CompuServe Messages

sanford, << Has anybody read the Studio City Charter (in the TAKE5 library)? I have received no responses. If I get no response that is the same as a vote of Indifferent. Therefore the charter will be ratified.>> Yes, I've read it, but haven't replied to it yet. I was unaware of any urgency associated with responding to it. You may not have received any responses yet because readers are carefully considering issues presented in the _proposed_ charter and are busy preparing their responses/alternatives to it. Some who were following this project in its earlier stages and realizing there is still no place to UL meshes may not be checking in on a daily basis. Others, like Angela Pate, may have been away for any number of reasons, and have no knowledge of the charter and the sudden urgency to have it ratified. And others might want nothing to do with the politics going on here, but fully intend to contribute models when an UL area and parcels are made available. << In one week this issue will be closed and I will post the results. At that time I will post an invitation to anyone who wants to participate.>> What's the rush here? People are talking, the project is evolving, and we have nowhere to send our mesh files yet. << The issues of commercialization and of "freedom" have been raised by a number of individuals. When we did the survey, asking for your opinions on these issues, very little was said and the votes tended toward indifferent. It seems that most of the people initially interested in this project have stopped participating.>> What information has led you to this conclusion? Donald Newlands has identified at least 28 people at last count who are or have been participating. How many more are lurking, waiting for a parcel on which to proudly place a mesh? <<Therefore it is clear that neither side of the issue is attractive to most people.>> Which issue? You mentioned two, commercialization and "freedom." Most of what I've read, and that which appeals most to me as well is the freedom to choose commercialization or not. <<I expected to just collect everybody's thoughts, write them down, vote to adopt them and then get on with the building of the city. So far, the whole thing has degenerated into an irritating conflict of communication and a waste of many people's valuable time. If all participants continue to be indifferent or to resist comming to any agreement, I think it will be obvious to all that we should go our separate ways.>> Nothing that's hard is ever easy. A project as complicated by medium, distance, timing, and personal taste as this is by definition extremely hard to manage. What you refer to as degeneration would by bothers be termed evolution. What is an irritating conflict of communication could instead be interpreted as an open and free exchange of ideas. No time is wasted while spent in pursiut of noble goals. Do you have noble goals, sanford? 😉 << I am contimuing on with the city as is. I like the rules and I believe that an impressive city can be built.>> An impressive city can be built only by a dedicated and diverse group of creative and talented people interacting together. Creative and talented people are individualistic by their very natures which is in direct conflict with the levels of peaceful interaction required by group projects adhering to a strict code of rules. <<But, it has also become obvious that most people don't want to be involved in a project where there is political infighting going on.>> Again, based on what information? What are your definitions of "most people" and "involved?" This political infighting might be considered good clean fun to some who visit this forum, and a necessary stage of project development by others. We are people representing different cultures with different views, and that which some might say is political infighting could be seen as dealing with essential issues by others. <<I myself have become angry and combative and have contributed to the chaos and most assuredly have driven away many who don't want to fight for the right to participate in the Studio City project.>> Sadly, I must agree with this statement. Too quick on the "SEND" button? << So far, little or nothing has been accomplished in my opinion except the prolongation of this agonizing push and pull over issues of what we should build and why we are building it.>> Having no area to store the UL'd meshes, what other issues could or should be addressed other that what should or should not be built, and discussing the purpose(s) for building anything? This has been and continues to be very interesting theatre from where I sit. Why, in your opinion, has it seemed to be so much "prolonged agony" to participate in the development of such an exciting experiment as this? << Here is my final position:::: I will continue to participate in the forum and I will help build the city. I will help render what gets built and I will help get it shown at Siggraph. Other than that, I no longer have any interest in arguing about why or how the city should be built.>> If you "no longer have any interest in arguing about why or how the city should be built," how effective will you be in participating in the forum and helping to build the city? To my knowledge, not even a rough plan yet exists or has been approved for the layout of streets, parcels, parks, industries, the beach, shopping centers, etc. Will you build a city of your own design and invest your own funds to present your city at SIGGRAPH? <<It will get built according to the charter. I can promise you that. If other versions get built, I am no longer concerned as of Jan 15, 1995, I am moving forward with the city map and inviting anyone who can help to do so. Send messages to me by e-mail if you want to be included in what I am doing.>> Is this the equivalent of taking your ball and going home? Assuming the charter is ratified as written, how can you assure that the city will adhere to the terms of the charter? Citizens can change the charter by a simple majority vote which means that if only 10 people are deed holders, and 6 of those who may or may not have anything built on their parcels decide that all buildings will be inverted and mapped with canker sores, the city will consist of inverted, canker sore covered buildings. That would certainly be democratic, but I don't think you'd want to show it off at SIGGRAPH. The charter is too dynamic to allow any promises made to be kept. Why have you requested e-mail messages to be included in what you are doing? Are you relinquishing your forum flag in pursuit of your own private city? <<Finally, the resulting tapes will be for sale, not given away. Tape is not free and the money collected at Siggraph will go to pay for the costs of production. That is how it has to be done. If an angel appears and puts up the money for the tapes, that is fine. Any angel lurking about has been pretty silent so far except Matt Armstrong who offered to render the City for us. He did not offer tapes.>> It also costs money to present or sell anything at SIGGRAPH. I'm no (gag!) lawyer, but I can safely assume that everything using the SIGGRAPH trademark for promotional purposes at or away from the SIGGRAPH conference must require payment of a fee. How will those up-front marketing costs and fees be funded? Who will bear the expense of producing goods to be sold at SIGGRAPH and elsewhere? Who will share in any profits derived from sales of products produced by this project? How will those profits be divided? << Obviously I am tired of the controversy, and I am moving forward with the project. This is comming close to a "Tower of Babel".>> Perhaps you should step away from the project for awhile and try to regain your enthusiasm, some optimism, and some patience. Things can always seem quite confusing when studied too carefully or to intently for long periods of time. A little r&r couldn't hurt. …B.