Recent posts by donseptico on Kongregate

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Theoretic Wonders: Man and Machine

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-31637149 (seemed apt – although no time right now)

 
Flag Post

Topic: Wartune / mods

Complaining on the forum will get you nowhere – I’ve sent you the ID of the person who moderated your posts – you’ll need to take it up with him.

 
Flag Post

Topic: AdVenture Capitalist / Prices off?

Price of each business increases by a different percentage for each one you buy… newspapers go up by 15% (from memory!) and oil a mere 7% for example

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / United States laws "Utah Shame" Edition

Originally posted by cromagin2:

Ok let me put it another way, do you think 55 years mandatory in jail ( in reality, a death sentence ) is OK for carrying 8 oz of weed? Do you consider that humane?

Originally posted by donseptico:

In this one specific case the resultant sentence seems to be excessive (as I’ve said and agreed multiple times)

although – side note – the 55 years isn’t simply for ‘carrying 8oz of weed’ (as has also been mentioned repeatedly)

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / United States laws "Utah Shame" Edition

There are plenty of academic opinions as to the efficacy (or lack thereof) of incarceration however I’m not aware that was an issue in this (and similar) cases.

The point of a minimum sentence (whatever that might be… incarceration, probation, community service, fines, etc) is that it’s the starting point treating every offender the same for the same offence… obviously the level at which the minimum sentence is set should be appropriate to the offence in question.

The balance of mitigating and aggravating factors allows the courts to level an appropriate indictment and for the judge to then tailor the sentence more closely to the particular circumstances of each case.

 
Flag Post

Topic: AdVenture Capitalist / Purchased but not received

kuku – you’ll need to contact HH directly for in-game purchasing problems… Adventurecapitalis@hyperhippo.ca

 
Flag Post

Topic: AdVenture Capitalist / Upgrade sacrificing AI question?

No, you lose the upgrades as and when you reset your game.

 
Flag Post

Topic: AdVenture Capitalist / Do the angels that you don't spend carry over?

Yup, absolutely… you retain any unspent angels at each reset.

 
Flag Post

Topic: AdVenture Capitalist / Offline Progress completely broken

It’s a known problem (that keeps coming back, affecting some but not all, etc)… something the devs have said they’re trying to fix.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / United States laws "Utah Shame" Edition

What more is there to understand cro?

minimum/maximum sentences ensure that, at a minimum, all persons convicted of a certain crime are treated the same.

the range (to a maximum) allows the judge some discretion in sentencing to allow for mitigating and aggravating features.

In this one specific case the resultant sentence seems to be excessive (as I’ve said and agreed multiple times) however

nowhere in any of the reading does it suggest he had an unfair trial – the jury decided there was sufficient evidence to convict, etc.

the fact that the ‘controlled buys’ were for ‘only’ 8oz is kinda irrelevant to the charge of possession with intent to supply – he knowingly and of his own free will engaged in ‘criminal activity’ – it should, and did, factor in the sentencing for that part of the tariff.

the defendent’s lack of knowledge about the intricacies of the law do not mitigate against him receiving the mandated sentence – until and unless the law is changed (and yes, to reiterate, the current mandated sentence for 2nd indictment onwards is excessive imo) – that would be 5yrs + 25yrs for each subsequent indictment. However, any change in the law would not normally apply retrospectively.

the particular statute under which he was convicted has been on the books for aaaaaaaages – certainly sufficient time for it to be challenged on several occasions (I’ve read in my research some of the SC decisions) – suggesting that they find it to be constitutional in principle (if nothing else).

the only thing people can realistically do is campaign for a change in the law (to make the minimum sentence more appropriate) and or for presidential pardons/commutation of sentence where the ‘majority popular opinion’ is that the resultant sentence is excessive.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / United States laws "Utah Shame" Edition

yawns… was up way too late looking in to this…

Not that I’m a lawyer (by any stretch of the imagination)… but ignorance of the law isn’t a mitigating factor in and of itself as far as I’m, and the law is, concerned although having said that, I can’t help but wonder at the difference between the two ‘carrying during the commission of a crime’ counts and the third ‘oh look, he also happens to have several guns at home’ count which, imo, lacks the link to the predicating indictment… (what I’m trying to say there, by analogy, is if arrested for drunk and disorderly, having a car at home does not warrant a further charge of ‘intent to commit drunk driving’ as the car is incidental to, rather than integral to, the crime in question)… mayhaps a good defence attorney could get at least 25yrs knocked off the sentence :/

 
Flag Post

Topic: AdVenture Capitalist / The music stinks.

Oh you want separate controls… well, I guess that’s what happens when you scan through posts… you’re right, reading comprehension seems low at times… suggestions go in the suggestions thread :P

 
Flag Post

Topic: AdVenture Capitalist / Help bugs!

Kindly stick to reporting bugs in the bug thread… makes it easier for the devs to find (rather than sift through the forum when it’s bumped off the first page).

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Book Club 2015

Due to the late start on The doors of his face… suggest holding off on any review/discussion until Friday?

 
Flag Post

Topic: AdVenture Capitalist / Angels

Word of advice… when you get a load more angels you’ll be looking at resetting every ‘time period’ rather than doubling up (as that could take weeks)… presently I reset every 4-5 days (usually for around +20% AI).

 
Flag Post

Topic: AdVenture Capitalist / Super Pac Man cash Upgrade

Trite answer – get more angels!

Lengthier answer – upgrade where you can, reset frequently (covering AT LEAST your angel expenditure + 10%) – eventually you’ll cross the ‘hump’ for the next upgrade.

 
Flag Post

Topic: AdVenture Capitalist / Angel purchases *2

http://www.kongregate.com/forums/2606-adventure-capitalist/topics/422011-angel-investor-formula

the tl;dr version – there’s no fixed amount per angel – it keeps going up!

 
Flag Post

Topic: AdVenture Capitalist / The music stinks.

Turn off music/sfx from the super secret button located in game! (click the capitalist profile pic at the top left, the button’s on the screen that pops up)

 
Flag Post

Topic: AdVenture Capitalist / Any Newb Tips?

the number of AI you get is determined solely by the formula posted in the FAQ thread (where you’ll also find some tips and tricks used by other players).

 
Flag Post

Topic: AdVenture Capitalist / Still no offline earnings? Are you kidding me?

Originally posted by EverEvie:

Offline earnings bug has been going non-stop for days now, and the devs have opened a “suggestion” thread without fixing it. This is ridiculous.

The suggestions thread has very little to do with prioritising or fixing existing/known bugs – it is for community suggestions for improvements/inclusions that the developers may not have already considered.

That said, merely ‘suggesting’ they fix the bug (or reporting it) doesn’t guarantee an immediate, if any, response – unlike some developers I could mention HH does seem to care somewhat about the players and the ‘state of the game’ and, I’m pretty sure, they’re working on resolving this issue (and others) although, obviously, that’s taking time and may realistically, due to reasons beyond their control, never get fixed.

Obviously I hope that’s not the case but it is entirely possible :(

edit: rather than make a second post… let’s try and treat each other civilly eh? while no insult may have been intended above, consider how any response you make comes across before pressing the post button.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / United States laws "Utah Shame" Edition

federal sentencing guidelines manual

Interesting…

Based on the very limited information available to us, this federal sentencing calculator comes out at a sentence of 18-24 months for 3 counts of possession with intent to supply (1-3 oz, organic THC), while in possession of a firearm, with some previous criminal history…

So one has to wonder what it is we’re unaware of that bumped it up to 55 years (660 months)

EDIT: Some extensive digging later…

The case of Weldon Angelos illustrates the unduly severe sentences that stacking mandatory minimum penalties under section 924© produces. The Judicial Conference of the United States has twice cited Angelos’s case in opposition to stacking section 924© penalties in its testimony before Congress, and has similarly cited the case in
testimony before the Commission. Angelos was a 24-year-old first-time offender convicted of three counts of an offense under section 924©, among other offenses, in the District of Utah. His offense conduct was not extraordinary among drug offenses; he was the target of “controlled buys” in which a governmental informant purchased eight ounces of marijuana from Angelos on three occasions. On two of those occasions, Angelos was known to have possessed a firearm. A subsequent search of Angelos’s residence revealed three pounds of marijuana and three additional firearms. Angelos’s three convictions of an offense under section 924© were based on the two transactions at which he possessed a firearm, and the additional firearms found at his residence.

Interestingly, facing 3 counts under 924© – giving the minimum of 55yrs – he reportedly declined a plea bargain for ‘only’ 15yrs (still excessive, but a whole lot better than 55, no?)

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / United States laws "Utah Shame" Edition

Originally posted by karmakoolkid:

And, just a huge FYI here, the man wasn’t robbing anyone … he was selling POT to an undercover agent — a sting — entrapment. What was he going to do, MAKE them buy his pot at gunpoint?

a) It’s only entrapment if the LEO induced the defendant to commit a crime he was otherwise unlikely to commit – it’s hardly reasonable to suggest that this defendant was only carrying ‘not a small quantity’ ($1000 worth is mentioned in the article) to sell pot to the LEO and had no interest in selling to anyone else.

b) Assuming he actually had a gun on him, what you or I think he may or may not have done with it is, frankly, irrelevant – for the purposes of sentencing mere possession is recognised as an ‘aggravating factor’ of whatever crime(s) he was committing at that time (actually using it in the commission of a crime would result in a harsher sentence again).

If one reads the entire story in the link, a few really odious revelations pop up. A child rapist will likely do only 11 yrs. A terrorist will do only 20 yrs.

All this minimum sentencing shit comes down to is the insane witch hunt that got started w/ the famous, yet utterly fucked up, War On Drugs.

Umm, no they don’t… there is brief mention of them in the video segment however.

Does the same principle not apply to other crimes over there? The child rapist you highlight would only serve 11 years no matter the number of counts against him/her, on any aggravating factors (such as being armed or in a position of authority)?

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / United States laws "Utah Shame" Edition

Originally posted by karmakoolkid

All of that said, the OP’s point is that 55 yrs. w/o chance for parole is not only waaaaay out of the ordinary for such crime, it really isn’t that difficult to view it as being Unconstitutional because of it being unusual & cruel_.

Sorry but that makes no sense whatsoever… if the sentence given is the minimum for the crime(s) (for which he was convicted) then it is, by definition, completely ordinary


Originally posted by urine420:

I don’t want to be accused of mod sass, but donseptico seems to have a real case of just world fallacy.

OK, had to go look that up… “The “just world fallacy” is the belief that a person always gets what they deserve in life.” (assuming that’s what you’re referring to?) – um, no.

None of the above suggests that the legal system is infallible or any of the other points you raise in your opening paragraph… in fact, I support minimum and maximum sentences for those convicted in an effort reduce discriminatory sentencing (as in it has to be the same for everyone)… Nothing I said suggests that this particular minimum sentence is set appropriately or that this particular individual ‘got what he deserved’. Assuming he was actually guilty of what that society has deemed to be a crime then yes, he deserved to be punished according to that society’s rules… but, to paraphrase what I said above, serving a consecutive sentences for 3 counts totalling 55 years is excessive, concurrent sentences would be better (at approx 18 years)… but, depending on the exact circumstances of the crimes, could still be excessive.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Anyone got experience with wills and probate (uk law)?

Originally posted by cromagin2:

Since they are not getting a free house and land anymore, what are their plans now? I hope you follow up with all of us on this issue.

Without wishing to sound trite – they’ll either stay, or they’ll move (I’d wager on them moving, but that’s just my opinion at this point in time) – either way, keep trying to save for a deposit for a place of their own.

And I do so love your definition of free :P


Originally posted by thepunisher52:

Basically, unless you have a proof that she agreed before hand about this property transfer, you are as you pale buggers say “Shite out of luck mate.”

Just my two cents.

I suppose the original will, depending on exactly how it is phrased and when it is dated (and I’ve not had sight of it), could constitute proof of the agreement between parties… that said, I don’t think they’ll want the stress/hassle/uncertainty (i.e. is, as I postulated above, the new landlord wanting to sell the property – in which case they’d have to find somewhere new anyhow) and will simply move on to pastures new.

£480… 1951… oh how times have changed :)

 
Flag Post

Topic: AdVenture Capitalist / Allowed to buy things I can't afford

coughs – let’s play nicely or simply ignore oneanother :)