[rab] Passers-by just starting things for the hell of it... is that necessarily a bad thing? Some of the most memorable games have started like that ("wigwam" on Orange springs to mind, but there are others). I'm starting to think we'd be better off it all games were treated as fast burners and we encouraged a much faster turnaround for games, to keep people interested and stop us all (me included) getting too caught up in only one or two games and ignoring all the rest. I've heard people say that years ago, the MC servers did have games which were much shorter, only lasting a day or so.
Killing a game is easy creating a game that people want to play is more difficult, something different does not go down well, so players do not feel confident in filling a vacant slot. My worry over a timed game is once it has been timed out it will reappear as ...the Return Again of... which happened only recently. I would like to see more people prepared to start games and not stand on the side lines saying "what shall we do now, what shall we do now". With a regular turnover there will be flops and hits. The reason games hang around is the reluctance to replace them. I would not want to see time limits just more bravery with the sythe. Afterall what is the turnover of games on MCOiS where there are 18 active games.
[Darren] It's not a bad thing if it occurs only once in a while, but on the Lockisseum nuisance games were started on an almost daily basis until Dunx brought in the login system. I neither want the maintenance burden of cleaning up, nor to enforce logins for the starting of new games.
[Inkspot] Well, that would be all well and good if people actually killed games, but they don't so it seems that some form of encouragement is needed.