1  2  |   Order by index

Mar 1, 2001, 8:37pm

I was wandering around in IRC and wondered if there is a channel for
ActiveWorld users to chit-chat, shoot the bull, about life in AW..

Just wondering????


James Wyatt

jwyatt at bak.rr.com

Mar 1, 2001, 10:32pm

[View Quote] AW users are chit-chatting, shooting the bull in AW :) Why on earth you need another chat for it?
Andras

Mar 1, 2001, 11:08pm

i was just about to ask the same question.. why have a chat room designed
for users of a different chat client.. hmm... *scratches head* what on earth
are you to do on irc anyhow?

--

J B E L L
http://platinum.awjbell.com
G O I N G P L A T I N U M


[View Quote]

Mar 1, 2001, 11:42pm

IRC is for tech junkies and warez :)
[View Quote]

Mar 2, 2001, 12:39am

Hmmm I'm not sure, but I *think* he's talking about a universal chat place.
For example if you have 500 people on AW now, 500 people would be in that
chat program...I guess that's what he means, not sure...

--
SW Comit
swcomit at swcity.net
Mayor of SW City
http://www.swcity.net
President of Community Linkage Commission
http://comlinkage.tripod.com

Mar 2, 2001, 5:30am

let me ask again... what on earth are you to do in irc anyhow? lol.. i used
to use it all the time.. i even scripted a very large, and complex bot, full
of all sorts of dialogs and whatnot.. of course i lost the disks i saved it
on.. but still.. it's pointless.. but i guess you could say the same thing
about aw, however aw has pretty pictures hehe..

--

J B E L L
http://platinum.awjbell.com
G O I N G P L A T I N U M


[View Quote]

Mar 2, 2001, 9:30am

[View Quote] There is. It's even in AW, and it's called AWGate. Or AW GZ.

rolu

Mar 2, 2001, 11:24am

heheh i resent that tech junkie coment :)
Seriously though irc is popular cause its easy to get a chanel takes bout 5
mins
and is free to do so.
I can see one reason some one would want a aw irc chanel say your working on
a object or set of object and your resorces are spred a bit thin but your
working on the kit with some one else you could colaberate on the project in
a irc room with a irc client.
But realy youd want a priv room for that any how so a aw chanel would still
be basicly useless.
[View Quote]

Mar 2, 2001, 11:44am

No, but this would make an interesting post in the wishlist newsgroup;
proposing to add IRC support into the Active Worlds Browser.

Builderz
Stuff-X - Bot & World Hosting Services
http://www.stuffx.com/aw/

[View Quote]

Mar 2, 2001, 5:29pm

IRC support for aw? *scratches head* doesn't aw sort of.. well... I dont
know.. sort of have a built in thing to chat with. Maybe all this time I've
just been imagining things. Yeah.. irc support for the aw browser, and
maybe aol chat room windows when you're in the build menu, and maybe little
chat windows for various other totaly useless non-aw related chat and
communication programs throughout the browser. Newsgroups are usefull
right? Well how about we put a newsgroup window in... hmmm... how about the
contacts list tab? Any other brilliant ideas for exsessively redundant
features in aw?

If you want irc, use an irc program. Someone invented it for a reason. If
you want to chat about aw and "shoot the cow" or whatever strange expression
you used, you'd find many people with a similar interest in aw... actualy
in aw. Yeah, it may surprise you that there are many people interested in
chatting about this chat program within the chat program it's self. Just
type something and press enter, you just might find someone in aw that
knows about aw. Crazy huh?

sorry... I don't post on the newsgroups often but I found this subject
delightfully stupid :)

Mar 2, 2001, 6:17pm

Please see my comments below:

[View Quote] Moff Piett, I don't know what triggered your harshness from my post, but
please calm down. I do not wish to engage in a flame war with you. I
like Active World's built-in chat feature. To my knowledge, it even
encrypts messages you send to other users before it sends them. The only
things I dislike about it are: 1) the "period changes to a URL bug" and
2) you cannot use different fonts or font sizes.

> Yeah.. irc support for the aw browser, and
> maybe aol chat room windows when you're in the build menu, and maybelittle
> chat windows for various other totaly useless non-aw related chat and
> communication programs throughout the browser. Newsgroups are usefull
> right? Well how about we put a newsgroup window in... hmmm... how aboutthe
> contacts list tab? Any other brilliant ideas for exsessively redundant
> features in aw?

As for your sarcasm about adding America Online chatroom functionality
and a newsreader into AW, there was no need for you to say that. I don't
know what I said in my post that would of offended you so badly. I agree
that it would be a complete waste of time to add these things into AW.
You couldn't even add AOL chatroom support anyway since its a
proprietary standard and AOL is a b*tch when it comes to releasing any
of their chat/instant message coding.

> If you want irc, use an irc program. Someone invented it for a reason.

I haven't used IRC in months. I hardly ever use it at all. I also agree
with you on this issue.

> If you want to chat about aw and "shoot the cow" or whatever strange expression
> you used,

Do you mean "shooting the bull?" James said "shoot the bull" in his
post. I never said that in my post and in fact haven't used any
expressions in it whatsoever.

> you'd find many people with a similar interest in aw... actualy
> in aw. Yeah, it may surprise you that there are many people interested in
> chatting about this chat program within the chat program it's self.

Nope. That doesn't surprise me one bit. Should it?

> Just type something and press enter, you just might find someone in aw that
> knows about aw. Crazy huh?

Nope, not crazy either. Very logical, in fact.

> sorry... I don't post on the newsgroups often but I found this subject
> delightfully stupid :)

Well then instead of taking your anger out on myself, why not take it
out on the original poster, James Wyatt? I believe you responded to my
post instead of James' original post in error.

Builderz
Stuff-X - Bot & World Hosting Services
http://www.stuffx.com/aw/

Mar 2, 2001, 6:32pm

How true. There are points where redundency just gets stupid. The AW browser
sucks bandwidth like a vacuum as is. Adding IRC would become an added drain,
and pretty stupid too. That'd be like AOL adding MSN messenger support. If I
want to be on IRC, I'll use mIRC. If I want to be on AW, I'll use AW. At
least that way I can tell WTF is going on. Honestly, how many of you know of
a successful IRC channel based on activities of another chat channel or
program? IRC blows the donkey (excuse that colorful metaphor) compared to AW
to begin with. *decides against arguing it*
[View Quote]

Mar 2, 2001, 7:39pm

Wow, thats the fastest set of replys of a question i've seen.... wow..

And a small arguement also...

My problem with chatting in AW is that I have to be close enough to the
chatters to listen....
When I'm building somewhere remote, there is no one around to listen to, and
respond.....

There's never enough people in one area to have a nice long conversation...

The only conversations I've seen were at ground zero, supply yards, or at
special events. (Cy Awards etc...)

Maybe if AW allowed us the option to lower or remove the distance
limitations to "Listen" it would be different.



> sorry... I don't post on the newsgroups often but I found this subject
> delightfully stupid :)

Why do we have to limit ourselves by using AW alone?

We have these newsgroups to post messages about AW, why can't we do the same
thing on IRC?

Just Wondering...... James Wyatt...

Mar 2, 2001, 8:02pm

Did I hear "Cy Awards?":)
Hey folks...hope everyone's busy building!....they are just around the
corner ya knows:)
For more info please visit www.awcommunity.org/cyawards
You will find the schedule there plus a whole lot more!:)
Cya at the Cys!
Hugggggs:)

--
Beverly Tuttle/AlphaBit Phalpha
Juno 3D Chat Support Team

Mar 2, 2001, 8:46pm

One reason the distance exists is so you can have private conversations.

[View Quote] And a small arguement also...

My problem with chatting in AW is that I have to be close enough to the
chatters to listen....
When I'm building somewhere remote, there is no one around to listen to,
and
respond.....

There's never enough people in one area to have a nice long
conversation...

The only conversations I've seen were at ground zero, supply yards, or
at
special events. (Cy Awards etc...)

Maybe if AW allowed us the option to lower or remove the distance
limitations to "Listen" it would be different.



> sorry... I don't post on the newsgroups often but I found this subject
> delightfully stupid :)

Why do we have to limit ourselves by using AW alone?

We have these newsgroups to post messages about AW, why can't we do the
same
thing on IRC?

Just Wondering...... James Wyatt...

Mar 2, 2001, 9:31pm

[View Quote] We have whisper for that now. But it works for one to one chat only. So we
need multi person whisper and then can remove the chat limit.

rolu

Mar 2, 2001, 9:55pm

Crossposting to wishlist...
REMOVING the chat limit would be completely pathetic. I don't want to listen
to a coupla tourists cybering on the other side of AW while I'm building.
It'd make the lives of PKs VERY VERY difficult. Bots on the other side of
the world could spam GZ. General chaos would ensue. I do feel that the
option to place a chat "beacon" at a location to hear what goes on there and
participate in a discussion without actually being there would be a better
option than this.
[View Quote]

Mar 2, 2001, 10:31pm

[View Quote] Multiple beacons, if possible. In multiple worlds. Kinda like a phone bot.
Drop one at every world and place you want to talk or keep an eye on. And be
able to set the range of the beacon.

rolu

Mar 2, 2001, 11:31pm

Excuse me? No one is dropping anything like that in my world.
And I will be the first to start a group against it if it's made possible to
do so without the world owners permission.
As for dropping beacons to listen in other worlds, well I don't know that I
would want to visit the other worlds knowing that some one in another world
could hear my conversations, perhaps without my knowing. This is called
spying. I am against this idea totally.
If james w wants to chat while he builds, he can call his friends in to chat
with him. There is no need to listen in on other peoples conversations.
As for wisper, it's fine for short comments in private, but it is a real
pain when trying to carry on an entire conversation.
Just my opinion :)
Imagine



[View Quote]

Mar 2, 2001, 11:43pm

Two quick fixes for this.
1) World option (That window's getting pretty big aint it?)
2) Shows in whisper list regardless of speaking status with another notation
to seperate it from citizens/tourists/bots (like parenthesis)

Also, these things aren't visible in the 3d pane, only the whisper bar so it
isn't cluttering the world any.

This seems like an interesting concept and one that AWCI just might pick up
on since it's going in this group as well, and would make the job of
watching your world GZ or in the case of the PKs, every AWCOM GZ much, much
easier.
[View Quote]

Mar 3, 2001, 3:42am

i've actually thought about this.. maybe setting a minimum/maximum world
range.. and have your range customizable in the settings menu.. could start
a whole gamma of possibilities.. especially with bots..

--
news://awjbell.com
--
J B E L L
http://platinum.awjbell.com
G O I N G P L A T I N U M


[View Quote]

Mar 3, 2001, 3:43am

if your talking everyone shows up in whisper box regardless of range.. bad
idea.. i don't want to be in aw and try to whisper someone-only to open my
whisper box to see 200+ names..

--
news://awjbell.com
--
J B E L L
http://platinum.awjbell.com
G O I N G P L A T I N U M


[View Quote]

Mar 3, 2001, 11:09am

i know its possible for bots to bug out and pick up chat beond the 200
netters chat distance ive seen it twice my self was in aw at gz had a bot at
a freinds build out beond 16000x16000 and seen my chat in the bots chat log
was was kinda useless though because as people whent out of range of me they
also disapeared from the bots chat log.
I was sort of acting like half of a chat bot.
[View Quote]

Mar 3, 2001, 2:04pm

Regardless of range? No, just people who have CHOSEN to listen in on your
particular area and are their beacon is within the current 200m chat range.
[View Quote]

Mar 3, 2001, 6:19pm

[View Quote] ah... and you don't let them in in person either, I assume?

> And I will be the first to start a group against it if it's made possible
to
> do so without the world owners permission.
> As for dropping beacons to listen in other worlds, well I don't know that
I
> would want to visit the other worlds knowing that some one in another
world
> could hear my conversations, perhaps without my knowing. This is called
> spying. I am against this idea totally.

It's only spying if you use a dumb implementation. The beacon would be
clearly visible for everyone around, with a special av. It will show up in
the whisper list. The only real difference: the person isn't actually there.
It's not like a microphone hidden in a bush somewhere.

If you whisper something, the beacon will not hear it (unless you whisper to
the beacon). You can kick beacons if you can kick people. The beacon will
have the name of it's owner on it. So, what's the difference with the owner
of the beacon actually being at the place of the beacon? Nothing.

> If james w wants to chat while he builds, he can call his friends in to
chat
> with him.

And what if those friends want to build somewhere else at the same time?

> There is no need to listen in on other peoples conversations.

Oh, there is. You need to listen to be able to participate. The beacons
aren't one way - you can send chat back to it.

> As for wisper, it's fine for short comments in private, but it is a real
> pain when trying to carry on an entire conversation.

Could be solved by making a better implementation of whisper.

rolu

Mar 3, 2001, 11:47pm

anyone can come into my world. They just can't drop a beacon to hear what's
going on in my world. If they want to be in on a conversation they should be
there in person.

> It's only spying if you use a dumb implementation. The beacon would be
> clearly visible for everyone around, with a special av. It will show up in
> the whisper list. The only real difference: the person isn't actually
there.
> It's not like a microphone hidden in a bush somewhere.

I don't really think going to the trouble to make a beacon is necessary
anyway because there are bots that can already do that. A friend of mine
sometimes sends his bot to my world to talk to me while he works elsewhere.
I don't mind that, if I know the bot was sent. What I do mind, is when some
one I don't know sends a bot to listen in on what's going on in my world.
You are right they can be ejected if I know they are there. They will show
on my wisper list, but I dont' always scan my list to see who is on it, so I
will miss a bot comeing in at times. That is when my conversations are being
spied on. Useing a bot should be enough since every cit num can run up to 3
bots at a time. I don't see why or how anyone would handle more
conversations then that. So, I don't see a need for a beacon.

Imagine

[View Quote]

Mar 4, 2001, 12:09pm

I dont see any thing wrong with it if its done like that would be no difrent
than the old phone bot i use to use phone bot to boost chat range in one
world.
What would be nice is if you could have one master bot that had multiple
slave bots that sent chat to the master bot letting you set up a sort of
net to boost chat range set the slaves out at 199 metters away from the
master but as aws curent limit for most cits is 3 bots would make this set
up a little useless.

[View Quote]

Mar 4, 2001, 2:06pm

Odd, my citizenship can only run TWO bots at a time. Am I being cheated or
are you just misinformed? Also, bot's take up annoying amounts of bandwidth
that us poor 56k and under users desperately need. Also, even at super-high
resolutions, the use of a bot requires switching between Windows, which
often slows down the "remote participant" at whatever. The chat beacons
would function exactly like a chatbot, but be based in the normal chat
window, not take up a bot space and not require a seperate uniserver login.
The beacon would be placed in a predified avatar at the world and
coordinates specified for it. For the more paranoid users, there would be an
option in the options box for the IO to notify of the arrival of a chat
beacon or bot. World owners could choose what areas to limit these goodies
to, but as they aren't annoying little shits like most bots are, they'd not
be subject to the restricted radius UNLESS the world owner set that as an
"exclusion zone".
[View Quote]

Mar 4, 2001, 3:04pm

[View Quote] And that's where the beacon comes in. It is a representation of someone, so
he doesn't have to be there in person.

in
> there.
>
> I don't really think going to the trouble to make a beacon is necessary
> anyway because there are bots that can already do that.

You can have only a few bot instances - what if you want to use them for
something else already? Also, you'd have to run an external program, as
opposed to the beacons, which are used inside the AW browser.

> A friend of mine
> sometimes sends his bot to my world to talk to me while he works
elsewhere.
> I don't mind that, if I know the bot was sent. What I do mind, is when
some
> one I don't know sends a bot to listen in on what's going on in my world.

The beacon is not meant as a listening device but as a way to participate in
a discussion. Being able to listen is a part of that, but certainly not the
only thing.

> You are right they can be ejected if I know they are there. They will show
> on my wisper list, but I dont' always scan my list to see who is on it, so
I
> will miss a bot comeing in at times.

To drop a beacon, you'd have to come in in person anyway. And if you don't
check who is around, you can easily miss someone who is in your world in
person as well as a beacon. Both can hear what you say. If you don't check
who is around, it's your problem.

> That is when my conversations are being
> spied on.

Yeah, so? What you mentioned can be done as well without the beacon, so I
don't really see a problem there. If you don't want to be heard, go to a
place where nobody is - neither people nor beacons - or use whisper.

> Useing a bot should be enough since every cit num can run up to 3
> bots at a time.

Bots are annoying for that. I want all the chat in one place - in the AW
browser, where it belongs. On IRC you can enter as many channels as you
want, this should be possible in AW too.

> I don't see why or how anyone would handle more
> conversations then that.

oh, that's easy. Yourself at awbingo, one beacon at AW GZ, one beacon at
tech talk, one beacon at AWGate, one beacon in a friends world, etc etc etc.

> So, I don't see a need for a beacon.

Hope you do now.

rolu

Mar 4, 2001, 3:36pm

I thought he wanted a way to talk to his friends while he builds. Well if
the beacon can hear all conversations in the worlds it is dropped in, then
his screen would be flooded and he would have a hell of a time trying to
keep up with a conversation with his friends and build at the same time. Oh
well maybe he is a speed reader. :)
Imagine
[View Quote]

1  2  |   Order by index