Suggestion:20070813 Fort Bodies Dumps

	Dupe
	This suggestion has been found to be a dupe of peer reviewed suggestion. Dupes are easily found by searching for them in the main and suggestion namespaces.

Suggestion by --Secruss 22:11, 13 August 2007 (BST)

Suggestion type
Fort Body Dumps

Suggestion scope
Bodies in a fort.

Suggestion description
OK, everyone who’s been present at a fort siege as either a zombie or human, knows that any zombie inside the fort can get a free meal every day from the gatehouse if they are simply inside the fort.

The idea goes like this, any body lying outside of a building in the fort complex(except for outside the gatehouse), or on the exercise yard, or training ground may be moved inside the gatehouse by pressing the “Move Body to Gatehouse” button for 2 AP. This simply places the body inside the gatehouse. From there, you would have to dump the body outside the gatehouse.

Bodies inside the other buildings of the Fort would still have to be dumped out their own buildings.

There would be no distinction from revivifying bodies and normal dead bodies.

The entire dumping process would take ~4 AP.

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 - If only to remind Kevan that we've been wanting to dump bodies from forts for a year now.--Labine50 ^MHG|MEMS 06:59, 14 August 2007 (BST)

Kill Votes

Spam/Dupe Votes

1. Dupe - This suggestion is a bad knock-off of this Peer-Reviewed suggestion. There is a problem with forts, but second-rate dupe suggestions are never going to get it fixed. Please - either look through past suggestions to see if you're duping anything, or use Talk:Suggestions to get some feedback before you put something up in the firing line. -- Pavluk 22:36, 13 August 2007 (BST)
2. Dupe - Many times and in many ways, but the above one covers it.  Swiers 22:49, 13 August 2007 (BST) Seventythree- my fort revision suggestion almost passed- with one less kill vote, it would have. It was substantially different and new, so didn't get voted voted (much) as a dupe, but in being different, it was also seen as needlessly complex. And truthfully, Funt's suggestion does solve the problem efficiently- hence it gets duped so often.  Swiers 23:34, 13 August 2007 (BST)
3. Well, we're all looking a bit silly after today's changes, huh?--Seventythree 23:22, 14 August 2007 (BST)

   Nope, because a dupe of a decent and now implemented suggestion is STILL a dupe. Voting dupe doen't mean you think the idea is BAD.  Swiers 23:43, 14 August 2007 (BST)

4. Dupe - Did'nt you suggest something along these lines Swiers? Where did that end up anyway? I liked it.--Seventythree 23:13, 13 August 2007 (BST)
5. Dupe - Gotta love bandwagoning.-- dǝǝɥs oʇ ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 00:48, 14 August 2007 (BST)
6. Dupe - and I would spam it too cause it is something that doesn't/shouldn't be done.--Karek^maps?! 01:08, 14 August 2007 (BST)
7. Dupe - Useless vote. +1 link to my page. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 01:27, 14 August 2007 (BST)
8. Dupe - Good job finding and addressing a problem. Next time, though, check to see if someone (or a whole bunch of people, actually) has already found and addressed it. --Steakfish 02:08, 14 August 2007 (BST)

   *Pulls our a lump of hair.* DAMN IT. --Secruss 03:13, 14 August 2007 (BST)

9. Dupe - i'm with the dupe train...--~~~~_T^''' 09:25, 14 August 2007 (BST)

---