I don't really know if this will ever crop up again after this current situation is resolved surrounding the hit over Achilles, so feel free not to waste any time putting this in if it will take any time, but I don't really think anyone should still be classed as innocent if they are either erecting or renewing hits on people. That's a pretty naughty thing to be involved with after all. 

I thought this was already in place. If not i'd support it being put in. 

There'd be no way for us to tell until after they've died I think Snidely, since there are no w/s's produced (unlike the case with shooting Forts)

no zoey. it would jsut mean that if you shoot them at thug, it doesn't cost you a point of gun skill

so because a mouthy POS gets hitlisted we should implement a feature to prevent it from happening again? or make it harder to happen again? it shouldnt matter who pays to renew a hit especially anonymously, if we implement it so that someone who is tagged renews a hit anonymously all of a sudden loses a tag then peop-le will start hunting new players/accounts thinking that person was the person who renewed the hit and it will drive people away from this game

I am against it.

Also, you can't refresh a hit until Gangster. Isn't that what was just put in anyways? Or is it soon to be implemented? Thought I read that somewhere.

Either way. I am still against this idea.

Are they the ones taking the shot at you? Obviously not.

Many people want someone else killed at least once in their time here. Doesn't mean they need to dirty their hands. An anonymous hit is meant to be untraceable. Therefore this suggestion is not at all a good one.

Taking the shot is irrelevant to this suggestion.

You're advocating that someone should be classed as "innocent" who has offered a reward for the death of another person. This is a contract killing. I cannot conceive a reality where the definition of innocent could include that action. I appreciate this is the Mafia, but I can't really think of any other way to explain how "innocence" should work in this situation than the fact people get a life sentence in prison for doing this. 

Keep the -1 on their profile to protect their anonymity if that is the actual concern as I'm not suggesting the anonymity is compromised, just the unfairness of being punished twice. 

Yet you want to be able to get that +1 for someone that didnt shoot you or PP you. So yeah I think that is wrong.

You say you want to keep them anonymous yet you think that people wont start shooting young members just to find out if they are the ones posting or renewing hits. I think you are advocating for trouble. Maybe not consciously but it leads to that possibility.

So I am against it. Unless they shoot you or your BGs themselves, I think it should be left the way it is.

I would consider renewing or raising a hit on my head far more detrimental than a PP. How can you tell me this is an innocent act and a PP isn't? Come on. People go to jail for life for doing this!!

Why would people start shooting young members to find out if they are posting or renewing hits?

A) Squishy wouldn't allow that and would dramatically increase the harm done to your account, likely resulting in a ban.

B) Why would you automatically assume it was a "young member" doing it?

People operate by discovering evidence and then acting upon it, not baseless assumptions. 

The only thing this would do is not punish those putting a bullet in people who are actively trying to cause them harm, which sounds fair to me. I'd even settle for a +0 being better than a -1. 

Because I figure an older member would PP (since majority seem to enjoy that) or have a shooting range or shot something by the time they get a few days old. I could be wrong.

Did you know that some PP in hopes of causing a flip out that leads to someones death? Yet that person doesnt end up dead. So you are right I see no issue with renewing hits in general. Unless that person is the one actually taking the shot I dont see why anything should be done.

It's not like a leader gets killed if their member rogues. Since they weren't the ones taking the shot. So yeah I think a -1 is fine for those shooting the hit renewers. All they are doing in my eyes is wasting their money on hope that someone is stupid enough to accept the offer and hit. It's the other person you should be more concerned about, you know the one actually shooting at the person on the hitlist.

Ok, I'm not really seeing there being anything to gain from us continuing to go back and forth on this one because I honestly don't understand the point you're trying to make anymore and you seem to just be ignoring the fact that if this is done IRL it would carry a life sentence. How doing something that illegal doesn't bust your innocence protection, I have no idea.

You can't make everything as it was IRL. Or we wouldn't have low rankers as hands. Sometimes it just doesn't work in a game. So my point is I don't see this working.

We are both entitled to our opinions. That is the point of having them and making them on a suggestions box. We just have a difference of opinion.

That's pretty much how I thought it already was. So that sounds good.