[CU] Response to Citizens Union Proposal (Community)

[CU] Response to Citizens Union Proposal // Community

1  2  |  

goober king

Aug 7, 2001, 7:23pm
Here's the response I just received from Rick concerning the Citizens Union Proposal,
word for word. Feel free to post your responses here, since it's obvious Mr. Noll
*does* read these newsgroups, but apparently doesn't read emails that get sent to
him...

[View Quote]

facter facter@awsupport

Aug 7, 2001, 7:31pm
Personally I think AWDEbate might be a good place to start, as I also agreed
that the CU you have proposed is fundamentally flawed in that it is not
representative of the community as a whole, but, unfortunatly, only of those
within this newsgroup.

As well as Rick, I'd also be happy to be a part of organised debates and
discussions in AWDebate.

Facter
AW Support.

[View Quote]

wing

Aug 7, 2001, 7:39pm
Sure did take the M60 to that idea. Interesting how he took the ideas of a few idiot children to be the overriding factor (Boycotts,
etc.) when you stated that the Union reps would weed through that muck for them, and present in an organized fashion the desires of
the community. However, he himself states that
[View Quote]

agent1

Aug 7, 2001, 7:40pm
I'm sure he's referring to the conversation I had with him. One way to implement custom avatars is to add a field to every citizen record that allows people to specify a URL to grab the RWX file from. This would allow avatars that people could change whenever they wanted to. AW already has all of the code necessary to download, cache, and display avatars, so getting them from a different location shouldn't be *that* hard. The only problem that might occur would be with the additions to the citizen database and uniserver->browser protocol. Without looking at AW's code, I can't know how hard changes to those systems are.

-Agent1


[View Quote]

j b e l l

Aug 7, 2001, 7:54pm
*shrugs*

You have to realize his standpoint, Goober, he IS willing to work with the community, but is NOT willing to change his current goals
and ideals for the company. He also IS NOT willing to work with people who he feels can be a threat to the community and program.
Not neccesarily that *YOU* are a threat, but this type of "union" runs a high risk of coruption and private-party rule. Although I
would have liked to see the Citizen Union Succeed with AW, I understand why it will not at this point. My suggestion to you is to
continue with your plans, and when the 7 of you meet, meet with AW staff if they are willing, if not then meet with eachother and
share ideas, send the chat log out to AWC and they can do with it what they will. After time, if all goes well, I am certain AWC
will be more then happy to re-consider they're position on this subject.

[View Quote]

wing

Aug 7, 2001, 8:08pm
OOPS! Damn ctrl-enter.
My reply continued inline below.

[View Quote] >I believe my last letter showed the difference between the
> COMMUNITY and the COMPANY. While neither can exist as a whole without the
> other, some decisions are made solely by the COMPANY.

In effect, the COMMUNITY is already standing seperate from the COMPANY, with only a few pillars still supporting the structure.
Techtalk, where we mindlessly present ideas to Roland, who has little power to implement them, the monotony only broken by new
releases. Tech support, and precious little actual involvement in the community are all we have to stand on besides Roland.

In response to Facter, the union would not be a reflection of only these groups, but anyone who wishes to provide somthing to be
reflected. If these newsgroups are the only entities that provide material, then it is a truly sad shape that the community is in.
Already, we are divided. Tourists, citizens, those who care, those who don't, and those who don't know. Everyone is taking sides. If
the children are allowed to run rampant in their revolution, a fairly large boycott or the like is quite possible, if not inevitable
in the future. By that time, the community's mainstay events, the Cy Awards, Festival and the like, will have been torn to pieces,
the cys truly becoming a popularity contest, and the Festival, rather than being a celebration of another year of a strong
community, will become just a time for preteen warmongers to plan their next year of "resistance" against AWC. Look at the universe
logs. Out of the total number of named citizens, how many log in at least once a week? With each week, you'll notice it decline.
People are leaving, and at an alarming rate. In June two years ago, I had fifty people on my contacts list. How many of them still
use the program? Three...


[View Quote]

wing

Aug 7, 2001, 9:14pm
*shrug* The simplicity that it was to add the URL to each citizen's webpage would be the same simplicity that it would be to add the
URL to a custom av. Instead of passing it to the internal browser, pass it to be rendered.
[View Quote]

sw chris

Aug 7, 2001, 10:02pm
I'm on Rick's side about custom avs. Never say something is easy unless
you've done it yourself. :) For all we know, the code could be very touchy
to work with, or royally buried under tons and tons of other code.

SW Chris

[View Quote]

john viper

Aug 7, 2001, 10:03pm
I got my damn hopes up again. Gotta stop doing that!!!

More response intertwined:

> Here's the response I just received from Rick concerning the Citizens
> Union Proposal, word for word. Feel free to post your responses here,
> since it's obvious Mr. Noll *does* read these newsgroups, but
> apparently doesn't read emails that get sent to him...

He must not read the newsgroups very well -- if he did he would understand
this was a public meeting, basically just a huge whiteboard that everyone
could splash their ideas on, and that the bad ones would be weeded out by
the representatives, and not just sent on to AW in the form of a demand.

Rick, if you perchance are reading this, I don't think that you understood
exactly what the purpose of CU would be. It would not be a way to undermine
your decision-making power in AW (Any entreprenuer could tell you that it is
a terrible idea for the customers to ABSOLUTELY CONTROL the development of a
product). The difference between Active Worlds and, say, MS Word is that
Active Worlds is not just a tool or a utility, it is a community area that
would simply not exist if the users did not visit it every say. Once you
buy Word, you never have to buy it again (except new versions, but thats
another discussion), and you never even have to use it -- Microsoft already
has their money. Active Worlds, on the other hand, once purchased, has to
be used. Half the fun is no longer there if there are no other people to
talk to. Anyone can build 3-D works of art... just run out and get some
kind of design software or other. $500 for something halfway decent. Okay,
let me try to veer back on topic here. Anyways, the CU would be a way to
COMMUNICATE the NEEDS of the COMMUNITY TO and WITH the COMPANY, as well as a
way to COMMUNICATE the NEEDS of the COMPANY TO and WITH the COMMUNITY. Not
only would the community be IN NO WAY taking control of the company, but
also, you could help us UNDERSTAND some of the decisions that the company is
making, rather than stupid rumors being spread as hatred engulfs everyone.
(I personally would not like the idea of being hated by people -- and if you
can explain your actions to maybe make them less angry, why not?) In the
mix, we would also be able to communicate our NEEDS with the company, and
get the company's feedback on our needs.

ALSO, you mentioned some of the negative results as recorded in the chat log
of the CU meeting. You will also notice this line very near the top:
"Goober King: This thing is essentially a brainstorming session, so if you
guys have any ideas, don't be afraid to speak up" The PRIMARY RULE of a
brainstorming session is that NO IDEA IS A BAD IDEA. Basically, you set up
this big huge white board, and give everyone a dry-erase pen. Everyone
writes up their ideas, from feasible ones such as telegram muting, to less
feasable ones such as killing all Pokemon. These are both good ideas, but
one is more possible than the other. MANY IDEAS COME OUT OF A BRAINSTORMING
SESSION. In the actual monthly Citizen Union Board Meetings, which contains
members of the COMMUNITY as well as members of the COMPANY (maximum of 10 or
so people total, DEFINITELY not public), you work TOGETHER to sift through
EVERY idea, deliberating over all of them, keeping, sorting, and
prioritizing the more feasible ones (giving GOOD REASONS for each), and
tossing out (with GOOD REASONS) the the less beasible ones. The chat log
that you saw was the PUBLIC meeting, in which ANYONE can put forward ANY
ideas. These ideas are then taken out of the chat log, put into a nice list
format, and then organized and edited during the monthly board meetings.

Does THIS sound like a plot to ruin Active Worlds? Does this sound like we
are trying to damage the company? A prime interest of mine is business, and
I see no flaw in any logic herein. You lose no power, but what you do lose
is people who hate your guts for stupid reasons, as well as confused
citizens. We gain no power over how the company runs, but what we do gain
is security in our ideas being listened to, as well as happiness, and
believe me, when you have happy customers, business WILL BE GOOD.

>
[View Quote]

--
_____________________________________________
Jeff Tickle (John Viper, #296714)
jviper at jtsoft.net
http://www.jtsoft.net

sw chris

Aug 7, 2001, 10:20pm
Just a forewarning... long post down here. :)

Just a quick question... did you tell them representatives would be elected?
Also... AWDebate stole the fire. :) Like the battle between BetaMax and
VHS, similar standard, but only one idea won out. I think what they said
one of their deciding factors not to support the citizens union is because
the suggestions would be dug through and only the ones to meet the
representatives' criteria would be presented. The inherent flaw in this is
that the reps might have their own agendas. But then again that's what the
elections are for. :)

What I found odd about this is that AWDebate decided to have an open forum
where everyone could talk and that the Citizen's Union, sensing Rick and
company would not want to weed through all the useless and agenda-driven
suggestions, decided to weed through the suggestions for them to make for a
more presentable format.

Goober King, keep it up with the Citizen's Union. Restructure it a bit
according to what Mr. Noll has layed out in his letters to you though. May
I suggest that you don't call it a union? Because it shouldn't be. Unions
can be driven by who's on top. I've heard of lots of stories where many
union members didn't want to strike, yet its brass decided they should.
Perhaps that's what was communicated to Mr. Noll through the name. However,
CU has far more potential than just communicating with AWC. It could also
communicate user's wants to The Cy Awards, AW Festival, AW Reunion
Committee, ABN, etc., as well as to AWC. I say wants because that's what we
want.

Rick and company, I'm glad you're making more visible efforts for community
development and whatnot. Please keep it up.

SW Chris

sw chris

Aug 7, 2001, 10:35pm
You have effectively just described AWDebate world. :\

SW Chris

[View Quote]

agent1

Aug 8, 2001, 12:08am
From talking to Roland, it seems it would be easy to implement the way I suggested, but it would cause lots of problems. Roland described what they were to me and I agreed that the way I suggested wasn't the best way to go about it.

Rick: Can't.
Roland: Can't, because ...

-Agent1

[View Quote]

wing

Aug 8, 2001, 12:34am
Mind relaying to US what those problems were?
[View Quote]

facter

Aug 8, 2001, 1:01am
> I'm sure he's referring to the conversation I had with him. One way to
implement custom avatars is to add a field to every citizen record that
allows people to specify a URL to grab the RWX file from. This would allow
avatars that people could change whenever they wanted to. AW already has all
of the code necessary to download, cache, and display avatars, so getting
them from a different location shouldn't be *that* hard. The only problem
that might occur would be with the additions to the citizen database and
uniserver->browser protocol. Without looking at AW's code, I can't know how
hard changes to those systems are.

See, those things are only *one* small part of the implementation of custom
av's, which, mind you, I am a great supporter at the company.

You forget so many other things, like policing of the avatars, poly counts
and how to make it so someone cant bring in an incorrect avatar, or an
avatar that has a flaw in it and causes everyone to crash on a badly
rendered model..etc etc etc - things like routines to put in the browser to
reject avatars, because surely you dont think we at the company should go
through an approve manually every avatar that gets submitted?...

Thats only one thing that needs to be put into place with custom avatars,
there are so many, many more...just letting people whack them in, sure, it
could probably be done without too much hassle I guess (im not a c
programmer, I dojnt know), but you also have to think of all the peripheral
things that go along with it. Taking all those things into account, you
start to get a very, very big undetraking....

F.

F.

>
> -Agent1
>
>
[View Quote]

agent1

Aug 8, 2001, 11:34am
Encrypted Transmission from Roland, sent Tue Aug 7, 2001 4:50 PM:
No adding such a field isn't difficult,the problem is that is a woefully inadequate implementation of custom avatars...it is much more complicated than that...we've talked about the issues many times at tech talk.

Encrypted Transmission from Roland, sent Tue Aug 7, 2001 4:55 PM:
Examples of some of the issues are...if it uses textures, where do they come from? If it uses sequences, where do they come from? How do you specifiy what sequences it uses? How and where does it get cached?

Encrypted Transmission from Roland, sent Tue Aug 7, 2001 4:55 PM:
How do you prevent other people from stealing it? How do you prevent people from using avatars that are too large...both in terms of file size, physical size, and polygon/vertex limits, textures, etc? How do you determine what those limits should be?




-Agent1

[View Quote]

moria

Aug 8, 2001, 3:20pm
and once again this is not followed through... sure the abililty to add a
url is easy... but what about the code to not allow custom avs in worlds
under worldowners control where they dont want custom avs.. what about
guarding against 100ft high genitals wandering around as a custom av, what
about all the intricacies of rendering if there 40 people around all trying
to download each others avs at the same time.. what about the protection
features for ratings on world, what about someone that decides its fun to
drop into a world and use a 500k polygon avatar to disrupt that world.

Its this type of stupid half assed "its easy to do" comment, which
completely destroys any credebility of putting forward ideas NOT completely
researched. THINK before you say something is easy from all sides, not just
your own myopic viewpoint.

This is a prime example of exactly why Goobers idea, excellent though it is
in concept will NEVER work.

Moria



[View Quote]

icey

Aug 8, 2001, 3:30pm
............but they do not like HTML to be posted in the NewsGroup
icey

[View Quote]

agent1

Aug 8, 2001, 3:51pm
The method I suggested *is* something that would be easy to do, the only reason it's not is for the reasons mentioned already. So it's not a technical limitation, really. Enzo told me that he was open to suggestions and so I chose custom avatars as a half-joking example.

-Agent1

[View Quote]

goober king

Aug 8, 2001, 3:58pm
It's obvious that quite a few people still don't seem to "get" the purpose of this
Union, so allow me to explain:

The Union is *not* for pushing the community's ideas through the AWC management and
getting them implemented. The Union is *not* about dictating to AWC what should and
should not be done. The Union is *not* solely for the people here in the newsgroups.
The Union is *not* out to destroy AWC and is *not* in any way, shape, or form
planning to "threaten AWC if our demands are not met."

What the Union *is* for is presenting the communities ideas, no matter how
far-fetched, to the AWC management for the *sole* purpose of getting their opinions
on such ideas. If the AWC management were to say at one of the private meetings,
"Yea, we could do that. It shouldn't be a problem." then we would ask them to
implement the idea. If, however, they were to say "Sure, it's a good idea, but we
just can't do that." then they would be expected to explain why it can't be done, and
that's it. There would be no attempts to argue the point or try and convince them
otherwise. All the Union is looking for is confirmation that these things can be
done, or explanations as to why things can't be done, nothing more.

All of this was *clearly* stated in the Proposal I posted here previously (see [CU]
Citizens Union Proposal) and sent to various AWC employees, yet as far as I can tell,
the only people who actually *read* the thing were John Viper and Wing. Everyone else
seemed to think the meeting log was some sort of official, binding discussion that
was to be the entire basis for the Union, when that was entirely *not* the case.

To all of those who think there's no way in hell this idea could work, I suggest you
go back and actually *read* the Proposal and take it for what it is. *That* is what
the Union will be based on, not some impromptu bullshit session. What kind of
organizer do you people take me for, any way? :P

--
Goober King
Now where'd he put that Reading Comprehension book...?
rar1 at acsu.buffalo.edu

wing

Aug 8, 2001, 4:31pm
Mmmmmmm. Textures should be searched for on the world's OP, then the SAME DIRECTORY AS THE AVATAR ZIP, then in the relative
directory to the avatar zip ../textures/texture.jpg

Same with seqs, AW path, then same dir, then ../seqs

Preventing theft... Don't make the avatar URL publicly available, except if someone is watching cache. Filesize should be a locally
set limit.

I honestly can't think of any way to control physical size except for *eject*, and custom avs should be a RIGHT so people will use
them sensibly anyway, at least until a feasable universal system can be devised. Perhaps having the browser generate a registry on
the fly and not rendering the av if it exceeds dimensions set by the world owner, and poly/vert counting on the fly as well to
operate based on user defined limits, though this is kinda far off, or is it?
[View Quote]

wing

Aug 8, 2001, 4:31pm
RAWER!

I thought Eep was negative. We need to toss up ideas, find out the problems with them and fine-tune implementation ideas. Read my
other post for some altered custom avs implementation
[View Quote]

agent1

Aug 8, 2001, 5:01pm
Another way to help prevent theft is to put all of the files that need to be cached into one large file. The whole thing could be encrypted and have a header with offsets and lengths of the "files" in the package.

-Agent1

[View Quote]

eep

Aug 8, 2001, 5:47pm
Simple zip encryption would suffice. However, it's where the zip password is transferred where the security issue is...perhaps in the citizens settings in a separate "avatar/object password" field similar to the privilege password field...

[View Quote] > Another way to help prevent theft is to put all of the files that need to be cached into one large file. The whole thing could be encrypted and have a header with offsets and lengths of the "files" in the package.
>
[View Quote]

lara

Aug 8, 2001, 7:49pm
Hi moria,

I'm getting a bit lost. I understand your response about custom avatars not being the greatest idea at this time. I didn't, however, quite understand how this automatically follows:

> This is a prime example of exactly why Goobers idea, excellent though it is
> in concept will NEVER work.
>
> Moria

As I understand Goober's idea (regarding a Citizens Union - nothing to do with anyone else's specific ideas about custom avatars), the Citizens Union would be open to everyone. The C. U. would announce a meeting that anyone could attend, perhaps once a month. AWC people could be there, of course - or not be there. It doesn't really matter whether AWC attended the big open meetings or not. No one expects AWC to sit in on the open Citizens Union meetings or answer questions there at all.

It's *after* the open meeting, that 5 representatives of the C U (still no involvement yet for AWC) would sit down and thoroughly look at what was brought up at the wide open meeting. Discarding (or at least setting waaaay aside) any patently silly ideas and ideas they already knew absolutely could *not* be implemented. Sifting through the big meeting chat log to find suggestions that at least appeared *possible, maybe*, in order to come up with a couple of the most likely things (not necessarily the most requested things) to present to AWC.

I don't want to speak for Goober King, but again, as I understand it, he's not talking about trying to push a whole wish list forward at once. It seems to me he plans to have just a few reasonable, knowledgeable citizens (the 5 C.U. representatives, whomever they might be) meet privately in-world with anyone AWC chooses, to have a civilized, quiet, rational discussion something like this:

"Here are a couple of things quite a few people are asking for...any chance you guys could work this into the program? If so, roughly when? If not, we'd like to be able to tell people why this particular thing can't be done, or perhaps could be done someday, but not in the foreseeable future."

Very much like what you have said right here, Moria, about *why* custom avatars is not a feature to be expected. A reason. Expressed by AWC itself to the 5 C. U. representatives in a private meeting. Not at a big open meeting.

If there is a misunderstanding that Goober King's idea is to set up a group to fight with AWC - to demand "you add this feature because the loudest shouters want it", I'd agree that would never work. I don't think that's what Goober King is proposing at all. I'd think AWC would welcome having *formal* and *reasoned* (not argumentative) input from 5 C. U. representatives - representing not their own personal agendas, but what the 5 C. U. reps had distilled from the wide open meetings of the Citizens Union and from responses to the C. U. website each month.

As for "putting foward ideas not completely researched", I think just hearing a researched reason from AWC's point of view as to why a specific request (presented by the 5 C. U. reps) is a "no go" or a "not right now", would go a long way toward helping regular users understand why something many might want was not going to happen. Sure, you'll still have people arguing ad infinitum, but it won't be the 5 C. U. reps arguing with AWC over things, or the C. U. website bashing AWC. The C. U. reps would simply present a request or two at a time in private, hear AWC's reponse, perhaps discuss the pros and cons a bit with them, accept AWC's decision, publish AWC's reason on the C. U. website and move on to the next item the next month. I see it as a way of letting people actually see AWC's reason for doing or not doing something instead of having people get third or fourth-hand info from "someone who heard that someone on the newsgroup said that someone at AWC said..." this or that.

Of course AWC owns the software and has no obligation whatsoever to give any reason to any customers about anything AWC chooses to do or not do. I think, though, that AWC does understand the value of the "community" aspect of this program. The majority of users may not think of it as a community. The majority probably go about their business of enjoying whatever they enjoy out of it quietly - with never a word or a request. On the other hand you'll always have some who heckle, badger and bash, no matter what. It's the community minded, regular users that I think the Citizens Union is really aimed toward - an effort to be a bridge between what many people would like to see happen and what AWC can or can't do. A voice (via the C. U. website) for people to see actual *reasons* why AWC will or won't implement something, rather than feeling a request has simply dropped between the cracks or received no further attention than a "thanks for your input, your opinion is valued, we'll
consider it." Seeing a request discussed and dealt with (albeit buffered from the madding crowd ;) just between the 5 C. U. reps and "whomever" from AWC.

Possibly the C U website eventually might come to be regarded almost as a features FAQ sheet. :-) Once AWC had gone on record with reasons given to the 5 C U reps in private meetings, people who continued to ask for features that had already been covered by the AWC-CU Reps could be referred to the C U page to see WHY a particular feature wasn't on the drawing board - might be "someday" - or might never be.

Possibly workable?

Best regards,
Lara


[View Quote]

kellee

Aug 8, 2001, 8:07pm
Gawd Lara, you know how to express it....all thats left to say is....

Sounds good to me :o)

[View Quote]

wing

Aug 8, 2001, 9:46pm
[View Quote] They won't understand that either. A large stick with "Reading Comprehension" scribbled on it in crayon would be more effective. Sad
that even with so many native English speakers they still can't understand a simple concept between them. Perhaps you used too many
abbreviations and words longer than four letters.

Some of them just don't understand that this isn't just about features. It's about giving the community somthing to grab onto. Right
now we're climbing the buttered cliffs of life without any handholds. As Rick himself said, the company and community cannot survive
independently. I'd be just fine if NONE of the community's features were implemented just as long as it was clear that it didn't go
in one ear and out the other or never even reaches the first ear.

If you can't figure out what I'm saying, good for you, take some reading classes

casay

Aug 8, 2001, 9:51pm
Said to my self that I wasn't going to post in this NG again since it's
reached new lows but I feel the need to respond to the custom avatar issue
that was brought up by Rick.

He stated - . One such idea is "custom avatars", they refer to this as
"simple". I assume this must come from a very high level programmer for it
to be "easy". Does this show the level of misconception and naivete we are
supposed to expect?

Dear Rick,
On several occasions, over several years I have discussed the
capabilities/possibility of custom avatars with Ron, Roland and Hamfon. None
ever said it would be 'easy'. I believe all have told me that it is
possible. I've always felt that the best solution to adding custom avatars
would be to add a path within the browser to some folder on AW's server that
would contain the avatars and seqs. I've also suggested several times that
AW charge a small extra fee for people to be able to have their avatars/seqs
on that server to help pay for the server space and the person to maintain
it. Of course security would have to be the highest.

A world option would need to be added so that world owners could set whether
they allow custom avatars to be used or not. I personally feel that AW
should made privacy, removal of the green checkmark, and custom avatars one
of their top priorities. Years ago Blaxxun added the capability to have
custom avatars as their browser would allow downloads of them from various
sites. Now Atmosphere ( although I don't think it comes close to comparing
to AW, had that ability too. I do not understand why AW has not added the
capability for custom avatars. People within a community need something
tangible to identify with. That's what keeps them coming back. Custom
avatars would help in that area a lot.

I don't feel that I'm under any 'misconception' as to the overall issue
here. I'm also far from naiveté when it comes to AW. I do honestly feel
that the reason we still have the green checkmark and no custom avatars is
because the company hasn't made them a priority issue. Please correct me if
I'm wrong but I've been asking about these same issues for years and I've
been told it IS possible.

Thanks for you time and looking forward to a reply,
Sincerely,
Casay

casay

Aug 8, 2001, 10:14pm
[View Quote] Yes, I've brought it up in Tech talk several times as has others. I'm sure
there's logs of it.

> Encrypted Transmission from Roland, sent Tue Aug 7, 2001 4:55 PM:
> Examples of some of the issues are...if it uses textures, where do they
come from? If it uses sequences, where do they come from? How do you
specifiy what sequences it uses? How and where does it get cached?

Have the avatars, seqs, and textures all on 1 server. Charge small fee for
people to have their custom avatars placed there. Make a new cache file in
the browser. Yes, possibly a new avatars.dat file would have to be generated
for each avatar but put a size limit on the dat file. 1 avatar could have
say 10 actions period. Also have total sum limit of seq files themselves.

> Encrypted Transmission from Roland, sent Tue Aug 7, 2001 4:55 PM:
> How do you prevent other people from stealing it? How do you prevent
people from using avatars that are too large...both in terms of file size,
physical size, and polygon/vertex limits, textures, etc? How do you
determine what those limits should be?
>

Have them on the same sever with as much security as is possible. We can't
prevent people from stealing objects now as it is. Limit the avatar file
size, limit the seq file sizes, limit total amount of texture file sizes.
Have a way for people to test compatibility within the browser to prevent
crashing. Some kind of testing program like rwxmod ( or the long awaited
program Shamus is/has created.) Physical size limits - allow only humannoid
and animal style avatars scaled to size to start with. Possibly have scale
as large as a car. Blaxxun had scale size limits I believe but I may be
wrong. Determining limits can't be that hard and seems a bad excuse for not
implementing it. Jeese, we worked with a 64 vert limit for years. If you
want my .02 I think a 1200 -1500 vert limit for avatars would be very
reasonable. I think MyTwoKeys avatar, Summer, was right around 2000 verts
and that was one of the most detailed avatars of it's day and still is
today. 5 textures on an avatar , high rez, 256x256 at ~192Kbytes each =
960Kbytes ( so round it off to 1000)

So, there ya go Roland, the same answers we've been giving you for years and
the same solutions you've had that I know of. I know you've been thinking
about it for a long time and wouldn't be suprized if you basically have it
all figured out by now. I do realize that you're going to have to do some
changes within the browser programming. Yes, it will take time.

Bottom line here..... Time is what you need I think. Time from Rick and JP
to allow you to take the time to figure this out and implement it in the
code.

Casay
<snipped>

de de

Aug 9, 2001, 9:32am
i dont know if this has been asked before or if it is posible to do
i am a newby on this
would it be posible to implement in the option feature to not have telegrams
from any people then the one on my contact list






"wing" <bathgate at prodigy.net> schreef in bericht
news:3b71cf49 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
[View Quote]

e n z o

Aug 10, 2001, 2:45pm
Hi Casay,

Thanks for writing. I am sorry if my personal letter to Bob implied anything
negative towards you. I also did not realize that he was posting it on the
newsgroup. My comment was not meant to start a debate of "custom avatars".

I wrote, "I assume this must come from a very high level programmer for it
to be "easy"."

Please let me explain:

My comment was taken directly from a quote I recieved from a user who
represents himself/herself as a CU member. My comment did not say that
custom avatars was "impossible". My comment was that this CU member was
refering to the project as "easy" and "simple". It was obviously coming from
a source that was either an extremely talented programmer or was misinformed
as to the complexity of writing 3D multiuser software. The fact that
something can be done does not mean it will be done or be done immediately.

Custom avatars can be done. The solution you describe to handle custom avs
is well thought out and very close to one which we have considered. But,
there are several other ways which may be end up more difficult to do, but
far more satisfactory for long term goals and usability. Sometimes the
seemingly easiest solution that just gets plugged in ends up haunting you
years later. You need to make sure your solutions are going to work for
years and foresee problems which may crop up later as to backwards
compatibility. This is why software devwelopers are called "architects".
Both Blaxxun and Atmosphere had the liberty to begin developement after AW.
This means they have the advantage of observing a working system. They can
develop on a different track and add features they thing they need without
having a preexisting structure. Their developers have not put in "building"
which I am sure some users would feel "easy" since they have seen it in AW.

Until AW has only one version (3.2) which includes software rasterizers,
making 2.2 unnecessary, it does not make sense to add signifigant features
like "custom avs" to 3.1. If we did, those changes would need to plug back
into 2.2, making developement time at least double. And might it be prudent
to determine whether polygonly jointed avatars running seq files was the
standard we wanted to follow. Perhaps skin and bone avatars might be a
better standard since it has become accepted by most every 3D game? Perhaps
we need to allow people to bring in avs from their game into AW? Do we keep
support of old formats while accepting the new? Do we allow any texture or
geometry or will that be abused to that offend the majority? These are
issues that the architect decides while taking into consideration the goals
of the end user be she corporate or consumer.

I assure you that I personally have custom avs very high on my wishlist and
look forward to the day we have them. I must also say that my personal
wishlist does not drive the direction of AWC. My personal wish is sometimes
based on what I want as an AW user and does not reflect the realities of
doing business. There have been many features added which are more important
for the stability and compatiblity of future versions of AW as a platform.
These are where we have put the majority of our focus of late. While I know
this is disappointing to some, I assure you we are working very hard not
only to keep AW fun for our users today but also developing it for the
future.

It seems that everytime we begin a new version there are features which
people feel are necessary and often "easy". Even while they are being added,
other features are suggested or even deemed as "more necesary". The phrase
"to many cooks" comes to mind. Activeworlds by its nature is an iterative
process. Everyone who works on it or uses it becomes part of the system
which makes it better. While many might feel that "custom avatars" are the
top of the list there are just as many who would like "multi-universe
capability", "mirrors", "guns", "voice chat", "flash support","privacy",
"block swear words" or even "more animals". While all of these may be
important, not all can be done at once. AW is growing and getting better,
pleae be patient with us. We do listen and many times take the suggestions
which often are relatively naive, such as, "why not just add a checkbox,
that can't be to hard?" and take the time needed to make it work in the real
world.

Please realize that everytime we add new features they are added into a
version which needs extensive testing both inhouse and beta. These upgrades
take time, especially when they involve the complex issues of late. Even if
a solution is "easy" adding it to a spec which is nearing completion is not
feasible. Doing so would extend the inhouse testing even further and make
the beta test more difficult. We would be adding complexity beyond that
which exists and therefore make everyone wait even longer. This would not be
wise either for business or community goals. We are very near to a beta
release of 3.2 and I am sure there will be features that make everyone
happy. As to future versions, custom avatars are on the list, whether we are
able to include them in 3.3 is just not decided as of yet.


Thank you for writing,


Rick Noll

CEO
Activeworlds Corp.
(978) 499 0222


[View Quote]

1  2  |  
Awportals.com is a privately held community resource website dedicated to Active Worlds.
Copyright (c) Mark Randall 2006 - 2024. All Rights Reserved.
Awportals.com   ·   ProLibraries Live   ·   Twitter   ·   LinkedIn