[panthers17nfl]

------------------------------------------
Old Section

I'm not saying we should implement the idea, or that it's awesome, I'm just saying it because it popped into my head (hence, the idea section).

So boundary blocks...

Basically they would work like this: you place these blocks (at least 3) in a certain area, anything within that area is under the effect/protection/whatever the boundary blocks create.

For example, some of us hate de PvP, some of us love it. Say you have a, oh I dunno, Stadium built (hey wait, Kurachi has one of those). Within this stadium in the fighting area you would place - lets go 4 boundary blocks. Anywhere within that area (including max height->bedrock) has pvp enabled. Both players have to be inside the zone for it to be allowed.

In another example, maybe we want to have cities officialized further. We have a channel creator plugin, don't we? Have it so that city owners can create a separate channel for their city. Place the boundary blocks down surrounding the city limits, and then any player inside that city may type to and read from the city-chat for that particular city.

Conversely, these blocks can also show areas that prohibit certain actions from taking place (no removing blocks, no building, no pvp, etc)

Now of course, with this kind of technical ability, admins would have to oversee every instance of placing these blocks, and it would have to be so that only admins could destroy them. I don't think there will be a problem with people making troll-tastically large boundaries, as admins will oversee their placement.

In addition, the effects of these blocks can be limited to certain people. For example, to prevent griefers in a city, one may place the boundary blocks and then, being the owner of the city, decides who has the rights to build/destroy within these boundaries.

---------------------------------------------------------------

In summary, here are the pros and cons I see to this idea:
Pros
-Legitimizes Cities: Be it for better or for worse, with these blocks, cities will become more legitimate. With their own channels, building rights areas, etc., they will behave more like a true city and become a more serious concept rather than just a collective of houses.
-Reduces Griefers Drastically: Of course, I'm not psychic. I can pretty well predict that with griefers unable to do anything inside these boundaries (no building, no destroying, no placing water/lava, no looting, etc.), there's really not a whole lot they can do inside the city. This coincides with the first Pro, as removing griefers from the equation makes city management a lot less frustrating. I wouldn't say "simpler", because without griefers, it gives cities the ability to look towards doing other things rather than trying to catch those that are breaking server rules anyway.
-Reduces Frustration: Pretty straightforward. I won't name city names, but a good portion of cities have had their fair share of griefers. Some cities shrug it off, others demand reparations. In any case, having these boundary blocks would eliminate the entire entourage of complaint tirades that goes on in global after a city has been griefed. The entire entourage, panthers? But what if someone on the trusted list griefs the city? Well, first off, A. it would be alot easier to find out who it was since you as the city owner know who is on that trusted list. And B. if you put him/her on the trusted list in the first place, it is entirely and absolutely your fault ). Oh wait! That just gave me another idea for a Pro:
-Enhances Responsibility: Like i just said, having this makes the city owners responsible for every griefing instance in their city, because it's only he that could have made the mistake of trusting someone. So yeah, your fault, not the admins', not the glitched out creepers', yours.
-Creativity Maintained: Preventing griefers from griefing does not equate to lack of creativity. These boundary blocks and special build rights would not mean "okay, you have to build an identical house with no personality whatsoever". It's the same as always, so long as you're a trusted member.


Cons
-Subtracts from the Vanilla-ness of this server: For those of you unaware, Intelli likes to maintain this server to be as vanilla as possible. Having this additional plugin would subtract from this because it poses an artificial advantage to living in a city (in the case of anti-griefer boundary blocks).
-Very high maintinence on the admins' ends: Imagine having to keep track of who is in possession of these blocks, where and what they're being used for, and, in the event of exclusive-rights boundaries, who has those rights. There is probably a simpler method of doing it, though. For example, maybe the city owner has a command console to decide who has rights within these boundaries.
-Removes the "survival" aspect: While I don't believe it to be so, some people find that having griefers as a prevalent force enhances the survival aspect. As this is against the server rules in the first place, I would have to say that it isn't something to encourage. In any case, some people enjoy having to protect themselves from griefers and like the cunning it takes to hide from them. This would remove that aspect from cities.
-Tough to program: Just my guess, but something with this kind of capability sounds like it would be very difficult to program and use on a SMP server.

[Cogohst]

I was actually just thinking about something like this...