I don’t think being consigned, or “cast”, to hell precludes a preference to go there and I don’t think death and hades is “hell”. Christ now has keys over the general resurrection. Not over where you want to wind up. But anyway…
I think “eternal conscious suffering” is a pretty good definition for most people (whether from a hard Calvinist torture-for-God’s-glory to an Arminian giving-up-to-the-passions). But that would exclude Annihilationists, no? That’s why I think something like “eternal suffering” would be best.
But I still think we should go for a positive title. Who really cares about what they deny? That’s not the most important part. Freud rejected a traditional “hellism”. Why isn’t he on the list? So did Edward Fudge. I think this thread should be about what they’re actually affirming, namely: some form of ultimate reconciliation. But that’s just my two cents…
It’s difficult to define what a “hopeful universalist” actually is, but Greg Boyd should be considered a convinced annihilationist/hopeful universalist. You can see this hope here and his hopeful belief in post-mortem salvation here.