It's not all gravy. I'd also propose that NO private world ever be allowed to go public again. Chance you take. If you feel your world is strong and can recruit owners, go for it. If you're unsure, well, maybe private isn't for you.

I would agree with that miket-just make it so people can see all the private worlds currently looking for owners-just like they do with open public worlds. Except you can't view the world, but you can see the world name, number of openings and who the commish is to contact.

That would be a nice addition even if they didn't allow public worlds to go private. Instead of the cluttered classifieds, one could sort private worlds by commish and find one they like.

What exactly is the point of "once you go private you can never go back"? Can't imagine why it would be in WIS's interest to have any such policy. I mean, seriously, other than a way for posters to say "haha, you thought you were good enough to go private, now you're not and must pay", what would be the point? It seems like keeping worlds strong and keeping them rolling wouldbe the point to any of this.

there are some public worlds that could easily thrive as private worlds and then there are some public worlds that are struggling to survive as it is now...since public worlds cannot control who they let in, even the best ones sometimes end up with bad apples (caracarns if you will) that threaten otherwise extremely healthy worlds...why not let those strong public worlds go private and (at least in theory) become even stronger...tec came up with a way to identify those public worlds that might be stable enough to go private...no one said his system is perfect, but its a good start...hopefully WiS will give this some consideration

cm i think the idea would be if you go from private to public you can't go back to private again...at least that is what makes sense to me

The point would be to have a strong world. IMO, less but stronger worlds would be beneficial to WifS.

Additionally, it's not like a private world HAS to restrict entrance. They can just say "10 openings. Password is *******" That's how about half of the 'tarded up "private" worlds started.

Quote: Originally Posted By MikeT23 on 9/18/2009
The point would be to have a strong world. IMO, less but stronger worlds would be beneficial to WifS.

Additionally, it's not like a private world HAS to restrict entrance. They can just say "10 openings. Password is *******" That's how about half of the 'tarded up "private" worlds started.

well i think thats the point of tec's system...don't let public worlds that can't handle being private from going in the first place...identify the ones that can thrive as private and let them try it first...if they can't handle it its unlikely others would be successful...and if it does work you now have stronger non-tard worlds

What's the harm in letting any world that wants to go private do so?

Quote: Originally Posted By cmthieme on 9/18/2009
What exactly is the point of "once you go private you can never go back"? Can't imagine why it would be in WIS's interest to have any such policy. I mean, seriously, other than a way for posters to say "haha, you thought you were good enough to go private, now you're not and must pay", what would be the point? It seems like keeping worlds strong and keeping them rolling wouldbe the point to any of this.

I think public worlds would be less likely to go private if they do have a higher turnover, and would prefer to stay public rather than risk spending a couple months every rollover trying fill. Plus it forces them live by their decision. They wanted to be private-now enjoy it.

Quote: Originally Posted By bighead34 on 9/18/2009cm i think the idea would be if you go from private to public you can't go back to private again...at least that is what makes sense to m

I can agree with that...if you go private and then have to go back to public because you can't fill, the world wouldn't be a candidate to go private again. What I don't see the point of is allowing a strong public world to go private and then saying "if you ever in the future can't fill we will dissolve you rather than put you back to public".

You wouldn't be able to go public again in an effort to FORCE you to remain strong.

If you're incapable, just post your password. It makes life a little more difficult but YGWYD.

Quote: Originally Posted By MikeT23 on 9/18/2009What's the harm in letting any world that wants to go private do so

If I'm WIS, I would be concerned letting anyone go private because it would likely reduce the rollover time for some worlds. I'd only want to allow public worlds that show a high probability of still rolling over quickly to go private. Slower rollovers = less revenue.

If I'm speaking for myself, I don't really care I guess.

POST. THE. PASSWORD.

Quote: Originally Posted By steelerstime on 9/18/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By cmthieme on 9/18/2009

What exactly is the point of "once you go private you can never go back"? Can't imagine why it would be in WIS's interest to have any such policy. I mean, seriously, other than a way for posters to say "haha, you thought you were good enough to go private, now you're not and must pay", what would be the point? It seems like keeping worlds strong and keeping them rolling wouldbe the point to any of this.

I think public worlds would be less likely to go private if they do have a higher turnover, and would prefer to stay public rather than risk spending a couple months every rollover trying fill. Plus it forces them live by their decision. They wanted to be private-now enjoy it

but this is solved if you only allow the strongest publics to go private...again if you have a better system than the one tec devised to identify these worlds that is realistic (in other words something WiS might actually consider) please share it