Suggestion:20070704 Dry Cleaning and Clothing Repair (Revised)

	Closed
	This suggestion has finished voting and has been moved to Peer Reviewed.

20070704 Dry Cleaning and Clothing Repair (Revised)

Darwinson 20:24, 4 July 2007 (BST)

Suggestion type
Change to clothing changes in certain buildings

Suggestion scope
Applies to survivors

Suggestion description
A revision of my earlier "Dry Cleaning / Clothing Repair" suggestion; this would add to certain buildings - Hotels, Motels, and possibly "Buildings" - the ability to repair and clean torn and bloodstained clothing, as long as they had working generators.

An alternative implementation might be to note that the clothing was stained or mended, but that goes to the talk page.

To pre-empt the arguments from last time:

"Clothes aren't hard to find - why bother?"

Well, we already have a unique, limited item - the party hat - which, it seems, will only make its appearance once a year. It's almost a certainty that a party hat would be destroyed by zombie attacks over the course of that year - so having a way to repair them would be helpful.

Beyond this, of course, there's the fact that clothing from such locations as, say, Fort Creedy are a leeetle bit hard to find when you're in, say, Whittenside. One would think that people would at least try to keep them intact.

"You can't clean blood out of clothes!"

Uh, yes, you can. I've done it before, after a failed Chem experiment left me with glass shards in the arm.

"But collecting clothes is fun!"

Yes, it is, but collecting the same clothes every time they get torn isn't, unless you're a masochist. Besides which, it won't be as though every location will have this ability; one per suburb, at most. And again - for 'unique' clothing, there won't be the ability to run out and grab new duds.

Voting Section

Voting Rules

Votes must be numbered, justified, signed, and timestamped. # justification ~~~~ Votes that do not conform to the above may be struck by any user.

The only valid votes are Keep, Kill, Spam or Dupe. If you wish to abstain from voting, do not vote.

Keep Votes

1. Keep Author vote. --Darwinson 20:25, 4 July 2007 (BST)
2. Keep Ok. Sounds reasonable.--Seventythree 20:26, 4 July 2007 (BST)
3. Keep It's reasonable. But I really do like having blood splattered safety goggles. --User:Axe27/Sig 20:29, 4 July 2007 (BST)
4. Keep Fair and reasonable. The justification makes sense (re: Limited Edition articles). --Ryiis 20:32, 4 July 2007 (BST)
5. Keep - Still don't see the point really, but eh. What the hell?-- dǝǝɥs oʇ ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 20:33, 4 July 2007 (BST)
6. Keep - well... ok... --Duke Garland_T^{LCD SSZ} 21:23, 4 July 2007 (BST)
7. Keep - Do we only have one hotel/motel pr. suburb? - BzAli 21:40, 4 July 2007 (BST)
8. Keep - Save the party hats! Vault 22:03, 4 July 2007 (BST)
9. Keep - Yeah, when you have rare clothing item (like kilt), getting a new one is hard.--KiT 22:20, 4 July 2007 (BST)
10. Keep/Change - I think this works as RP flavour. However you shouldn't be able to save party hats - they are made of paper! (I wonder when the last one will be destroyed?) 'arm. 22:30, 4 July 2007 (BST)
11. Keep - I agree with this for one reason, unique time items. Someone shouldn't lose say the party hat they can only have gotten a while ago because as a zombie they got combat revived, or they got killed so much it disappeared. It just seems wrong.--karek 03:22, 5 July 2007 (BST)
12. Keep i hate having to go to a mansion to get my top hats.--'BP^Tmz 00:45, 5 July 2007 (BST)
13. Keep - Ok, unique clothing, hard to find yada yada. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 04:11, 5 July 2007 (BST)
14. Keep - I just got my red beret from Fort Creedy, and I'm not in a hurry to go there again. --Midianian 13:14, 5 July 2007 (BST)
15. Keep Perfectly feasible. ---DrBowman
16. Keep - It'd be a good addition --Ju Ju Master
17. Keep - But to correct you, items found in Fort Creedy can be found in Whittenside, at Fort Perryn (apart from the fort specific dogtags).
18. Keep Karek said it. VFD642 22:27, 5 July 2007 (BST)
19. Keep - Don't mind this one, however I think that Vista does have a point. --_Ducis ^Dux_Sloth^Talk 01:13, 6 July 2007 (BST)
20. KEEP Makes sense. There must be a laundry machine in hotels and buildings etc. --RayHanley 10:03, 8 July 2007 (BST)
21. Keep - yup. ~m ^T! 17:11, 8 July 2007 (BST)
22. Keep - seems like a good idea to me.I don't want to have to run over to Brooksville just to get new black robes.---Chill

Kill Votes

1. Kill -- Amongst wildland firefighters, the people whose clothes are always neat, clean, and unstained by soot are assumed to be either useless layabouts or posers trying to be cool. I believe the same attitude would prevail in a zombie apocalypse scenario. If the clothes were to deteriorate to the point where they fell off, then I could see a point. --Firemanrik 22:17, 4 July 2007 (BST)

   RE: Considering that clothing eventually deteriorates to "torn, brown rag", IIRC, there's a point to at least mending clothing. --Darwinson 22:53, 4 July 2007 (BST) Clothing does not normally become a "brown rag". I correct myself. --Darwinson 22:56, 4 July 2007 (BST)

2. Kill -Limited edition articles should deteriorate. It's impossible to mend and clean a paper hat. Cleaned and repaired clothing never resemble new clothing. The wear and tear on clothing in this setting would be to great to justify repear and cleaning to this degree. Normal clothing is extremely easy to find, if you want to waer Special clothing you should go the extra mile.-- Vista  +1  09:04, 5 July 2007 (BST)

   RE: Do note the suggestion in the submission to have "mended" and "stained" as statuses for, well, mended and stained clothing; admittedly, not a part of the suggestion proper, but something for discussion. Likewise, I was using the paper hat as an illustration; I expect we should see more 'unique' clothes in the future - Santa hats at Christmas, perhaps? --Darwinson 02:52, 6 July 2007 (BST)

Spam/Dupe Votes

1. Isn't this a dupe? New justification =/= new suggestion. --Magentaine 00:37, 5 July 2007 (BST)

   RE: Not a dupe; I changed the mechanic. And added location-based requirements. And a generator requirement. And... --Darwinson 01:18, 5 July 2007 (BST)

   Changes are too minor. My Dupe vote remains. --Magentaine 05:47, 5 July 2007 (BST)

   If you don't mind my asking, what changes would you consider sufficiently major to make this not a dupe, in your opinion? --Darwinson 23:36, 6 July 2007 (BST)

2. Dupey Spam - Pointless fluff, just like last time -- boxy ^{T Nuts2U DA} 02:38, 5 July 2007 (BST)
3. Above. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 22:59, 8 July 2007 (BST)