More Interface
Dear Editor: In response to others' comments on the interface change to VRMLSite:

I can't say that I was confused by the old 3D nav-window, but its reason for being there eluded me. It asked to be treated the same way as any 2D button bar--there was no point to moving around in the "world." It struck me as VRML just for the sake of putting some VRML on the page. And with due note to the thrust of this publication, I submit that this is the Wrong Idea.

Do not insult your readership by suggesting that perhaps many of them aren't "ready" for VRML interfaces. One readies oneself for challenges, and no interface should be a challenge. 2D or 3D, a good interface is an intuitive one. We do the new medium no favors by implementing it and not really taking advantage of the new capability it gives us.

Braden Mc Daniel

Editor: I'm sorry you and others interpreted my statement as an insult. I view our readership with the highest regard.

We are trying to reach a large audience. Many of our readers in the VRML community are technically savvy and ready to take on new challenges. We also cater to newbies and non-techies who have an interest in VRML. I did not mean to say that such people were in any way deficient because they are unready to adopt new tech. Some people prefer a challenge and some don't. At this point, VRML is a challenge to some. The obvious goal is to make it easy.

I grant you, however, that our interface was imperfect not only in its execution but its symbolism. We plan to future articles dealing with with 3D interface design. Stay tuned.

Mark Pesce's departure.
Dear Editor: Nice reporting. Good to see a mag "on it's toes"

John Mullee

Dear Editor: I just wanted to let you know that I am very displeased with your article about Mark's resignation. You have seen fit to air Mark's temper tantrum without balancing your "report". You printed totally unfounded attacks on Rikk Carey without any attempt to legitimize his claims. I have worked with and for Rikk for 4 years and I can tell you that his motivations have never been as avaritious as your article claims. You also print unfair attacks on Jan and John Marbry. This is nothing less than totally irresponsible journalism.

Is the goal of you magazine to support VRML or destroy it? Or has Mark's charisma just clouded your judgment?

Chris Marrin

Dear Editor (posted to the www-vrml mailing list): I'm sure I speak for many other people when I say that it would have been nice to hear what the VAG and others had to say in the same space. As far as I know it is common practice among journalists to invite comments from all the parties involved, before the article goes into print.

With this one-sided presentation I'm personally very worried that the rest of the media will swoop in with doom and gloom stories. This certainly won't help any of us.

James Waldrop

Dear Editor: John, please keep in mind that James does not speak for everyone. I thought VRMLSite's coverage of the Pesce story was absolutely first-rate and the timeliness and the extensiveness of the story speak well for VRMLSite as the premier VRML news & article publication.

Editor:Ultimately, our coverage of Mr. Pesce's resignation was acclaimed more than it was criticized. That aside, we admitted any mistakes we made to those personally involved and our apologies were accepted.

Those of us in the Bay Area often forget that there are other "vermin" in other parts of the world. Those people rely on us as a source of news, as they do not hear things through the grapevine.

Despite being primarily a technical magazine, we have the responsibility to report on matters involving personalities when the are appropriate. Mr. Pesce's stature in the community merits the reporting of his resignation and can be considered headline news.

We staggered the reports because we recieved responses from the VAG several hours after we recieved our information on Mr. Pesce. When we printed the article, we were gathering responses and indicated so in the article.

We did not intend to appear one-sided. We intended to appear on top of things, which is why the community relies on us.

Any comments should be directed to John Gluck: Editor-in-Chief