Subject: Dwelling orphans

What should happen to a dwelling if the account that owns it is, for whatever reason, deleted?

If it's only a stake in the ground, hey, that's easy: go ahead and delete the thing. Undeveloped land claims can expire with the claimant.

But, what if it's a beautifully developed site that's an asset to the game? What if two players have put equal effort into making a home and then one of them, the one who put the stake in the ground, quits playing the game? What if it's a joint clan project? What if, later on, it's got an Improbable Labs function hooked into it that is so good it's become an integral part of the game? (Um, okay... admittedly that last one is unlikely; anyone who has ever had the level of commitment to the game needed to do that has probably acquired a permanent character somehow, but still.)

So if we're talking about rules: a developed site should not be automatically deleted.

And because the game can't distinguish between Dunbernarding (or Nepeta Halt!) and a junk hut created by someone who was just fiddling around and then lost interest... over time, we are going to accumulate un-owned buildings: some that may be very valuable, and others that would need, er, extensive remodeling.

Just leaving such a dwelling in place as an un-owned orphan isn't ideal. Sure... it's still there to visit, but it's going to fill up with ghosts (see bug thread), and it can never be expanded or changed in any way. That's very sad for other players who may still want to think of that place as their home or their clan hall.

An ability to voluntarily transfer ownership to someone else would solve some of this. (Allowing joint ownership, instead or as well, would be even better, but might be technically difficult.) All the same, many who leave the game are not going to bother to dispose of their properties.

The old Season One dwellings had a feature where orphaned dwellings could be bought by other characters. (And, let me tell you, some of them were great bargains!) That's one option.

Or, more interestingly... maybe after a grace period they could be sold at public auction?

Re: Dwelling orphans

[quoteThe old Season One dwellings had a feature where orphaned dwellings could be bought by other characters. (And, let me tell you, some of them were great bargains!) That's one option.

Or, more interestingly... maybe after a grace period they could be sold at public auction?[/quote]

Useful idea. Maybe add a Real Estate office or something to one of the outposts? Rather than everything being done at Suzie's hardware store. Being able to purchase or receive another contestants dwelling would be quite useful, especially on some of those prime plots of land that already have all four spaces taken, but by people who may no longer play. The auction Idea would be pretty awesome.

In a few months, I'll be leaving on a mission for my church and I'll have limited amount of time to play the game, so it'd be awesome to be able to transfer a dwelling to someone else who will be able to look after it better, so that the weather station I wanna build won't go unmanaged.

Re: Dwelling orphans

Perhaps you could leave a 'will', which means that if you leave the game your dwelling goes to someone else that you specify. If no-one is specified, then after, say, 7 real days, with somewhere in the outposts to tell you what is avalible. Then during the auction, everybody who wants it goes in and puts in a bid (in cigs, presumably) perhaps starting at 50. Each person who wants it puts in a bid, and they can put in another bid when the current highest bid (which would be displayed). If there are no bids in a certain period, perhaps an hour real time, then it goes to the highest bidder.

Re: Dwelling orphans

I have an idea that's more of a combination between 'finders keepers' and 'flip this house'.

When a player is deleted, their home's name instantly becomes 'future land plot' or something like that, and is open to all. When you enter the area, you'll see some of the Island's staff with Bulldozers and other construction equipment ready to tear down the large mansion and flatten the land for other contestants.

I'd say 150 cigs and maybe 25K req would cause them to 'overlook' this house.

When you own your new home, you would get the main room with all it's space upgrades, but the other rooms are basically Squat Hole in comparison, and none of the descriptions. (Too wrecked to tell what was what) There would be rats and peeling paint and mold (and that tire fire that just won't go out) and all that lovely stuff.

To actually be able to use these rooms, it would require a lot of stamina used in decorating. Maybe 75 actions for a two space room.

Re: Dwelling orphans

You'd have to allow for an asynchronous bidding process, because, you know... time zones. And a longer time frame than just hours.

A silent auction, I think. You'd want the properties up for sale to be listed for a while before the start of the auction, to give people time to go look them over. Then the auction would start, and people could enter their bids. (They would have to have the cigs before the bid would be accepted, and that number of cigs would go into escrow? Details need to be worked out there!) Bids already entered would be listed next to the property. At the end of the bid period, maybe two or three calendar days? properties that had been bid on would go to the highest bidder. Properties with no bids would go back on the list in the next auction.

We might say that if a property remains unsold in... what, three successive auctions? then it would be system-deleted. That gives ample time for anyone who wants a given property to become aware that it's on the block, even if they aren't able to log in very often.

Could also have a "FOR SALE" sign added to the exterior description.

Edit: Oy there, Chimental! You got a Vogon somewhere under that cloak? ...Or did you maybe not read the reasons it would not be fair to delete (or wreck) a dwelling just because the player who initially hammered in the stake happened to lose interest in the game?

Re: Dwelling orphans

Re: Dwelling orphans

Re: Dwelling orphans

Entirely agree with everything that Sessine (and others) are saying.

Case in point. Daedalus has recently left leaving behind him a building which was explicitly a clan project. This wasn't very far advanced, it's got two rooms, one of which has a couple of extra sleeping spaces, the other of which is undecorated. I'd like to take this over and keep on going with it. I was thinking of starting again on the same space and building a copy, but this still leaves the problem of the original which is then just goping to stand there neglected. I'd far prefer to take over the original, even if I ended up paying the same price in cigs and req for it. It's just the feel of the thing.

I think the idea of an auction is best, with a minimum price for it, although I think that the minimum price should depend on how many rooms/sleeping spaces it has, and how much decorating. I agree with Sessein, keeping the decoration is essential, that's what really gives most places their character, and we wouldn't want to lose that.

Don't have much more to add than that, just thought that I'd voice my agreement.

Re: Dwelling orphans

I think that implementing a Statutory Will system (where the owner designates a beneficiary in case of deletion) should be prioritized before the Auction system for a couple of reasons:

1) It allows the player more choice in what to do with their property. Especially with the larger or more famous properties, this could be an issue if we went with an auction-only system. I imagine that places like Soup and Pants would be hotly contested in an auction... shoot, I'd bid in for it if I got the chance, and I'm rarely even in IC. But what if the owner wants to pass it on to a poor, underprivileged rookie as a grand display of the property's purpose, specifically despite the huge value of the place? Or another example, the clan project officially owned by Daedalus: under an auction system, there is no way to guarantee that the property will stay within the clan (other than ensuring that a clan member has enough cigarettes to outbid everyone else on the island, of course).

2) It allows a check against monopoly. Some people have the real-life time and cash to accumulate more cigs than others in-game. Let's say that Kash steals the Ferry and poles his way back to Texas, giving the Watcher the finger on his way out: He'll most likely want to leave his dugout in the care of BuckNasty just so Buck has to deal with being mildly cursed because he owns property on an ancient Chimental burial ground. But what if some other poor chap with enough cigs to buy a plot on every outpost square as soon as Dwellings are implemented (*cough cough*) decides he wants to snatch up the property when he sees it in Auction (because that is the only system that is implemented for transferring property)? Then that guy is cursed instead of Buck, and nobody wants that.

The auction system should be a back-up to catch all the properties that haven't been specifically left to someone else. A system implementing both methods of transferral would keep everyone as happy as everyone can be, I think.

Re: Dwelling orphans

Re: Dwelling orphans

hehehehe. Anybody here own a piece of land in Second Life? That's what this is starting to sound like.

Re: Dwelling orphans

Possibly I'm not thinking deviously enough, but I don't see any reason players shouldn't be allowed to give a dwelling they put hard work and cigs into building, to anyone they please, any time they please.

See, the thing is, owning a dwelling isn't really that big a game advantage. You don't have to own a building to get the stamina boost -- there's no shortage of open rooms with vacant floor spots. You can only use one bed at a time. By now, with all the building that's gone on, you can duck under a roof to trigger a chronosphere almost anywhere on the Island.

If owners could choose to transfer their dwellings any time they liked, why, why... Help me out here, I'm having trouble coming up with any bad consequence.

Re: Dwelling orphans

Well for starters; the Skronky's are going to have a field day trying to bribe, bully, and extort as many buildings into their possession as they can get their grubby little hands on. There goes the neighborhood.

Re: Dwelling orphans

Well I can't think of any bad consequences, but I'm really not a game player, and tend to play within what I consider to be the spirit of the game. A lot of people though seem to come up with all sorts of devious ideas, so I tend to assume that there will probably be one, just that I haven't seen it. Especially when it's something that involves the transfer of something between players.

But you're probably right, I can't even imagine any reason why a 100% game player would want a dwelling. As you say, the one game advantage it confers, the stamina boost for sleeping there, is open to anyone, and there's enough sleeping spaces around that you can always find one. It's not always just long enough to crack a chronosphere, some of us occasionally take time off the Island to sleep, or indulge in other such frivolities, but that doesn't really change matters. You can usually find somewhere to crash for the night, and know that you'll wake up there the next morning.

There has been some talk of extra features which might change things a little. But from the ones that I can recall having been mentioned, the only ones that give any game advantage sound like they'd be the same as the stamina advantage in that it would be easy enough to use someone elses dwelling for the purpose.

Having said that, they were made expensive to build for a reason. It would be circumventing that a bit if some big cig rich rank 7 player could build the first room and then give it over to someone else.

Re: Dwelling orphans

[quote="Hairy Mary"]It would be circumventing that a bit if some big cig rich rank 7 player could build the first room and then give it over to someone else.[/quote]

No more "circumventing" than the whole concept of Location Four, in my opinion. Sure, you might end up with a rookie owning a seventeen room clan hall for a clan they have never heard of (in a worst-case scenario, of course) but at the same time we're already telling rookies who Horatio is and how to find him for tea and how many DKs are needed for which races and where to find mounts and and and... you get the picture. That is more against the spirit of the game, I believe, than passing on late-game knowledge; because the whole idea of the game is that you're dropped on the Island pantsless and witless and have to figure out how to survive after being a sales rep or waiter or nuclear weapons tester or whatever. Once you know how to build a dwelling, (the discovery aspect that is so key in the first few DKs,) it's just a matter of collecting inane numbers of cigs and spending untold caches of req on one-shots to get those kits and supplies from place to place.

Re: Dwelling orphans

Re: Dwelling orphans

Agree It would be great to give a house over to someone else. Or perhaps even have multiple owners, so if one player leaves for good, there is no problem.

Regarding auctions....maybe. It's great that a dwelling would survive after someone leaves and doesn't have a will, but it would be strange, to me, if just anyone claimed ownership of a very special plot of land. Still preferable to losing the dwelling altogether, I suppose.

Re: Dwelling orphans

Re: Dwelling orphans

Silent auctions are definitely the way to make it work.

Until wills and such would be implemented, I wish there was a way to demonstrate merit for claiming a property... but of course that would require adjudication of some sort, which could potentially mean a crapload of frivolous work for our dear mods. (Hmm... unless we'd want to set up an in-game legal system... contestants running for judgeships... smear campaigns and stump speeches... Nah, things would spiral out of control pretty quickly. Let's stick with enlightened despotism, it's working pretty well so far.)

Of course, all this wishful thinking is merely due to the fact that I have a particular plot in mind. Extra-prime real-estate, currently filling up with ghosts, started up by an ex-clannie who has since fallen off the face of the Island... and I did contribute a modicum of sweat equity. Unless I have a way to make my case as a prime ownership candidate, I guess I'll be saving cigs in the hope that I'll stand a chance if and when auctions get rolling!

Re: Dwelling orphans

I think the recipient of a dwelling should have to pay something in the way of cigs/req. Possibly dependent on how big the place was, how much decoration it had.

Extra merit for claims? Yes Dulcibella's right. That would be quite good, but it's hard to imagine some way of doing that automatically. I'll try anyway. This is a rather tentative idea here.

Three reasons for extra merit in a claim, are
I) That you helped to build the place.
II) You belong to the same clan as the owner did.
III) You were married to the owner.

Is it possible to know how much any one person contributed in terms of decorating or building? If so, then for each bidder, compute a number.

Count 1 for each piece of decorating they did. Count 2 for each piece of wood they added. Count 3 for each piece of stone added. Now you have a number. Multiply this by 1.5 if they're in the same clan, and then by 2 if they were married.

Now treat this number as a percentage, and give this as a bonus in auctions.

Example. Dwelling goes on the market. Person A bids 180 cigs. Person B bids 150 cigs. Person A was in the same clan as the original owner, and contributed 20 stone 60 wood and did 100 decorating turns. Person B was in the same clan and married to the owner and contributed 10 stone, 30 wood and 100 decorating turns.

So A's multiplier is (100 + 60x2 + 20x3)x1.5 = 420. Their bid counts as 180 + 180x(420/100) = 936
B's multiplier is (100 + 30x2 + 10x3)x1.5x2 = 570. Their bid counts as 150 + 150x(570/100) = 1005

Person B wins the auction and pays 150 cigs for their new dwelling.

I picked those numbers more or less off the top of my head, they can of course be fiddled with. They seem a bit high in this example to be honest. I've no idea how possible this is but maybe something of the sort is possible. There should definitely be a minimum payment of 100 cigs.

Does this make any sort of sense to people?

Re: Dwelling orphans

Yes, but it did not take into account the providing of meterials. often, in joined projects, one person spends a sphere, a ciggie, and some one-shots on lumbering/stone-cutting their stamina into the neither regions, and deliver their cargo to a fresh mason/carpenter whom does the actual construction.

Not that i'd demand that factored; but it might be simpeler to just transfer this via the Improbable Board of Surveillance and Real Estate Management.

Or petitions for a transfer. It's not like we'll develop a booming market in land ownership, so it wouldn't realy be much added workload for CMJ.

Re: Dwelling orphans

Re: Dwelling orphans

Perhaps the ones that go unclaimed and are, for lack of a better word, demolished, the building materials, or a portion thereof, would remain on the site for filthy scavengers [read:GERM] to use? Maybe 50% of the logs and stone that went into the building would be left behind?

Re: Dwelling orphans

One issue here is that buildings are only counted as orphaned when the owning account disappears. People with permanent accounts may still suddenly be faced with RL issues forcing them to leave the Island, even people who have put in a huge amount of time and effort, creating things in Improbable labs say. Life happens.

Being owned by a moribund account is effectively the same as not being owned at all, no one's looking after the building. Perhaps if an owner doesn't visit a dwelling in a month, or doesn't log on in a month then they get sent an email warning them of impending repossesion? Then they get a fortnight to do something?

In fact, if buildings are complete, then it doesn't really matter if anyone owns them or not. If the owner of Soup and Pants had to leave, then Soup and Pants would still be there exactly as it is now, and still fulfilling it's valuable role in the game. It's the half built and unused dwellings which are the potential problem.

Actually, this isn't true. Thinking again (I did that once in 2003), I suppose that ghosts would go unkicked out, and these would accumulate over time. Also in a property shared by a couple, the spouse might eventually get over their grief, remarry, and want to use the property, locking and unlocking rooms and so forth. Also, if someone left when a room was locked, then that room would stay locked for evermore.

Point: If a dwelling goes on the market, then automatically unlocking all areas would probably make sense. Afterall, you'd want to go and have a good look round a property if you were thinking of buying it.

Re: Dwelling orphans

I wholeheartedly agree that we should freely be able to transfer dwellings from person to person at any time. I know Jacques would be thrilled by this idea, since he's never around Port Foley and cant work on his own house, and I'd willingly start construction jobs for him and such, then give it back when he's got the time. I think that spouses should be able to do that without any sort of limiting factor. And Clan members, really.

The Will idea is also something I agree with completely. Human Judgement is definitely more effective than any algorithm.

Actually.. now that I think about it... I agree completely with Sessines little list of instances. Yep. If the building isn't inherited or given out it should be auctioned.


I also agree with Hairy Mary, if someone has a permanent account and just doesnt get on for ages (a month is how long a non-permanent account has to be gone to be deleted, right? how about that long?) then they get an email reminding them that they have a house. Or something like that.

Re: Dwelling orphans

I think a lot of these issues would be easily resolved given one addition to dwellings:

KEYS

Let the dwelling owner assign permissions to different key levels, including a{ny number of} secondary master-keys, for, say clan officers. That way, anyone with a Locking Key can lock or unlock rooms, anyone with a Decoration Key can set up decorations, anyone with a Build Key can set up new build jobs, and anyone with a Master Key can do all these things... Also, if the dwelling-owning account gets deleted, whoever has a Master Key for the dwelling is the default to "inherit" the dwelling.

Hell, that might be the simplest way to do it, rather than give every individual individual rights, just assign them a number of keys, and set a flag for certain rooms to be "owner only" or "Master Key only" for locking/unlocking/decoration/building.

And move the locking/decorations/build jobs/key management/etc. to its own submenu in the dwelling, rather than having the dwelling owner see a completely different interface for their own dwelling(s) as they see for others...

Sorry, a bit off topic there, but yeah...for orphaned dwellings, maybe if you go by number of rooms, or decoration actions required for the flavor text, (or a mixture of both) to determine the "Value" of the house if it goes to auction? Seems fair to me...and if the dwelling surpasses a certain "value" it can't get automatically demolished (So Dunbernarding will stand forever)

Re: Dwelling orphans

Teh Dave's right. The key's idea even takes care of 'what happens if someone has to leave the Island but the account's not deleted' question. Although I suppose that in this case could someone else start cutting and handing out keys? Change the locks and withdraw keys?

Re: Dwelling orphans

Forgive me if this point has been brought up before, I have an awful memory for such things, but I would like to submit a point:

I have a dwelling that, like soup and pants, is there so people can have a nice warm... floor space to sleep on. Personally, if I disappear off the face of the island, I would like it to remain there as a monument to the kindness of the people on the island, as well as remaining to give everyone a place to sleep until newday. To me, it just doesn't seem right to simply destroy a dwelling like that just because nobody wants to buy it at auction because it doesn't have much decoration, so I think that there should be some sort of way to keep such dwellings around, perhaps if you go to the site of the dwelling you could do something that adds one to a counter and if that counter reaches a certain number that dwelling won't be destroyed?

Re: Dwelling orphans

Re: Dwelling orphans

Re: Dwelling orphans

Have to say Cake Ninja, as somebody who's used your place for the intended purpose, I'd put in a minimum bid for it, not because I particularly want to own it myself, but just to make sure that it didn't disappear.

By the way, how will we know when a place is up for auction? A message on the new day screen or something? It would have to be something active. If it was just a notice in council offices then no one would ever see it.

Re: Dwelling orphans

Er. I'd better say: None of this is official! It's only me, as player, going into hypothetical design mode. For fun. It may never happen, or may happen quite differently -- Dan's the real designer and coder around here, and what he comes up with is generally way cooler than anything we players think up.

But the way I imagine it is, the external description would have FOR SALE appended to the description, so anyone passing by would know.

The auctions would happen on a regular schedule, maybe weekly, maybe only once a month. There might, yes, be a New Day notification of how many properties are currently slated to be sold in the next auction (quite often this would be zero).

Either in Suzie's Hardware, or in a separate real estate office next door, there'd be a list of properties up for sale, so prospective buyers could go and inspect them. That's also where bids would be entered once the auction started.

And yes, your earlier suggestion is a good one: all doors in these properties should be unlocked when they are placed on the list.

Re: Dwelling orphans

I just wish to say:

Thank you, Cake Ninja! Your dwelling may not be decorated, but I sleep there every night. I think its at least as important as Soup & Plants. I woul be will wiling to pay a vast amount of cigs for it, if it ever cam up at aution. (There is one problem though. I don't have vast amounts of cigs.)

Re: Dwelling orphans

The IBSREM office! It lives!

Re: Dwelling orphans

How about this: A housing tax and ability to sell house.
To be able to transfer ownership through a lawyer or a bank, which is the closest to something lawyer-like, would be great. Would boost the economy as well probably. I would say the house price could be fixed, determined by:

1. ) Distance from the nearest outpost (getting this number would be a bit hard if terrain is considered, but once you have it, it's just a number stored for each square).
   
2. ) Number of floor spaces and rooms
   
3. ) Amount of decoration already in place
   

Re: Dwelling orphans

Re: Dwelling orphans

Oh, no! I hear TAX! I hear OFFICE! Oh my, oh, my, oh my, please tell me guys you're just kidding! Please save this wonderful island of insanity of things like that, that plague this other insanity continent we call RL. If anyone starts thinking about revenue tax and VAT and healthcare issues I'm outta here. Please.

On the other hand, maybe on II one could have a huge bonus of something (I'm thinking hats or shoes) for actually killing (or at least severely maiming) the taxman? Bhahaha!

Yep, probably need therapy.*slinks off to buy yet another pair of shoes*

Seriously now, back to the matter at hand, I think auctioning them is a marvelous idea, I like what Sessine proposed as a system.

And, Cake Ninja, I'd also bid in for a place like yours, 'Shelter from the outdoors', isn't it?

Re: Dwelling orphans

Re: Dwelling orphans

Indeed, that's the one. And I'm shocked by how many people have offered to buy the dwelling if I disappear. I'm also very happy due to the fact that so many people appreciate the place.

I would fight against* a cig tax on dwellings. Between helping SOUR max their buffs and building the shelter, I'd have no cigs to pay it with! And I enjoy having ownership of it, for comfort reasons.

*No, not like in the jungle.

Re: Dwelling orphans

I agree, a tax would be far too... heavy. Especially for people who occassionally have real lives and may not always have hours a day to cig-hunt (or the RL cash to buy them with DPs). It would penalize people simply for not playing enough, rather than just for not playing at all by which I mean deleting their account and/or dying IRL. I wouldn't want to lose Kash's dugout simply because the tax date fell in the middle of finals and I was busy at work and didn't have time to grind for the 100 cig penalties. Especially since only two people even know where the dugout is and that other person maybe would care enough to notice that the dugout is in danger of being lost.

Re: Dwelling orphans

Re: Dwelling orphans

That's actually the very word I was avoiding. But thanks for trying to help.

Re: Dwelling orphans

A taxman? Kill it? *Runs off to the moster submission tent. *

Re: Dwelling orphans

Re: Dwelling orphans

Re: Dwelling orphans

Re: Dwelling orphans

Re: Dwelling orphans

Re: Dwelling orphans

Quote by: blob

Quote by: Cousjava

A taxman? Kill it? *Runs off to the moster submission tent. *

AAAAARGH! Beat me to it! Just came back to check replies and thought "Hmm, might work as a monster. Maybe if...". Then saw your comemnt. Haha. Brilliant.

Ok, looks like people aren't keen on taxman idea. And I did think it would just be a punishment for some people, instead of opening up the house for others.

How about this. An orphaned house becomes open to public. From what I understand, you can not destroy houses, so the worst thing a person would see after coming back after a long time would be a bigger house, with some rooms occupied, which s/he can still lock again after coming back. The only question is description, or "decorating", for which I don't really have a solution.

So, I would say, unless you have given out master keys to people and have been away for a long time, your house becomes open to public, from which you will not really be pained, because once you come back, you can still kick the squatters out (or at least lock the house again).

And perhaps open up a real-estate market so people could trade houses and perhaps even start up some RP construction companies. But have a transaction tax imposed, so it still makes it hard for people to transfer cigarettes to others. And then, some time down the line, watch the real-estate bubble collapse

This any better?

Re: Dwelling orphans

At the moment, I can't afford a master key to give to Alternatecash, but I did buy a front door key for Nessa. If my account expired(it won't now, I bought the permanent thing unless it failed to acknowledge me), I'd want the house to go to Alt. If there are no Master keys assigned, would lower level keys be considered for possible inheritance, would keyholders outrank spouse for inheritance, and would it be hard to put an input box somewhere in the house where an owner could specify who the house should go to, in order, and be easily updateable?

I suppose I was thinking something like in the preferences menu, but then you'd need one for each house, so maybe one in each building, only accessable to the owner and visible to mods? You'd probably get some people putting in nonsense, but I think most would use it. You probably wouldn't need to set it up to be functional, just somewhere to put down an owners request for who'd inherit, to be viewed if necessary by someone with the power to transfer possession of a dwelling. You could put in like five spots, in case the next account(or three) was expired by the time the document became needed. Also, if the next inheritor expires before they change the Will, it'd go to the next person originally written down. Of course, each owner would have a chance to write in a new list, but they wouldn't need to. You could even write in a description about accessing a safe somewhere in the dwelling, with secret codes, and all sorts of sneakiness. Just an idea.

Also, in the case of permanent accounts, perhaps there'd be a spot to indicate after how long one would want care transferred over. I'd be horribly depressed to get a permanent account and have my house taken away from me after a month. Honestly, anything less than five months would probably make me sad. I'm very possessive of my lovely house, that I've sunk so much effort into. By the way, you should all stop by. First square Northwest of Kit.

Edit: Because he's too lazy to get his own forum account, Alt would like to suggest a bit about how if one inherited a dwelling, they'd get served papers about it next time they enter an outpost, with a header about "You got served!". He's ridiculous, but I heart him anyways. And mentioning that will annoy him. >^.^<

Re: Dwelling orphans

I still don't see what everyone's fascination with giving away still-owned dwellings is...

Re: Dwelling orphans

Re: Dwelling orphans

Ok, I only read through the first page-and-a-half, so apologies if someone has suggested this before...

The possibility of leaving a dwelling (such as the Dumbernarding) to a clan?
'Ownership' would default to all officers and/or founders (so they could cut keys, pick the next development job, etc - don't have a house so I don't know the technicalities), and the property would only count as 'Abandoned' if there were no officers/founders left in the clan.

Re: Dwelling orphans

Any reaction to my suggestion about leaving a will, or a better method to formally suggest it? I'm really taken with the idea..

The Improbable Island Enquirer - Forum
http://enquirer.improbableisland.com/forum/viewtopic.php?showtopic=13578