Sure, on the outside looking in that is equally just as fine, but when we look closer and find that certain people cannot garner as much wealth from their very own Motherland counterparts because of no fault of their own, then is it really the same? When do the lines start to blur between these two?

So it’s fine - savvy, even - to use other-worldly connections and cliques to advance your agenda, but when other-worldly wealth is concerned, we should be more selective about when those alternative avenues can be utilized?

I guess we can say that these "mystery hitlisters" lack the mental fortitude or IQ points to use their own gun?

I’d also like to take this opportunity to point out how incredibly narrow-minded this sounds. Trying to fabricate some sort of correlation between gun building and IQ? Really?

  So it’s fine - savvy, even - to use other-worldly connections and cliques to advance your agenda, but when other-worldly wealth is concerned, we should be more selective about when those alternative avenues can be utilized?

Not quite sure what clique or indeed agenda I am part of, but I would assume that these repeat hitlisters would also have cliques and connections to affront their agenda, if not then it is something they could easily acquire. That is pretty much a level playing field. However other worldy possessions and wealth coming into play is not the same, it's not someone can easily make up. That's the main discrepancy between the two.

I’d also like to take this opportunity to point out how incredibly narrow-minded this sounds. Trying to fabricate some sort of correlation between gun building and IQ? Really?

Well shooting actually requires precise eye-hand coordination that will most likely be determined in the future to have certain skills like visual and movement. These two skills could be classified as a brain thingy (cognitive ability), thus PERHAPS having the adverse or indeed beneficial impact on said IQ. Whether or not you completely agree with it, there is a possibility of a correlation there. I don't see the fabrication there. Perhaps if you just automatically dismiss it, it would be narrow minded of you?

That's pretty much my two cents on it all. No one here should be that put out by what I have said, it's an opinion, just the same as anyone else in this conversation, including my own Manhattan residents.

Everyone who’s anyone has been on the list at some point - hell, even I’ve been hit listed in the past (and I’m a treasure; universally loved)

I have never heard of you. You do, however, give off the same aura of someone I knew once. That doesn't mean anything, just neat based on the similarities. 

 Not quite sure what clique or indeed agenda I am part of...

I never said you were a part of any clique, but let’s be honest; anyone without some sort of historical inter-dimensional relationship to a certain numbers related clique seems to have inexplicably walked off a cliff, or died falling down some stairs recently. The upper echelons of that gang seem to be mostly excelling recently. Maybe that’s just coincidence though.

Nevertheless, the point I intended to make was that it’s not reasonable to highlight one aspect of the other-worldly that isn’t currently convenient to you, whilst disregarding all the benefits you may have obtained as a result of other-worldly ties (those are plural “you’s”, just to be clear).

They are two faces of the same coin as far as I’m concerned. You are free to develop and use connections to progress, just as others are free to use their ‘old-country’ savings to affect change. I suppose I just find it tasteless to want to deprive other people of their other-worldly advantages from an ivory tower.

...there is a possibility of a correlation there. I don't see the fabrication there.

There’s either correlation or there’s fabrication. I would contend that shooting relies on practice, not grey matter. As a matter of fact, I’d actually go so far as to say that I believe you’re actually less likely to encounter a top rate shooter at a Mensa convention than you are almost anywhere else in the world. Geeks, right? Nevertheless, I’m willing to listen if you wish to try to elaborate on how stupid people are poorer marksmen than the intelligentsia?

That's pretty much my two cents on it all. No one here should be that put out by what I have said, it's an opinion, just the same as anyone else in this conversation...

Never a truer word spoken. I discuss and debate not out of anger or malice, but because I have a flair for it. Sadly I also possess a distinct lack of ability when it comes to acquiring friends. I guess that puts me in the low IQ group alongside the hitlisters. Sad face.

Others have mentioned about how the hitlist has been around forever, and others have mentioned how that Mr Durdens influence hasn't.   This thing of ours has evolved throughout the years.  From very, very, very old and rather water damaged old diaries I can see that ancestors of mine spoke of times between two very similar lands, where bodyguards were non-existent and there was a very real and present threat from any new gangster on the streets. 

In those times the hitlist was a threatening means, as many gangsters would come into the streets, take a shot and possibly miss or come out of it with a big payday.  The money then just went immediately to their children as they'd either be quickly caught or put the gun in their own mouth.  When I say big payday, certainly big at the time, but nowhere near the vast quantities of money available now - back then I can see from entries underground groups would be formed collecting money for such hitlist entries. 

Many very old names build a legacy on exactly this type of behaviour, cross them and they'd send wave after wave of gangster progeny, most missing their shot of course but enough hits over time would go through that their name would be known.  Back then there wasn't the same reliance on having a big, throbbing, gun (still I believe a 1% change) - but also there wasn't an army of bodyguards to contend with either.  With the introduction of BGs that changed.  Many things were changed by City Hall and the CH of websites past.  

Nowadays it would take considerably more effort to take the shot and 'cash out' the hit, which means the shooter would have to determine if the risk of missing / getting caught was worth the loss of the time they'd invested.  It seems purely to help draw out Mr Durden, which the person put on the hitlist has no control over when he appears or when he can disappear.  There is an order that must be followed and the victim has no way of helping to alter that than firing shots.

Perhaps, another alternative is to have the value of hits go down as time goes on?  Currently they are up and will remain that way until bought off or the person is dead.  If, as time went on, they reduced in value (City Hall has expenses, they might need to dip into any available funds) to the point that if neither of the previous outcomes happened they'd simply disappear?  

Also another issue with anonymous hitlisting is it also doesn't open any sort of discourse, much like we have here, to debate what happened or other ramifications of it.  Sure there is a thread in the streets from GF Takkar but is the hitlister involved or actively refuting what was said?  There is a possibility, certainly one person voicing a contrary opinion, but it is unlikely that person is the one who ponied up the funds.   This leaves everyone not involved hearing accusations from one end, an explanation from the other, and only one side actually responding to questions.  To me that doesn't help the aggrieved to actually state their case.  

Before I start off, I want to make myself clear: I am in no way, shape nor form saying the hits on Takkar, TallGuy and the late Papua were/are self-made hits. These arguments/responses are just to respond to the questions asked whilst disregarding the current hits. From this sentence on, if I don't mention directly someone who is/has been on the hitlist, assume I'm talking about hits in general; the purpose being to avoid any kind of confusion.

You asked if the hitlist has ever served a purpose. The answer to that is yes. Empirically, we've seen it have an effect. As witnessed during the Curtis and Grin regime that was prior to this one, 2 godfathers died due to Tyler's gun. Another argument that favours the side that the hitlist does in fact serve a purpose, albeit a bit more theoretical, has been done empirically in the past. This second argument is posting hits on yourself or someone else to stir some sort of uncertainty or, at the very worst, chaos. Some records do show that someone under the name Kuku has done this before and has, to some level, infinitesimally small or to some gargantuan effect, succeeded in regards to his goals.

What is the point in our hitlist, if it isn't being used for the intended effect?

I already spoke on this question, but I want to add something here as it is a bit disassociated with the last part of my monologue. The "intended effect" of the hitlist isn't directly defined by the hitlist, but rather by the people who use it. Hence, I think the question is wrong. It is being used for the intended effect, as the intended effect is thought by the hitlisters and not the hitlist itself. Just because someone thinks a certain way, it doesn't mean it's the only way to think. Just because an object is built for a certain purpose, it doesn't mean others won't find another purpose to it. Meaning changes through time.

If Tyler Durden is neutered of his ability to kill this on the hitlist, does it even remain relevant?

I'm assuming here that this is theoretical thinking. A "what if" of sorts. As I mentioned at the start, Tyler isn't neutered of his ability because even if he shoots like a toddler with Parkinson's disease, he still hit two Godfathers of the last regime. So, it would be dull to argue this question considering there is evidence of the contrary, other than considering the theoretical implications. The way I'm understanding this is not "if" as in it did happen, but rather "if" as in if it were to happen. If it were to happen, then, like I aforementioned, the hitlist could be used to stir up uncertainty among leaders or otherwise. Whether this goal is met or not is not really of importance because, as I said before, the intended effect is thought by the hitlisters, not the hitlist itself. Thus, it remains relevant as long as the hitlisters find relevancy in the hitlist .

Have people got to go back to putting in hard work to kill the targets they want dead?

I do have to say I don't quite understand this question with the way it's formulated, but I'll give it a shot in the off-chance that I do understand it. I comprehend this as asking if people should just put in hard work to kill the targets they want dead. Well, can we argue that the recent takedown was because of said hard work put in by the wiped districts? Assuming it was, then this goes to show that one of the reasons to use the hitlist is to allow the "small fish" to go against "the big fish" when their hard work has been snuffed out, which also reinforces the idea that the hitlist is still relevant and has a purpose. On the other side of the coin, if we assume it wasn't, can we argue that the current regime would have had more hurdles to jump over if Tyler didn't shoot dead 2 godfathers in the prior regime? Now, to be lucid, I'm not taking away anything the current leaders have done. I've stated publicly before that I commended their efforts and that this regime is by far the best in years. However, hard work needs some luck. These two shots, including the deaths pertaining to the time where even gangsters can shoot at people of status, regardless of rank, meshed very well with their hard work. Would they be where they are without this luck? Would we be where we are without this luck? It's too arduous to try and argue this point, but it does show that hitlisting does help the victor too.

How many of your kin will inherit one hundred billion dollars of credit assets on your death and be able to use it in this way? Would it turn them into a bully if they did?

Up to this point, I've been almost purely factual and tried to keep my opinion out of it. On this last question, though, I think it's more appropriate to give an opinionated argument rather than a factual one. Personally, I don't think the money is worth it. Whatsoever. It hurts the reputation of your lineage and of your future generation. 100 million is nothing compared to the massive stain to be left on one's legacy. Furthermore, I don't think it's about the money. The money is just to make it difficult to buy the hit off. The money is just there so that Tyler can take his time to shoot because of said difficulty. The money is there to add longevity to the hit so that people of all cities can see it and the reason behind it. I heavily doubt anyone puts that much money up expecting anything to be done about it by another mafioso. It's just for psychological reasons/manipulations and to let Tyler chime in.

With all this said, I shall retreat to my maple cave unless prodded to come back out. It can be strenuous on me to be this serious without cracking a joke or saying dumb stuff. Nonetheless, interesting topic of conversation and I'll always enjoy debates like this.

Toodles

I've got a couple thoughts/solutions here.  I'm old and demented, so forgive me if they seem a little delusional and contradictory.

1) Being the socialist I am, I love to apply taxes.  If the Crew Leaders are so worried to pay off the hits - why don't they just fund the payoff by driving up the taxes and making us all pay?   Once the hit is paid, the taxes can be reduced.

2) Anyone with a powerful gun isn't going to use it on the hitlisted person because they've invested money and time in their marksmanship prowess.  The payoff doesn't warrant the risk.  With this in mind - I wonder what it would be like if said shooter obtained no witnesses in the killing.  Some with a powerful gun may be enticed to take the shot if they knew that no witness statements were generated.  Then - they get the riches to control the mobster underworld however they want.  The rest of us are left to follow the huge dollar amounts and create our own conclusions.  A mobster whodunnit if you will.  The paranoia would be surreal and the coffee shop discussions would be riveting.  Let's face it, Tyler is fairly useless and anticlimactic.

Anyway, being the leader I am - I don't have time for problems.  Only solutions.  I'm gonna make this place fucking rock again.  

 The young teen  listened to the conversation  and was late as usual but there was  so much  that was said and she was still a child and had the thought processes of a child. But she was curious so she listened and pondered then after her thoughts were formulated she spoke up . Rosalia paused giving a respectful moment of silence, because in her tradition it was disrespectful to mention those who had recently passed. She  wondered how she should address the issues . 

Too many times someone comes out here and says one or two things about a topic and then it gets drawn away from the main idea to a million other sub related topics. Then the main points never get a resolution. 

There are two  main points as I understand them they are:  one a portion of the citizens are upset that outsourced money from off shore accounts  are  being used to fund  hitlists.  The second point I see being made is that these hitlists are being made by anonymous entities. 

Those who know of me know I am in support of community improvement. This like self work is never complete.  Things can always  be improved and the minute we think they can't be is the minute we  are no longer evolving.   

You see everyone has the same chances to get these off shore accounts, and to save their funds in them. Some just have to work a little harder than others, this is a simple fact of life. No matter if you believe in  Socialistic government practices or Democratic ones. My bloodline for example has had to work hard to save money in these offshore accounts. So I know it can be done.

 First thing to fix the issue is to change the way we think. Thing is most people want to invest in themselves and then they are mad when they lose that investment. If they changed their perspective towards investing in the community instead of self, then they would never lose their investment and avoid the negativity that the bitterness of lost investment brings. 

  So let give this short analogy.  Sometimes a market needs to be drained so that it does not burst. Much  like a dam and sudden unexpected  flood happens drowning all those who thought building dams and living in the valley below  the dam was a smart idea. 

This is what  I see the hitlist as, the dam that is let loose under controlled guidelines, instead of  a crashing flood.  
So, getting rid of it is the wrong idea.
However making it so that only on shore earned  money can be used to register them and  pay these off may be a proper option.  There is always some sort of option even if you have to think outside the box so maybe someone has another idea. 

She paused a moment as her thoughts changed  direction to her other point.

As far  as making it so that the poster is not anonymous my bloodlines have posted hits on  a couple people and I see it  is noted in the family bible  that everyone  of them did it out right showing it was they who posted the hit.  Only cowards hide, there is no nicer way to say that unfortunately. 

So I say let them stay anonymous, but make it a penalty to do so.

Such a penalty could be that the hit listed person gets a defense bonus or 

a bonus could be a  chance to wack the poster if the hit is not complete within 24 hours.

or 

It could even be that if the hit is not complete within 48 hours the hit listed person  gets a permanent bonus added to defense for surviving a hit. 

 My main point is that the person who posts the hit should have to  think twice and depending on the person maybe half a dozen times, before posting a hit on someone. 

 These ideas can be improved upon but I think making the person paying for the hit have to think about doing it may reduce some of the issue with taking money from the community as it seems to be the complaint. 

Personally I just laugh looking in hitlist and can sit and having fun into it.

I can in some way understand some that put others in there but mostly its a terrible thing ii the game actually.

During many years back theres so much anger from other against some which is very sad.

From my side I think its no point having it with this hitlist

Since it just a way to get people angry its a pretty bad way of it.

I know I already spoke here, but I'd like to elaborate on the discussion following the changes to be made by city hall in regards to the way mobsters can post hits and the way the hitlist will work.

In my previous reply, I answered directly each and every one of Mezzo's questions. Now, I feel like some of my answers need changing or need to be updated. I'll reiterate a point I said previously:

The "intended effect" of the hitlist isn't directly defined by the hitlist, but rather by the people who use it. Hence, I think the question is wrong. It is being used for the intended effect, as the intended effect is thought by the hitlisters and not the hitlist itself. Just because someone thinks a certain way, it doesn't mean it's the only way to think. Just because an object is built for a certain purpose, it doesn't mean others won't find another purpose to it. Meaning changes through time.

 Now, I stand by what I said, but because the head of city hall stated this in his most recent announcement to this date, I feel like this is a perfect example of explaining further my previous argument:

This addresses all valid concerns that I have, keeping the hitlist in place as a tool that can be used to hold people accountable, while also making the decision to attempt to kill someone a human one.

With this statement, we clearly see the initial "intended effect" of the hitlist brought forth by the Squishster himself. However, I did say that the hitlist is directly defined by the people who use it and I still stand by it. Like I said, "Just because an object is built for a certain purpose, it doesn't mean others won't find another purpose to it. Meaning changes through time." However, I'd like to ponder one of the side effects of these changes.

Do I think the modifications to the punishments of the hitlist are proportional to the punishments before? No. I think these new punishments are much more potent than the ones to be replaced. At the end of my last speech, I said that the hitlist isn't there for the money:

The money is just to make it difficult to buy the hit off. The money is just there so that Tyler can take his time to shoot because of said difficulty. The money is there to add longevity to the hit so that people of all cities can see it and the reason behind it. I heavily doubt anyone puts that much money up expecting anything to be done about it by another mafioso. It's just for psychological reasons/manipulations and to let Tyler chime in.

 Now that anyone can shoot after 2 days of a hit being up, regardless of auth, we scratch out Tyler and we bring in users. This is what I think is most dangerous. At the end of the day, Tyler and the young mafiosos that can shoot those of stature have the same chance of hitting. However, what's dangerous here is the frequency of the shots. See, before, Tyler had to wait a whole day before shooting. We also had to wait for his arrival. He also had to wait a day in between shots. However, now, these time restrictions aren't in effect as of very soon. This is what's most dangerous. When the money becomes too difficult to buy off, this is when the problem becomes too big. I think that the intent of the head of city hall was to reduce some of the frustrating factors brought forth by the hitlist, but, personally, I think this change makes it worse. However, because the "intended effect" is thought by the hitlisters, it remains to see if I'll be wrong on my initial assessment. Hopefully, I will be.