Feature Request - Death for Avatars (and ostracism)

There have been a lot of problems lately with griefers, especially the "Impeach Bush sign guy" and most of the residents are in agreement that something should be done about it even though LL seems to be just sitting on their hands. A very obvious solution to this and other problems of this nature is to allow the residents to actually take matters in their own hands. This would allow justice to be done and take LL of the hook at the same time.

What we need IMO is a place in SL to ship all these idiots that they cannot return from and that said place should conform to their (the griefers) idea of what SL is all about (i.e. - a lawless "frontier" kind of place where they can do anythign they want).

Feature Proposal:

That avatars can "die" in SecondLife (in designated areas) and NOT be resurrected at their home point and NOT be able to take any of their stuff or money with them. They would be gone from the game, period. Forever.

Details:

A third type of zone (complimentary to "safe" and "damage" zones), would be created called "Coventry," its chief property being that one can only be killed once in this area and said death is final. Avatars considered through their actions to be "griefers" would be banned from all non-damage and damage areas and forced to exist (for as long as they are able) in "Coventry" areas only.

- Avatars traveling through "Coventry" areas can be attacked and killed much in the same way they are now, but such "death" would be permanent.

- Avatars not wishing to "die" would steer clear of these areas.

- Avatars banished to "Coventry" for their actions may NOT return although visitors (citizens in good standing) can come and go as they please.

The intention here is that avatars who show through their actions that they are unable to live in a civilised society would be ostracised and "sent to Coventry." This lawless, (and highly dangerous) area would better suit their temperament and might even be fun for people who like to play the game that way. If through their actions on the main grid, and avatar causes a "lynch-mob" mentality to form, said lynch mob can actually go into coventry and "kill" said avatar if they want to (at some risk to themselves of course).

I think this works on many levels. It would facilitate a lot of folks who are into the whole "Gangsta" thing and allow "real" hits on people. It gives the griefer the fame and "cred" they desire in that how long one can survive after being banished would be an indicator of griefer skill perhaps. It has overtones of "Escape from New York" and all kinds of exciting (to some folks) stuff.

It might even start a much more enthusiastic cycle of weapons and defence development which is something (for no reason I have even been able to figure out), that tons of folks seem interested in also.

Seems like win-win-win to me.

Imagine the satisfaction of shooting that "Impeach Bush" guy and knowing he is gone forever.

Given the arbitrary, hackish nature of the entire combat system, I can't agree.


It was like a million newbies cried out in pain and were suddenly silenced.

Why mess about 'entertaining' griefers? Perma-ban them for real!

Better still, drop the 'free basic membership' stupidity - the situation has become steadily and alarmingly worse since it was started.

Sounds fun, but unworkable. I would be the first person trying to line people up with torches and pitchforks to cast out some innocent for my own amusement.

Additionally, given that banned griefers pop right back on again, this still doesn't solve anything fro me. Also still doesn't solve their need to be "famous" through annoying the hell out of people who are minding their own business.

Gabe. we'd have one hell of a race.

Deathrace 2000?

Special agent: You know, Mr. VeTurbo, as a representative of Mr. President's government, I happen to hold the power of life and death.

Machine Gun Joe VeTurbo: Yeah? Well I happen to hold the clam sauce.

I half agree. The stupidity was to remove the reputation bonus when removing the token $10.00 signup fee. Either bring it back as it was, or bring back the reputation bonus with enough nerfing that any combination of trading bonuses leads to a net loss in lindens.

Well I guess it was kind of tongue in cheek a bit, but I think its workable regardless.

Probably this came out of some especially murderous thoughts I have been having lately about that sign guy.

This would go hand-in-hand with something I've wanted for awhile: Second Death.

The underbelly of the grid... and an answer to why we can't build tunnels digging to sim-China or whatever.

I do think the risk vs. reward aspect would be very thrilling to some Resis. Understandably, PKilling is also controversial, so as has been pointed out, until the combat system is smoother (and more modular, customizable, etc.), I can't see this being carried out practically.

DEATH BY VIRTUAL FIRING SQUAD

or... 109 (and counting) years of torture in AM. (warning, fear follows)

When i first say this thread i was hoping it would actually address user death and what happens to avatars. I was quickly shocked and dismayed to find out that in fact it was intended to attack a user who's motives while maybe pure, methods are not. I'm sorry but i cannot condone such a feature that would cause more grief in this world then all the rest.

Let expose how this feature is fatally flawed: Cage gun that pushes you into said location then smashes your av's brain against the ground. Instant permanent death. It wouldn't take a skilled scripter to write one of these. I'm appalled that anyone would think of that this feature is "a good idea".

Ok enough being appalled, lets get serious, it's a bad idea, it could too easily be abused. Another example: Idiot noob, fresh from the Orientation Islands, wanders into said space and is killed almost instantly by a Squidy from the Matrix. LL just lost a potential customer. This feature is bad for business. And when you get right down to it, thats the only thing that matters.

Hahaha... that's hilarious...

No, I can't see "permadeath" being a possibility on the whole grid... only for those who want to participate in it. Some do enjoy that riskplay, and it could be an "intermediate proving ground", at least.

I do not support nor endorse this feature proposal.

Briana Dawson

Land barons would probably go third, after furries and W-Hatters.

The other reason this idea is a bad one.

In most games when you perm-die, your character dies and you have to create a new one. What this is calling for is the death of your account. I'll be very supprised if there are any other games where the let you kill your account.