what advances could be made in aw from the
> money generated. There are enough decent cits in aw to help "guid" aw,
> what we need now is money, and idiot aol kids and the like are the perfect
> "target".

1  |   Order by index