Article by Brant (long post) (Community)

Article by Brant (long post) // Community

1  2  3  |  

beardo

Jul 18, 2001, 8:57pm
- I found this article by Brant at awnews.com more exactly =
http://awnews.com/article.php?s=3D169 , so go there to argue with him =
since he doesn't read this newgroup anymore.

/Beardo

-------------------------------------------------------------------------=

Goober King presents many valid arguments in his July edition of =
"Stirring the Virtual Melting Pot". While there are several =
improvements to be made to the Activeworlds universe, his article =
presents some serious flaws.

Goober presents a list of mistakes that AW has made in the past. He =
points out that gaining corporate sponsors is one of these "mistakes", =
while charging for free citizenships is also a "mistake". Simply put, =
Activeworlds has to make money somehow. If Goober wants AW to stop =
seeking corporate sponsors, then AW has to charge for citizenships; if =
citizenships were to be free, AW would have to rely on advertising and =
corporate sponsorship. At least one of these steps has to be taken to =
ensure that the bills are paid. Yet, there are those who believe that =
AW can continue to exist as a company without a source of revenue.

There seems to be a stigma that AW has poor customer service and does =
not try to help the community. In contrast, all of the AW employees I =
have met in my experience have been very experienced and helpful. =
Lucrezia Borgia has never stopped trying to help people; Mountain Myst =
has been visible in the community coordinating events and setting up =
activities like AWCamp; Facter and Flagg have provided valuable =
technical support; and even HamFon has participated in many =
behind-the-scenes activities such as programming the BingoBot. Yet, =
there are those who believe that AW employees are "out to get them."

Some believe that the AW universe is "dead and dying". In contrast, I =
remember a time just last September when the number of users logged into =
the Universe rarely exceeded 500. Today, at the same time of day, the =
number is regularly between 600 and 700. Yet, there are those who =
believe that AW should by now have millions of users registered.

If AW is not aiming to increase its userbase, then what is the purpose =
of releasing its upcoming version 3.2? Take the corporate firewall =
support that will be included, for instance. Many AW citizens would =
like to use AW at work, and Activeworlds' management is giving them this =
new option. Firewall support isn't just for Juno subscribers or for =
NetTaxi readers or for other Universe owners, but for all citizens, as =
is OpenGL support. Contrary to popular belief, AW is growing and is =
taking steps to ensure that its growth continues, and its partnership =
with Juno is supporting this growth. I remember a time when the =
JunoDome world had in excess of 100 people occupying it during a Juno =
advertising campaign, and I know many citizens who started out as Juno =
users. Furthermore, one of the biggest problems that AW (and the =
frustrated bot programmer) has faced, the discrepancy between versions =
2.2 and 3.1 of the AW browser, will be eliminated with the upcoming =
software renderer. Yet, there are still thse who will complain that AW =
is not taking steps to ensure its continued success.

Looking below, you'll find that there is an article about a petition =
in AW that is attempting to lower world prices. I would like to ask the =
creators of this petition what lowering world prices would accomplish. =
Would cutting the cost of worlds make the community closer? Would =
charging less increase AW's revenue so that it can further its =
development? Would eliminating the one-time signup fee bring more users =
to the universe? Absolutely not. Instead, lowering world prices would =
simply increase the number of dead worlds and reduce the number of =
people who actively participate in the AW community. And yes, there are =
also those who believe that lowering world prices would solve all of the =
problems of the Universe.=20

However, despite all the positive things that AW has done for the =
community, I find that there are many steps that AW can still take to =
increase its userbase, and ultimately, its revenue. First, a stand =
needs to be made against troublemakers and those who aim to destroy =
worlds and to hack other users. Many worlds have been closed or =
hindered because of this sort of cyber-crime. AW needs to enforce its =
GZ behavior policies, Content Guidelines, and other various charters and =
rules more strictly. In addition, AW employees need to take a more =
active role in improving the Peacekeeping of AlphaWorld, as several of =
the Peacekeepers with which I have dealt have not handled a situation in =
a professional manner. In my experience, some Peacekeepers have been =
downright rude when I have contacted them, and their superiors did =
nothing to correct the problem. Most importantly, the company needs to =
moderate its newsgroups. Many a user, myself included, has left the =
newsgroups because of a select few citizens who continue to post =
inappropriate content that serves only to demean fellow users, ruining =
the atmosphere for legitimate debate. In fact, while I had been =
aggravated by the arrogance of those citizens in the newsgroups for a =
long time, I finally decided to leave the groups after Eep, instead of =
debating in a calm manner, flamed my posts on the subject of this =
article. In short, troublemakers both in-world and out-of-world destroy =
the community feel which is so crucial to AW's success, and AW must take =
swift and decisive action against them.

What do I find wrong with Activeworlds' management? In short, very =
little. Activeworlds has done what any company tries to do - make =
money. While most Internet companies have floundered and become a =
"passing fad", Activeworlds Corp. has stayed around for over six years, =
during which a tremendous technological change has occurred. Through =
this change, AW has secured its place in the 1% of startup companies who =
survive past their first year, which in itself is quite a feat. While =
there are a few areas that leave room for improvement, I feel that AW =
has, in general, done a good job balancing appeasing its customers and =
securing corporate deals. Besides, AW currently has many =
community-friendly activities up its sleeve, such as new building =
worlds, an object maker for the AW browser, and more events, for which =
Goober King and the citizens who support his letter clamor ceaselessly. =
If everyone would work to make the community better instead of =
petitioning Activeworlds for what it is already attemping to do, then =
perhaps the Universe would be a better place.

kmissile583k

Jul 18, 2001, 9:02pm
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_00D2_01C10FBB.8F951E20
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I agree with all of Brant's article.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-------


[View Quote] /Beardo

-------------------------------------------------------------------------=

Goober King presents many valid arguments in his July edition of =
"Stirring the Virtual Melting Pot". While there are several =
improvements to be made to the Activeworlds universe, his article =
presents some serious flaws.

Goober presents a list of mistakes that AW has made in the past. He =
points out that gaining corporate sponsors is one of these "mistakes", =
while charging for free citizenships is also a "mistake". Simply put, =
Activeworlds has to make money somehow. If Goober wants AW to stop =
seeking corporate sponsors, then AW has to charge for citizenships; if =
citizenships were to be free, AW would have to rely on advertising and =
corporate sponsorship. At least one of these steps has to be taken to =
ensure that the bills are paid. Yet, there are those who believe that =
AW can continue to exist as a company without a source of revenue.

There seems to be a stigma that AW has poor customer service and does =
not try to help the community. In contrast, all of the AW employees I =
have met in my experience have been very experienced and helpful. =
Lucrezia Borgia has never stopped trying to help people; Mountain Myst =
has been visible in the community coordinating events and setting up =
activities like AWCamp; Facter and Flagg have provided valuable =
technical support; and even HamFon has participated in many =
behind-the-scenes activities such as programming the BingoBot. Yet, =
there are those who believe that AW employees are "out to get them."

Some believe that the AW universe is "dead and dying". In contrast, I =
remember a time just last September when the number of users logged into =
the Universe rarely exceeded 500. Today, at the same time of day, the =
number is regularly between 600 and 700. Yet, there are those who =
believe that AW should by now have millions of users registered.

If AW is not aiming to increase its userbase, then what is the purpose =
of releasing its upcoming version 3.2? Take the corporate firewall =
support that will be included, for instance. Many AW citizens would =
like to use AW at work, and Activeworlds' management is giving them this =
new option. Firewall support isn't just for Juno subscribers or for =
NetTaxi readers or for other Universe owners, but for all citizens, as =
is OpenGL support. Contrary to popular belief, AW is growing and is =
taking steps to ensure that its growth continues, and its partnership =
with Juno is supporting this growth. I remember a time when the =
JunoDome world had in excess of 100 people occupying it during a Juno =
advertising campaign, and I know many citizens who started out as Juno =
users. Furthermore, one of the biggest problems that AW (and the =
frustrated bot programmer) has faced, the discrepancy between versions =
2.2 and 3.1 of the AW browser, will be eliminated with the upcoming =
software renderer. Yet, there are still thse who will complain that AW =
is not taking steps to ensure its continued success.

Looking below, you'll find that there is an article about a petition =
in AW that is attempting to lower world prices. I would like to ask the =
creators of this petition what lowering world prices would accomplish. =
Would cutting the cost of worlds make the community closer? Would =
charging less increase AW's revenue so that it can further its =
development? Would eliminating the one-time signup fee bring more users =
to the universe? Absolutely not. Instead, lowering world prices would =
simply increase the number of dead worlds and reduce the number of =
people who actively participate in the AW community. And yes, there are =
also those who believe that lowering world prices would solve all of the =
problems of the Universe.=20

However, despite all the positive things that AW has done for the =
community, I find that there are many steps that AW can still take to =
increase its userbase, and ultimately, its revenue. First, a stand =
needs to be made against troublemakers and those who aim to destroy =
worlds and to hack other users. Many worlds have been closed or =
hindered because of this sort of cyber-crime. AW needs to enforce its =
GZ behavior policies, Content Guidelines, and other various charters and =
rules more strictly. In addition, AW employees need to take a more =
active role in improving the Peacekeeping of AlphaWorld, as several of =
the Peacekeepers with which I have dealt have not handled a situation in =
a professional manner. In my experience, some Peacekeepers have been =
downright rude when I have contacted them, and their superiors did =
nothing to correct the problem. Most importantly, the company needs to =
moderate its newsgroups. Many a user, myself included, has left the =
newsgroups because of a select few citizens who continue to post =
inappropriate content that serves only to demean fellow users, ruining =
the atmosphere for legitimate debate. In fact, while I had been =
aggravated by the arrogance of those citizens in the newsgroups for a =
long time, I finally decided to leave the groups after Eep, instead of =
debating in a calm manner, flamed my posts on the subject of this =
article. In short, troublemakers both in-world and out-of-world destroy =
the community feel which is so crucial to AW's success, and AW must take =
swift and decisive action against them.

What do I find wrong with Activeworlds' management? In short, very =
little. Activeworlds has done what any company tries to do - make =
money. While most Internet companies have floundered and become a =
"passing fad", Activeworlds Corp. has stayed around for over six years, =
during which a tremendous technological change has occurred. Through =
this change, AW has secured its place in the 1% of startup companies who =
survive past their first year, which in itself is quite a feat. While =
there are a few areas that leave room for improvement, I feel that AW =
has, in general, done a good job balancing appeasing its customers and =
securing corporate deals. Besides, AW currently has many =
community-friendly activities up its sleeve, such as new building =
worlds, an object maker for the AW browser, and more events, for which =
Goober King and the citizens who support his letter clamor ceaselessly. =
If everyone would work to make the community better instead of =
petitioning Activeworlds for what it is already attemping to do, then =
perhaps the Universe would be a better place.


------=_NextPart_000_00D2_01C10FBB.8F951E20
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4134.100" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I agree with all of Brant's =
article.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>
<HR>
</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><EM>"beardo" &lt;</EM></FONT><A=20
href=3D"mailto:beardo at home.se.nospam"><FONT face=3DArial=20
size=3D2><EM>beardo at home.se.nospam</EM></FONT></A><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2><EM>&gt;=20
[View Quote] face=3DArial size=3D2><EM>...</EM></FONT></DIV><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2><EM>- I found=20
this article by Brant at awnews.com more exactly </EM></FONT><A=20
href=3D"http://awnews.com/article.php?s=3D169"><FONT face=3DArial=20
size=3D2><EM>http://awnews.com/article.php?s=3D169</EM></FONT></A><FONT =
face=3DArial=20
size=3D2><EM> , so go there to argue with him since he doesn't read this =
newgroup=20
anymore.<BR><BR>/Beardo<BR></EM><BR><EM>---------------------------------=
----------------------------------------<BR>Goober=20
King presents many valid arguments in his July edition of "Stirring the =
Virtual=20
Melting Pot".&nbsp; While there are several improvements to be made to =
the=20
Activeworlds universe, his article presents some serious =
flaws.<BR><BR>&nbsp;=20
Goober presents a list of mistakes that AW has made in the past.&nbsp; =
He points=20
out that gaining corporate sponsors is one of these "mistakes", while =
charging=20
for free citizenships is also a "mistake".&nbsp;&nbsp; Simply put, =
Activeworlds=20
has to make money somehow.&nbsp; If Goober wants AW to stop seeking =
corporate=20
sponsors, then AW has to charge for citizenships; if citizenships were =
to be=20
free, AW would have to rely on advertising and corporate =
sponsorship.&nbsp; At=20
least one of these steps has to be taken to ensure that the bills are=20
paid.&nbsp; Yet, there are those who believe that AW can continue to =
exist as a=20
company without a source of revenue.<BR><BR>&nbsp; There seems to be a =
stigma=20
that AW has poor customer service and does not try to help the =
community.&nbsp;=20
In contrast, all of the AW employees I have met in my experience have =
been very=20
experienced and helpful.&nbsp; Lucrezia Borgia has never stopped trying =
to help=20
people; Mountain Myst has been visible in the community coordinating =
events and=20
setting up activities like AWCamp; Facter and Flagg have provided =
valuable=20
technical support; and even HamFon has participated in many =
behind-the-scenes=20
activities such as programming the BingoBot.&nbsp; Yet, there are those =
who=20
believe that AW employees are "out to get them."<BR><BR>&nbsp; Some =
believe that=20
the AW universe is "dead and dying".&nbsp; In contrast, I remember a =
time just=20
last September when the number of users logged into the Universe rarely =
exceeded=20
500.&nbsp; Today, at the same time of day, the number is regularly =
between 600=20
and 700. Yet, there are those who believe that AW should by now have =
millions of=20
users registered.<BR><BR>&nbsp; If AW is not aiming to increase its =
userbase,=20
then what is the purpose of releasing its upcoming version 3.2?&nbsp; =
Take the=20
corporate firewall support that will be included, for instance.&nbsp; =
Many AW=20
citizens would like to use AW at work, and Activeworlds' management is =
giving=20
them this new option.&nbsp; Firewall support isn't just for Juno =
subscribers or=20
for NetTaxi readers or for other Universe owners, but for all citizens, =
as is=20
OpenGL support.&nbsp; Contrary to popular belief, AW is growing and is =
taking=20
steps to ensure that its growth continues, and its partnership with Juno =
is=20
supporting this growth.&nbsp; I remember a time when the JunoDome world =
had in=20
excess of 100 people occupying it during a Juno advertising campaign, =
and I know=20
many citizens who started out as Juno users.&nbsp; Furthermore, one of =
the=20
biggest problems that AW (and the frustrated bot programmer) has faced, =
the=20
discrepancy between versions 2.2 and 3.1 of the AW browser, will be =
eliminated=20
with the upcoming software renderer.&nbsp; Yet, there are still thse who =
will=20
complain that AW is not taking steps to ensure its continued=20
success.<BR><BR>&nbsp; Looking below, you'll find that there is an =
article about=20
a petition in AW that is attempting to lower world prices.&nbsp; I would =
like to=20
ask the creators of this petition what lowering world prices would=20
accomplish.&nbsp; Would cutting the cost of worlds make the community=20
closer?&nbsp; Would charging less increase AW's revenue so that it can =
further=20
its development?&nbsp; Would eliminating the one-time signup fee bring =
more=20
users to the universe?&nbsp; Absolutely not.&nbsp; Instead, lowering =
world=20
prices would simply increase the number of dead worlds and reduce the =
number of=20
people who actively participate in the AW community.&nbsp; And yes, =
there are=20
also those who believe that lowering world prices would solve all of the =

problems of the Universe. <BR><BR>&nbsp; However, despite all the =
positive=20
things that AW has done for the community, I find that there are many =
steps that=20
AW can still take to increase its userbase, and ultimately, its =
revenue.&nbsp;=20
First, a stand needs to be made against troublemakers and those who aim =
to=20
destroy worlds and to hack other users.&nbsp; Many worlds have been =
closed or=20
hindered because of this sort of cyber-crime.&nbsp; AW needs to enforce =
its GZ=20
behavior policies, Content Guidelines, and other various charters and =
rules more=20
strictly.&nbsp; In addition, AW employees need to take a more active =
role in=20
improving the Peacekeeping of AlphaWorld, as several of the Peacekeepers =
with=20
which I have dealt have not handled a situation in a professional =
manner.&nbsp;=20
In my experience, some Peacekeepers have been downright rude when I have =

contacted them, and their superiors did nothing to correct the =
problem.&nbsp;=20
Most importantly, the company needs to moderate its newsgroups.&nbsp; =
Many a=20
user, myself included, has left the newsgroups because of a select few =
citizens=20
who continue to post inappropriate content that serves only to demean =
fellow=20
users, ruining the atmosphere for legitimate debate.&nbsp; In fact, =
while I had=20
been aggravated by the arrogance of those citizens in the newsgroups for =
a long=20
time, I finally decided to leave the groups after Eep, instead of =
debating in a=20
calm manner, flamed my posts on the subject of this article.&nbsp; In =
short,=20
troublemakers both in-world and out-of-world destroy the community feel =
which is=20
so crucial to AW's success, and AW must take swift and decisive action =
against=20
them.<BR><BR>&nbsp; What do I find wrong with Activeworlds' =
management?&nbsp; In=20
short, very little.&nbsp; Activeworlds has done what any company tries =
to do -=20
make money.&nbsp; While most Internet companies have floundered and =
become a=20
"passing fad", Activeworlds Corp. has stayed around for over six years, =
during=20
which a tremendous technological change has occurred.&nbsp; Through this =
change,=20
AW has secured its place in the 1% of startup companies who survive past =
their=20
first year, which in itself is quite a feat.&nbsp; While there are a few =
areas=20
that leave room for improvement, I feel that AW has, in general, done a =
good job=20
balancing appeasing its customers and securing corporate deals.&nbsp; =
Besides,=20
AW currently has many community-friendly activities up its sleeve, such =
as new=20
building worlds, an object maker for the AW browser, and more events, =
for which=20
Goober King and the citizens who support his letter clamor =
ceaselessly.&nbsp; If=20
everyone would work to make the community better instead of petitioning=20
Activeworlds for what it is already attemping to do, then perhaps the =
Universe=20
would be a better place.<BR></EM></FONT></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_00D2_01C10FBB.8F951E20--

kmissile583k

Jul 18, 2001, 9:03pm
oops - meant to cut that off

syntax

Jul 18, 2001, 9:08pm
Filtered. :-\

mike zimmer

Jul 18, 2001, 9:29pm
Okay, so your going to "filter" him because he messed up? *shakes head*

[View Quote]

kellee

Jul 18, 2001, 10:19pm
I don't agree with EITHER Goober King or Brant strictly, although aspects of
both have quality.

I would like to comment though, that while he states....", for which Goober
King and the citizens who support his letter clamour ceaselessly. If
everyone would work to make the community better instead of petitioning
Activeworlds for what it is already attempting to do, then perhaps the
Universe would be a better place."
I feel that Goober King does a LOT for the AWCommunity and didn't deserve
that little dig.

Another thing.... because AWld crew where mostly visible to us through the
more unique browser we have in AW, then we feel a right to criticise their
business / management skills. mmmm Gee that is REALLY going to get us
far.

We are mostly Windows users. Most of us complain about Microsoft. Would
Microsoft listen to us if we complained that copy / paste was not supported
in most error messages? LOL.... if you got an answer laughing in your face
you would be one of the lucky ones

I like Eeps suggestion of advertising, perhaps this needs to be suggested
directly? Instead of telling them what they are doing wrong, can't we tell
them what they are doing right and suggest more ideas? Cant condemn AWld if
they don't read these NGs I wouldn't either if I copped the abuse that
ppl dish out to them.

I would also stop the community support I had been offering if I got my head
bitten off everytime I tried too.

syntax

Jul 18, 2001, 10:20pm
Ahhh look at it shake.
I already unfiltered him anyway. :-)

[View Quote]

brandon

Jul 18, 2001, 11:30pm
he NEVER said he wanted the citezinships to be free or anything like that as
brant says "they have to make money somehow"...alls he said is that they
should listen to us users who actualy are the backbone of the program intead
of corprate users

[View Quote] /Beardo

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Goober King presents many valid arguments in his July edition of "Stirring
the Virtual Melting Pot". While there are several improvements to be made
to the Activeworlds universe, his article presents some serious flaws.

Goober presents a list of mistakes that AW has made in the past. He
points out that gaining corporate sponsors is one of these "mistakes", while
charging for free citizenships is also a "mistake". Simply put,
Activeworlds has to make money somehow. If Goober wants AW to stop seeking
corporate sponsors, then AW has to charge for citizenships; if citizenships
were to be free, AW would have to rely on advertising and corporate
sponsorship. At least one of these steps has to be taken to ensure that the
bills are paid. Yet, there are those who believe that AW can continue to
exist as a company without a source of revenue.

There seems to be a stigma that AW has poor customer service and does not
try to help the community. In contrast, all of the AW employees I have met
in my experience have been very experienced and helpful. Lucrezia Borgia
has never stopped trying to help people; Mountain Myst has been visible in
the community coordinating events and setting up activities like AWCamp;
Facter and Flagg have provided valuable technical support; and even HamFon
has participated in many behind-the-scenes activities such as programming
the BingoBot. Yet, there are those who believe that AW employees are "out
to get them."

Some believe that the AW universe is "dead and dying". In contrast, I
remember a time just last September when the number of users logged into the
Universe rarely exceeded 500. Today, at the same time of day, the number is
regularly between 600 and 700. Yet, there are those who believe that AW
should by now have millions of users registered.

If AW is not aiming to increase its userbase, then what is the purpose of
releasing its upcoming version 3.2? Take the corporate firewall support
that will be included, for instance. Many AW citizens would like to use AW
at work, and Activeworlds' management is giving them this new option.
Firewall support isn't just for Juno subscribers or for NetTaxi readers or
for other Universe owners, but for all citizens, as is OpenGL support.
Contrary to popular belief, AW is growing and is taking steps to ensure that
its growth continues, and its partnership with Juno is supporting this
growth. I remember a time when the JunoDome world had in excess of 100
people occupying it during a Juno advertising campaign, and I know many
citizens who started out as Juno users. Furthermore, one of the biggest
problems that AW (and the frustrated bot programmer) has faced, the
discrepancy between versions 2.2 and 3.1 of the AW browser, will be
eliminated with the upcoming software renderer. Yet, there are still thse
who will complain that AW is not taking steps to ensure its continued
success.

Looking below, you'll find that there is an article about a petition in AW
that is attempting to lower world prices. I would like to ask the creators
of this petition what lowering world prices would accomplish. Would cutting
the cost of worlds make the community closer? Would charging less increase
AW's revenue so that it can further its development? Would eliminating the
one-time signup fee bring more users to the universe? Absolutely not.
Instead, lowering world prices would simply increase the number of dead
worlds and reduce the number of people who actively participate in the AW
community. And yes, there are also those who believe that lowering world
prices would solve all of the problems of the Universe.

However, despite all the positive things that AW has done for the
community, I find that there are many steps that AW can still take to
increase its userbase, and ultimately, its revenue. First, a stand needs to
be made against troublemakers and those who aim to destroy worlds and to
hack other users. Many worlds have been closed or hindered because of this
sort of cyber-crime. AW needs to enforce its GZ behavior policies, Content
Guidelines, and other various charters and rules more strictly. In
addition, AW employees need to take a more active role in improving the
Peacekeeping of AlphaWorld, as several of the Peacekeepers with which I have
dealt have not handled a situation in a professional manner. In my
experience, some Peacekeepers have been downright rude when I have contacted
them, and their superiors did nothing to correct the problem. Most
importantly, the company needs to moderate its newsgroups. Many a user,
myself included, has left the newsgroups because of a select few citizens
who continue to post inappropriate content that serves only to demean fellow
users, ruining the atmosphere for legitimate debate. In fact, while I had
been aggravated by the arrogance of those citizens in the newsgroups for a
long time, I finally decided to leave the groups after Eep, instead of
debating in a calm manner, flamed my posts on the subject of this article.
In short, troublemakers both in-world and out-of-world destroy the community
feel which is so crucial to AW's success, and AW must take swift and
decisive action against them.

What do I find wrong with Activeworlds' management? In short, very
little. Activeworlds has done what any company tries to do - make money.
While most Internet companies have floundered and become a "passing fad",
Activeworlds Corp. has stayed around for over six years, during which a
tremendous technological change has occurred. Through this change, AW has
secured its place in the 1% of startup companies who survive past their
first year, which in itself is quite a feat. While there are a few areas
that leave room for improvement, I feel that AW has, in general, done a good
job balancing appeasing its customers and securing corporate deals.
Besides, AW currently has many community-friendly activities up its sleeve,
such as new building worlds, an object maker for the AW browser, and more
events, for which Goober King and the citizens who support his letter clamor
ceaselessly. If everyone would work to make the community better instead of
petitioning Activeworlds for what it is already attemping to do, then
perhaps the Universe would be a better place.

goober king

Jul 19, 2001, 12:38am
I agree, kellee. We need to stop the bashing and condemnation, and focus on the
future. The problem is, we need to be *listened* to in order for that to happen, and
so far, it hasn't happened. Even if we were to all turn around and congratulate AWCI
on all of the things it did right, do you think they'd listen to us then? That's what
my letter was all about. It wasn't about condemning AWCI, it was merely pointing out
where they went wrong, and how, by listening to their valued customers once in a blue
moon, they can start to make things right again.

[View Quote] --
Goober King
We must be heard before we can present ideas!
rar1 at acsu.buffalo.edu

m a r c u s

Jul 19, 2001, 12:53am
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_002B_01C10FD9.27182C20
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Can we post html then?
[View Quote]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-----


[View Quote] /Beardo

=
-------------------------------------------------------------------------=

Goober King presents many valid arguments in his July edition of =
"Stirring the Virtual Melting Pot". While there are several =
improvements to be made to the Activeworlds universe, his article =
presents some serious flaws.

Goober presents a list of mistakes that AW has made in the past. He =
points out that gaining corporate sponsors is one of these "mistakes", =
while charging for free citizenships is also a "mistake". Simply put, =
Activeworlds has to make money somehow. If Goober wants AW to stop =
seeking corporate sponsors, then AW has to charge for citizenships; if =
citizenships were to be free, AW would have to rely on advertising and =
corporate sponsorship. At least one of these steps has to be taken to =
ensure that the bills are paid. Yet, there are those who believe that =
AW can continue to exist as a company without a source of revenue.

There seems to be a stigma that AW has poor customer service and =
does not try to help the community. In contrast, all of the AW =
employees I have met in my experience have been very experienced and =
helpful. Lucrezia Borgia has never stopped trying to help people; =
Mountain Myst has been visible in the community coordinating events and =
setting up activities like AWCamp; Facter and Flagg have provided =
valuable technical support; and even HamFon has participated in many =
behind-the-scenes activities such as programming the BingoBot. Yet, =
there are those who believe that AW employees are "out to get them."

Some believe that the AW universe is "dead and dying". In contrast, =
I remember a time just last September when the number of users logged =
into the Universe rarely exceeded 500. Today, at the same time of day, =
the number is regularly between 600 and 700. Yet, there are those who =
believe that AW should by now have millions of users registered.

If AW is not aiming to increase its userbase, then what is the =
purpose of releasing its upcoming version 3.2? Take the corporate =
firewall support that will be included, for instance. Many AW citizens =
would like to use AW at work, and Activeworlds' management is giving =
them this new option. Firewall support isn't just for Juno subscribers =
or for NetTaxi readers or for other Universe owners, but for all =
citizens, as is OpenGL support. Contrary to popular belief, AW is =
growing and is taking steps to ensure that its growth continues, and its =
partnership with Juno is supporting this growth. I remember a time when =
the JunoDome world had in excess of 100 people occupying it during a =
Juno advertising campaign, and I know many citizens who started out as =
Juno users. Furthermore, one of the biggest problems that AW (and the =
frustrated bot programmer) has faced, the discrepancy between versions =
2.2 and 3.1 of the AW browser, will be eliminated with the upcoming =
software renderer. Yet, there are still thse who will complain that AW =
is not taking steps to ensure its continued success.

Looking below, you'll find that there is an article about a petition =
in AW that is attempting to lower world prices. I would like to ask the =
creators of this petition what lowering world prices would accomplish. =
Would cutting the cost of worlds make the community closer? Would =
charging less increase AW's revenue so that it can further its =
development? Would eliminating the one-time signup fee bring more users =
to the universe? Absolutely not. Instead, lowering world prices would =
simply increase the number of dead worlds and reduce the number of =
people who actively participate in the AW community. And yes, there are =
also those who believe that lowering world prices would solve all of the =
problems of the Universe.=20

However, despite all the positive things that AW has done for the =
community, I find that there are many steps that AW can still take to =
increase its userbase, and ultimately, its revenue. First, a stand =
needs to be made against troublemakers and those who aim to destroy =
worlds and to hack other users. Many worlds have been closed or =
hindered because of this sort of cyber-crime. AW needs to enforce its =
GZ behavior policies, Content Guidelines, and other various charters and =
rules more strictly. In addition, AW employees need to take a more =
active role in improving the Peacekeeping of AlphaWorld, as several of =
the Peacekeepers with which I have dealt have not handled a situation in =
a professional manner. In my experience, some Peacekeepers have been =
downright rude when I have contacted them, and their superiors did =
nothing to correct the problem. Most importantly, the company needs to =
moderate its newsgroups. Many a user, myself included, has left the =
newsgroups because of a select few citizens who continue to post =
inappropriate content that serves only to demean fellow users, ruining =
the atmosphere for legitimate debate. In fact, while I had been =
aggravated by the arrogance of those citizens in the newsgroups for a =
long time, I finally decided to leave the groups after Eep, instead of =
debating in a calm manner, flamed my posts on the subject of this =
article. In short, troublemakers both in-world and out-of-world destroy =
the community feel which is so crucial to AW's success, and AW must take =
swift and decisive action against them.

What do I find wrong with Activeworlds' management? In short, very =
little. Activeworlds has done what any company tries to do - make =
money. While most Internet companies have floundered and become a =
"passing fad", Activeworlds Corp. has stayed around for over six years, =
during which a tremendous technological change has occurred. Through =
this change, AW has secured its place in the 1% of startup companies who =
survive past their first year, which in itself is quite a feat. While =
there are a few areas that leave room for improvement, I feel that AW =
has, in general, done a good job balancing appeasing its customers and =
securing corporate deals. Besides, AW currently has many =
community-friendly activities up its sleeve, such as new building =
worlds, an object maker for the AW browser, and more events, for which =
Goober King and the citizens who support his letter clamor ceaselessly. =
If everyone would work to make the community better instead of =
petitioning Activeworlds for what it is already attemping to do, then =
perhaps the Universe would be a better place.


------=_NextPart_000_002B_01C10FD9.27182C20
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4522.1800" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Can we post html then?</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"kmissile583k" &lt;<A=20
href=3D"mailto:Kmissile58 at hotmail.com">Kmissile58 at hotmail.com</A>&gt; =
wrote in=20
message <A=20
=
href=3D"news:3b56156f at server1.Activeworlds.com">news:3b56156f at server1.Act=
iveworlds.com</A>...</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I agree with all of Brant's =
article.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>
<HR>
</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><EM>"beardo" &lt;</EM></FONT><A=20
href=3D"mailto:beardo at home.se.nospam"><FONT face=3DArial=20
size=3D2><EM>beardo at home.se.nospam</EM></FONT></A><FONT face=3DArial=20
[View Quote] face=3DArial size=3D2><EM>...</EM></FONT></DIV><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2><EM>- I=20
found this article by Brant at awnews.com more exactly </EM></FONT><A=20
href=3D"http://awnews.com/article.php?s=3D169"><FONT face=3DArial=20
=
size=3D2><EM>http://awnews.com/article.php?s=3D169</EM></FONT></A><FONT =
face=3DArial=20
size=3D2><EM> , so go there to argue with him since he doesn't read =
this=20
newgroup=20
=
anymore.<BR><BR>/Beardo<BR></EM><BR><EM>---------------------------------=
----------------------------------------<BR>Goober=20
King presents many valid arguments in his July edition of "Stirring =
the=20
Virtual Melting Pot".&nbsp; While there are several improvements to be =
made to=20
the Activeworlds universe, his article presents some serious=20
flaws.<BR><BR>&nbsp; Goober presents a list of mistakes that AW has =
made in=20
the past.&nbsp; He points out that gaining corporate sponsors is one =
of these=20
"mistakes", while charging for free citizenships is also a=20
"mistake".&nbsp;&nbsp; Simply put, Activeworlds has to make money=20
somehow.&nbsp; If Goober wants AW to stop seeking corporate sponsors, =
then AW=20
has to charge for citizenships; if citizenships were to be free, AW =
would have=20
to rely on advertising and corporate sponsorship.&nbsp; At least one =
of these=20
steps has to be taken to ensure that the bills are paid.&nbsp; Yet, =
there are=20
those who believe that AW can continue to exist as a company without a =
source=20
of revenue.<BR><BR>&nbsp; There seems to be a stigma that AW has poor =
customer=20
service and does not try to help the community.&nbsp; In contrast, all =
of the=20
AW employees I have met in my experience have been very experienced =
and=20
helpful.&nbsp; Lucrezia Borgia has never stopped trying to help =
people;=20
Mountain Myst has been visible in the community coordinating events =
and=20
setting up activities like AWCamp; Facter and Flagg have provided =
valuable=20
technical support; and even HamFon has participated in many =
behind-the-scenes=20
activities such as programming the BingoBot.&nbsp; Yet, there are =
those who=20
believe that AW employees are "out to get them."<BR><BR>&nbsp; Some =
believe=20
that the AW universe is "dead and dying".&nbsp; In contrast, I =
remember a time=20
just last September when the number of users logged into the Universe =
rarely=20
exceeded 500.&nbsp; Today, at the same time of day, the number is =
regularly=20
between 600 and 700. Yet, there are those who believe that AW should =
by now=20
have millions of users registered.<BR><BR>&nbsp; If AW is not aiming =
to=20
increase its userbase, then what is the purpose of releasing its =
upcoming=20
version 3.2?&nbsp; Take the corporate firewall support that will be =
included,=20
for instance.&nbsp; Many AW citizens would like to use AW at work, and =

Activeworlds' management is giving them this new option.&nbsp; =
Firewall=20
support isn't just for Juno subscribers or for NetTaxi readers or for =
other=20
Universe owners, but for all citizens, as is OpenGL support.&nbsp; =
Contrary to=20
popular belief, AW is growing and is taking steps to ensure that its =
growth=20
continues, and its partnership with Juno is supporting this =
growth.&nbsp; I=20
remember a time when the JunoDome world had in excess of 100 people =
occupying=20
it during a Juno advertising campaign, and I know many citizens who =
started=20
out as Juno users.&nbsp; Furthermore, one of the biggest problems that =
AW (and=20
the frustrated bot programmer) has faced, the discrepancy between =
versions 2.2=20
and 3.1 of the AW browser, will be eliminated with the upcoming =
software=20
renderer.&nbsp; Yet, there are still thse who will complain that AW is =
not=20
taking steps to ensure its continued success.<BR><BR>&nbsp; Looking =
below,=20
you'll find that there is an article about a petition in AW that is =
attempting=20
to lower world prices.&nbsp; I would like to ask the creators of this =
petition=20
what lowering world prices would accomplish.&nbsp; Would cutting the =
cost of=20
worlds make the community closer?&nbsp; Would charging less increase =
AW's=20
revenue so that it can further its development?&nbsp; Would =
eliminating the=20
one-time signup fee bring more users to the universe?&nbsp; Absolutely =

not.&nbsp; Instead, lowering world prices would simply increase the =
number of=20
dead worlds and reduce the number of people who actively participate =
in the AW=20
community.&nbsp; And yes, there are also those who believe that =
lowering world=20
prices would solve all of the problems of the Universe. <BR><BR>&nbsp; =

However, despite all the positive things that AW has done for the =
community, I=20
find that there are many steps that AW can still take to increase its=20
userbase, and ultimately, its revenue.&nbsp; First, a stand needs to =
be made=20
against troublemakers and those who aim to destroy worlds and to hack =
other=20
users.&nbsp; Many worlds have been closed or hindered because of this =
sort of=20
cyber-crime.&nbsp; AW needs to enforce its GZ behavior policies, =
Content=20
Guidelines, and other various charters and rules more strictly.&nbsp; =
In=20
addition, AW employees need to take a more active role in improving =
the=20
Peacekeeping of AlphaWorld, as several of the Peacekeepers with which =
I have=20
dealt have not handled a situation in a professional manner.&nbsp; In =
my=20
experience, some Peacekeepers have been downright rude when I have =
contacted=20
them, and their superiors did nothing to correct the problem.&nbsp; =
Most=20
importantly, the company needs to moderate its newsgroups.&nbsp; Many =
a user,=20
myself included, has left the newsgroups because of a select few =
citizens who=20
continue to post inappropriate content that serves only to demean =
fellow=20
users, ruining the atmosphere for legitimate debate.&nbsp; In fact, =
while I=20
had been aggravated by the arrogance of those citizens in the =
newsgroups for a=20
long time, I finally decided to leave the groups after Eep, instead of =

debating in a calm manner, flamed my posts on the subject of this=20
article.&nbsp; In short, troublemakers both in-world and out-of-world =
destroy=20
the community feel which is so crucial to AW's success, and AW must =
take swift=20
and decisive action against them.<BR><BR>&nbsp; What do I find wrong =
with=20
Activeworlds' management?&nbsp; In short, very little.&nbsp; =
Activeworlds has=20
done what any company tries to do - make money.&nbsp; While most =
Internet=20
companies have floundered and become a "passing fad", Activeworlds =
Corp. has=20
stayed around for over six years, during which a tremendous =
technological=20
change has occurred.&nbsp; Through this change, AW has secured its =
place in=20
the 1% of startup companies who survive past their first year, which =
in itself=20
is quite a feat.&nbsp; While there are a few areas that leave room for =

improvement, I feel that AW has, in general, done a good job balancing =

appeasing its customers and securing corporate deals.&nbsp; Besides, =
AW=20
currently has many community-friendly activities up its sleeve, such =
as new=20
building worlds, an object maker for the AW browser, and more events, =
for=20
which Goober King and the citizens who support his letter clamor=20
ceaselessly.&nbsp; If everyone would work to make the community better =
instead=20
of petitioning Activeworlds for what it is already attemping to do, =
then=20
perhaps the Universe would be a better=20
place.<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></EM></FONT></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_002B_01C10FD9.27182C20--

m a r c u s

Jul 19, 2001, 12:56am
I didn't take the time to read all the allegations against you after the
first few ramblings, but if you are working to lower costs of the price of
worlds, I support your efforts and am willing to sign any petitition to help
achieve this.

[View Quote]

eep

Jul 19, 2001, 1:49am
No, you fuck; now quit acting lame.

[View Quote] > Can we post html then?

goober king

Jul 19, 2001, 2:12am
Well, I personally, am not doing any petition to lower world costs, but I'd like to
think that if my little letter-writing campaign is successful, it might make it
easier for those who want to see change like lower world prices. Better go back and
read my [long!] post. :)

[View Quote] --
Goober King
Communication is key!
rar1 at acsu.buffalo.edu

m a r c u s

Jul 19, 2001, 8:13am
nope, you clarified it enough. I gave you the position I was in with one
short concise post. You can too. This isn't the only thing I do online,
and I can't possibly read all the posts from NG, email, chat programs, etc..
I am a part of. It would be be more effective to users to try to limit the
posts to the core issues and leave out the flames/attacks/history lessons
etc... Again, I stress we don't all have this NG as our main seed in life
so please bring the core issues to the front if you want action and support
from your fellow AW'er.

[View Quote]

m a r c u s

Jul 19, 2001, 8:18am
"Looking below, you'll find that there is an article about a petition in AW
that is attempting to lower world prices."

It doesn't say who is running this petitition. I knew I read it Goober, not
saying you are, but you were under attack so I figured I would try to lend a
hand in support if it was. If whoever is running this petition reads this,
let me know.

[View Quote]

m a r c u s

Jul 19, 2001, 8:21am
I don't see you claiming to work for AW so why assume knowledge in this mr.3
letter perosn?

[View Quote]

eep

Jul 19, 2001, 10:53am
Yo, twit, fuck off, eh? Suck filter. Fucking evolve already, eh? Idiot...buh-BYE!

[View Quote] > I don't see you claiming to work for AW so why assume knowledge in this mr.3
> letter perosn?
>
[View Quote]

icey

Jul 19, 2001, 11:34am
Brant where did you go? Why don't you come back here?
icey

[View Quote] > - I found this article by Brant at awnews.com more exactly http://awnews.com/article.php?s=169 , so go there to argue with him since he doesn't read this newgroup anymore.

icey

Jul 19, 2001, 11:35am
Oh please stop it

[View Quote] > No, you fuck; now quit acting lame.
>
[View Quote]

icey

Jul 19, 2001, 11:37am
Stop it...stop it...stop it, it's an old fashion we do not swear anymore

[View Quote] > Yo, twit, fuck off, eh? Suck filter. Fucking evolve already, eh? Idiot...buh-BYE!
>
[View Quote]

facter facter@awsupport

Jul 19, 2001, 12:04pm
[View Quote] Eep, you are in extreme violation of this newsgroup charter, if you
continue, AGAIN, after repeated, multiple, hundreds and hundreds of times
being warned, to not swear or be derogatory towards others, then we may have
to look into a weeks suspension from these newsgroups of yourself, and
further suspensions thereafter. There will be no full ban, but I have
decided that those who cannot treat each other with respect and decency in
here will start receiving small suspensions to the effect that these
newsgroups are a PRIVILEDGE not a RIGHT, and it is *no ones* right to treat
others, no matter how much you disagree with them, as lowly as you have and
continue to do.

I think this is only fair, as you have just shown absolutly no courtesy to
anyone in the past few weeks, not myself, nor any other member of this
newsgroup, and your continual abuse and derogatory statements can only keep
being tolerated for so much longer.

One more from you like this, and I'll make you go stand in the corner for a
week - stop being childish and you wont be treated like one.

If anyone has a problem with these proposed part time suspensions, well in
all honesty, too bad, because thats how it is going to be if things like
this continue from him, or anyone. This is NOT a forum to attack or degrade
any other individual, and I think its about time some people stopped being
childish and realised that.

Facter.
AW Support.




>
[View Quote]

builderz

Jul 19, 2001, 1:22pm
..papillon started the petition to lower world prices, M a r c u s (their
name is mentioned in the article). You can find the entire article at
http://www.awnews.com/article.php?s=165.

Builderz
Stuff-X - Bot & World Hosting Services
http://www.stuffx.com/aw/
PGP Key ID: 0xAC0E7073 (for non-commercial use)

[View Quote]

eep

Jul 19, 2001, 5:21pm
<yawn> What about all the abuse from idiots like Marcus who post in HTML, stir up trouble just for the hell of it, etc, etc, etc? Oops, it's only me you truly hate--I see how it is. Way to go, hypocrite! You're also not doing your job of removing off-topic posts from this and the other newsgroups prior to general.discussion's creation. Oops, more hypocracy as usual. Keep it up, Fac; you're becoming a good little AWC lemming just as your dictators Ricky and JPeePee want. <pat head>

[View Quote] [View Quote]

facter facter@awsupport

Jul 19, 2001, 5:44pm
[View Quote] HTML is *not* against the newsgroup charter, it is a courtesy thing that you
guys can work out for yourselves.

Marcus has also been warned about his behaviour several times, but not in
regards to HTML posting, which, let me say again, is not against the charter
as it stands. It is also not my job to remove off topic posts from any of
the newsgroups, if you guys want me to do that, then I will - but every time
int he past anything has been removed you always cry "censorship".

You have been warned Eep, pure and simple, no one else is being warned
because your the only one who is being derogatory, mean, rude - as you
always are, well, time to start acting like a grown up Eep, and remember
that there are consequences for actions.

Everyone is reminded that this is not a forum for personal attacks, or
derogatory language or treatment of others, and action as such will be met
with suspensions from the priviledge of posting here in this newsgroup. I
think *temporary* suspensions will show certain people that their actions do
have consequences, and might go a long way to helping civility here in these
newsgroups.

Honestly people, should Eep, or ANYONE, really be allowed to sit there and
say the following and just get away with it ALL the time?

"Yo, twit, fuck off, eh? Suck filter. Fucking evolve already, eh?
Idiot...buh-BYE!"
".. you fuck; now quit acting lame."

No, I dont think so - it matters little, this is a warning to everyone, not
just Eep - temporary suspensions for continual abuse of others in this
newsgroup will be metted out if deemed necessary.

Do you people want me to start removing off-topic posts? And how am I to
deem off topic, and not get accused of censorship? I'd be happy to do so,
but I dont want to start doing that and ahve people jump down my throat when
I do.

Facter
AW Support.

>
[View Quote]

goober king

Jul 19, 2001, 6:03pm
Don't worry about off-topic posts, Fac. Eep's the only who ever cares that much about
them anyway. If someone posts something off-topic, then people can tell them where
they need to go, and that'll (hopefully) be the end of it.

And it's not as if the off-topic posts are taking up space, so you don't really
*need* to delete them. And as for determining what's "off-topic" it spells it out
right there in the Charter:

"Submissions unrelated to the AW Community shall be rejected. Commercial
advertisements unrelated to AW shall be rejected; all personal ads shall be rejected.
Submissions containing ethnic slurs, or submissions intended to hurt any given race,
religion, gender, or sexual orientation, shall be rejected. Personal attacks on
individual posters will also be rejected. Attacks on AWCOM, its employees,
contractors or partners will be rejected."

Of course, that makes it sound like the off-topic posts would never get into the
newsgroups in the first place. So if you really want to follow the Charter to the
letter, then you probably should remove off-topic posts, but personally, I'd rather
you not. In fact, I think the Charter's in serious need of a rewrite...

[View Quote] --
Goober King
They may be off-topic, but that doesn't make them any less valid...
rar1 at acsu.buffalo.edu

m a r c u s

Jul 19, 2001, 6:06pm
In support of Eep and making an argument against my actions and those
posting html, it WOULD BE wrong(if the rule was implemented)for me and
others who use html to post html in non-html designated areas. It takes
away from the worry you are censoring because either we post in the area or
areas that allow html or we don't. People like Eep who appear to not want
html can choose to subscribe to a newsgroup using html or not under their
own discretion.

Since we have 2 newsgroups I find not really defined, why not use community
for strictly non-html posts and have general.discussion allow html and
non-html posts.

[View Quote]

facter facter@awsupport

Jul 19, 2001, 6:54pm
>
> Of course, that makes it sound like the off-topic posts would never get
into the
> newsgroups in the first place. So if you really want to follow the Charter
to the
> letter, then you probably should remove off-topic posts, but personally,
I'd rather
> you not. In fact, I think the Charter's in serious need of a rewrite...

I probably agree with you that these newsgroups need to be looked at a
little better...maybe when I have time after doing these web pages I'll be
able to get to more community stuff, but I have my hand pretty full atm.

F.




>
[View Quote]

kah

Jul 19, 2001, 7:41pm
geez, what's the big deal? Eep ALLWAYS swears, there's no point in asking
him to stop, and you KNOW it... and I strongly suggest you add some kinda
HTML-ban clause to your NG charter (just DO it, don't tell the management,
they don't seem to care much about the NGs anyway...). Heck, do it for your
OWN sake, cuzz if everyone starts posting HTML, YOU'll be facing a space
problem after a while anyway. If you use some decent piece of
server-software, there should be some way of blocking HTML posts too...

KAH

[View Quote]

kah

Jul 19, 2001, 7:42pm
good idea... finally you're starting to use your brain :-))

KAH

[View Quote]

faber

Jul 19, 2001, 7:55pm
"facter" <"Facter at AWsupport"> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:3b5738a3$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> HTML is *not* against the newsgroup charter, it is a courtesy thing that you
> guys can work out for yourselves.

Thank you for pointing that out.

> Honestly people, should Eep, or ANYONE, really be allowed to sit there and
> say the following and just get away with it ALL the time?
>
> "Yo, twit, fuck off, eh? Suck filter. Fucking evolve already, eh?
> Idiot...buh-BYE!"
> ".. you fuck; now quit acting lame."
>
> No, I dont think so - it matters little, this is a warning to everyone, not
> just Eep - temporary suspensions for continual abuse of others in this
> newsgroup will be metted out if deemed necessary.

You have my support in this. Eep's language and behaviour cannot be excused by anything. Not by AW-knowledge or by "being nice
everywhere else" as people have put it frequently.

I have more than once asked Eep how he expects proper treatment by others if he acted this way, but he does see or he does not care.

> Do you people want me to start removing off-topic posts? And how am I to
> deem off topic, and not get accused of censorship? I'd be happy to do so,
> but I dont want to start doing that and ahve people jump down my throat when
> I do.

No, i don't, unless its something like spam.

Faber

1  2  3  |  
Awportals.com is a privately held community resource website dedicated to Active Worlds.
Copyright (c) Mark Randall 2006 - 2022. All Rights Reserved.
Awportals.com   ·   ProLibraries Live   ·   Twitter   ·   LinkedIn