I've always found it inconvenient to have to be friends with someone before you can give them a pet. Could this change to be moreso like stickers where you can either give the pet to someone on your friend list or just type the name in? It'd be much more practical. There could also be a point where the pet is in limbo so the recipient can accept or deny the pet instead of instantly getting it. If the pet is denied, the giver would get the pet back. The giver's slot would not be available for use until the pet is successfully transferred.

No. I really like that you gotta be friends with someone, because you can't troll people and send them terribly named pets to spite them, and fill all their slots.

It's also incredibly easy to typo a name. So, if you typo the name, bye bye pet

I'm lukewarm on accept/deny. I like the way it works right now, because I'm scatterbrained.

Also, it wouldn't really stop spite adopting, people would just spam people with accept/deny requests. That wouldn't solve the problem.

So much potential harassment.

I would support an accept/deny thing, I always thought it was weird you just instantly got a pet.

It's really weird that friends can just send any pet over when I have space, 'anyone can send me but I have to accept' sounds like a much better function.

I definitely would like this, but only with an accept/deny for the recipient. I assume the friends-only feature is because there isn't an accept/deny option but it doesn't stop your friends from sending you pets you don't particularly want anyway.

How would that be different than spamming them with comments? If it's bad, people can report or block, or ignore it and have a bajillion requests in limbo.

I would like there to be an accept/deny pet confirmation, and without having to be friends with another user. This would be a lot more practical than having to send a friend request, wait for them to accept, then send a pet and wait for that to be accepted or rejected. Not to mention it's senseless to add a person as a friend just to have to go back and remove them.

Similar was suggested here

I would be okay with an accept/deny function. Harassment is a reportable offense anyway, so that is something that could be dealt with just like any other harassment and spam.

But I think an accept/deny function would be good, maybe even with a limit of a couple of days to act on it and if you don't then the pet just goes back to the person who tried to send it.

I don't really care either way about having to be a "friend" first. But I have always thought it was pretty dumb to not have an accept/deny button. There have been plenty of dicks sending their unwanted pets to people just for the fuck of it. Just because we're friends doesn't mean I want ThisIsAPetName1029384756.

Ideas for other points brought up in this thread:

Option to 'only accept pets from friends', that can be turned off according to whatever people feel comfortable with. I doubt many people would just create pets for harassment, but there are black sheep that would search for any way to get pass the block system. Also add that blocked users can't send you pet requests?

Autocomplete search for users, just like the shop search. Like you type in 'rock' and the search shows you every user that has rock in its name. You can select the username you're looking for but you could still change it. Just like the shop search. But for users.