I recently had a friend accidentally send me her pet. Instead of having the option to give it back, I have to wait 30 DAYS to send it back. This is sort of a inconvience for both her and I.... my suggestion would allow this to not be a hassle when things like this happen.

Accept or Reject a pet being sent to you from a friend. It would give yo uthe option if you wanted to accept with so many hours/days to accept (48 hrs for example) or reject. In that time period the person sending the pet wouldn't be allowed to adopt or create another pet unless they had enough slots available to keep the one being sent if it was rejected. If rejected and the original owner doesn't want it, they would have the option to keep it our pound it. This would cut down on accidental sendings and the whole 30 day punishment on BOTH accounts. I get why it is there, however there should be the option to accept ore reject a pet if you don't want it. After it times out its all on the original owner and no one is really out either way if something like that happens again.

Pros and cons? anyone else like this idea? I know some will say toss it in the pound, I won't do that to a friend but thought this suggestion may be useful

I support this, this should have been put in place when pet transfers were implemented in the first place.

Yes please. I feel like I've voiced my support for this somewhere before but I'd still like to see it happen~

Supporting. I'm surprised this was implemented in the first place.

I agree with this idea. Seems pretty functional and wouldn't really hurt anything.

Full support. I've always thought that it was odd this wasn't a feature.

yes, a 10000% yes. when i was a newbie i thought i'd made a friend only to get 2 horribly named pets after two days of being on subeta.. and i was stuck keeping them since you can't pound until your acct is a certain age. this option would have been AMAZING to have.

I support this for the simple reason that the receiving user should have a choice. But, I am not sure how it could an accident. You have to click give pet to a friend and then you have to scroll to their username with a big button that says Give XXXX a New Home! And the text above that is in bold.

Ahh in that case then yes I could see it. Perhaps another change should be that it is a type box instead of a scroll down box. Only it would only bring up your friendlist to prevent mistyping of the username. Much like search shops but again limited to your friendlist. Still I support it because I have seen in the past people dumping pets on others.

I've always questioned why this wasn't already implemented. The person receiving the pet should always have an option. I've never had an issue with the system how it is though. But I feel having the option and not needing it is better than not having an option at all. The only concern I could even see is where that pet is really at while in limbo. I'd have to say it makes sense for the pet to still be a part of the senders pet count until accepted.

That would be nice. Or, instead of starting the dropdown with a username, change it to "Select a friend"

But I've supported suggestions to change it to sending a pet to any user and not just friends, so a type-in box in addition or instead of the dropdown would be nice.

I don't really send or receive pets so I didn't realize this is still a thing. That being said: this is still a thing??? Pretty sure it's been requested since the feature rolled out, lol.

It only makes sense. And the 'surprise' is still really there when you get the notification they want to send you a pet, if that's the concern.

Definite support, I remember reading a few threads where people were given pets randomly when they hadn't really wanted/asked for them in the first place.

Also jeeze a whole month to wait when it was an accident, ouch!

Wow this wasn't already an option with this feature?? I've never sent or received a pet but I'd be pretty annoyed if someone sent me a pet I didn't want and I couldn't do anything about it for 30 days. That's so ridiculous.

I know that this has been suggested before in the past, and I will again support it. You should have to officially agree to getting a pet.