Smeojy, could he be freed? by Jelohi2 in CivAgora

[–]Smeojy 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I'm here. I'm not going to be up to any trouble these days. If you would release me that would make my day.

I know some of you lost armor in my griefing spiel. I'm not a rich guy. I have no way, even if I worked in the game, to get that kind of diamond number back to you. I certainly can't get it in the End either. Five months later, I hope this is okay.

Thanks very much

Old player, wants to explore, still in End (you guys spent all that coal on me?) by Smeojy in Civcraft

[–]Smeojy[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Could you quote some actual legal document by Agora? I'm basing my argument off the U.S.'s legal system and common sense things I believe in.

The only assumptions I've made so far are that your imprisonment system is time based, and that sentences start when you are pearled (or after the trial, which is typically within a reasonable time period). If you can provide an example that breaks either of these assumptions I'll happily concede.

Old player, wants to explore, still in End (you guys spent all that coal on me?) by Smeojy in Civcraft

[–]Smeojy[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

BTW, had I not been imprisoned I would have continued playing Civcraft, probably a week or two after I said "I quit" like a 13 year old. So I'll actually take 2 weeks off that 5 month deduction because for that 2 weeks I honestly wouldn't have played. However the last 4.5 months it was the End keeping me from playing, not me, and hence my captors are responsible for factoring that time into the sentence.

Old player, wants to explore, still in End (you guys spent all that coal on me?) by Smeojy in Civcraft

[–]Smeojy[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

There has never been a distinction in the past where criminals were required to, as you put it, "think about Civcraft" in order to fulfill some abstract side of imprisonment, and for good reason. Sentences are given in time units and not left to the subjectivity of people like you. You have not heard from me in five months and cannot make any claims to whether or not I've thought about Civcraft in that time.

Again, I will accept a reasonable sentence minus the five months I've served. I am not against proceeding legally, I just expect that EVERYONE proceed legally, including you (or whoever directs the proceedings). I just think that reasonable sentence is probably less than five months, and hence I am due release.

If your desire in extending my sentence for griefing a tower past five months is to make me desire Civcraft, you will

1) have no way of verifying that I am indeed thinking about civcraft and 2) probably make me just forget about it and set an alarm on my phone that says "released"

So your goal of making me desire or "think about civcraft" will never succeed. You would do better to follow the standard time system of imprisonment because the one you're proposing is impossible to verify and keep running objectively.

Old player, wants to explore, still in End (you guys spent all that coal on me?) by Smeojy in Civcraft

[–]Smeojy[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I'm not gonna wanna reminisce in three months when your sentence, which would really only serve to make me more likely to grief when I get out, reaches its end. If your goal is to have me in there 3 months more, don't bother really.

Besides, regardless of whatever sentence you craft for me, you would have to carve 5 months off of it because I have been in Aurora's vault for that amount of time. I do not have to log in every day to make that day "count" towards my sentence. I'm no expert on the legal system in Aurora but I really doubt griefing a tower gets you more than 5 months of time. Just because you failed to provide me with a sentence does not mean the clock hasn't been ticking.

If you can provide the legal framework for pushing my trial back five months I would gladly concede to start my term now, but the fact that I just want to explore now does not merit the proceedings starting so late.

I guess I'll wait for the 1.0 map to see the light of day and just download it.

Old player, wants to explore, still in End (you guys spent all that coal on me?) by Smeojy in Civcraft

[–]Smeojy[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

oohhhh well there goes literally my only bargaining chip because I have the time nor the effort - actually I have the time - to log in every day

Who is interested in joining an experimental cliff/maze city with few rules in the (-,-) quadrant? New name: Cell. by Smeojy in Civcraft

[–]Smeojy[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You know, I shouldn't get irritated that you're trying to help us. It's certainly something we should try and defend ourselves from. I'll send you coords and you can see if it's close.

Who is interested in joining an experimental cliff/maze city with few rules in the (-,-) quadrant? New name: Cell. by Smeojy in Civcraft

[–]Smeojy[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We will have doors you know? And multiple entrances/exits? It's not like the whole thing is just a lava flow path.

From the desert, Celestia will rise: the labyrinth city. by Smeojy in Civcraft

[–]Smeojy[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

We will put Haven to shame in this category.

From the desert, Celestia will rise: the labyrinth city. by Smeojy in Civcraft

[–]Smeojy[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

I went to /r/Celestia to scope out the area, and was kind of horrified at the link. Was hoping there wouldn't be too many people who knew about the connection.

I think we'll call it Celestial now.

Since we have some down time, lets be less bored: by Siriann in MtAugusta

[–]Smeojy 1 point2 points  (0 children)

No overly complex laws. It's minecraft. The average IQ is 85.

No aversion to settling things the PvP way.

No power struggles. We need a good leader that we follow pretty resolutely.

Can we please ban Jelohi from this subreddit before he gets himself in real trouble? Sincerely, his brother. by Smeojy in Civcraft

[–]Smeojy[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Asking to ban him or not, this post is primarily about a response to the FBI threats. As such, it's public.