#Ineligible Receiver

[bookstattoosandtea]

Blog Tour, Excerpt & Giveaway: Roughing the Kicker by Rheland Richmond & Emerson Beckett

Blog Tour, Excerpt & Giveaway: Roughing the KickerBy Rheland Richmond & Emerson Beckett The Package Deal Series, Book 6 Do you believe in fate? Yeah, me neither until the sexy Navy SEAL I hooked up with three years ago suddenly reappears back in my life in the form of one of my best friends’ older brother. And now, they want me to share a room with him in the Keys.  “Can you share a room with…

[itmeblog]

If you are voting by mail do it early!!

Last time I voted by mail my ballot reached its destination in 1 day (i live in a very big city with a robust mailing system) and this was before the grand push they have every election. This year it was six!! Which is truly shocking because it takes that long for my letters to reach a friend halfway across the country??

[doyoulikethissong-poll]

Aaliyah - Are You That Somebody? 1998

"Are You That Somebody?" is a song recorded by American singer and actress Aaliyah for the Dr. Dolittle soundtrack. It was written by Static Major and Timbaland, with the latter producing it, in addition to performing a guest rap. It is an R&B, pop, soul, and avant-funk song with hip hop influences. Its production also incorporates other instrumentals such as staccato guitars, beatboxing, and drum and bass. The Dr. Dolittle soundtrack was released on June 16, 1998 and consisted of a blend of hip hop and contemporary R&B. The soundtrack was a huge success, peaking at 4 on both the Billboard 200 and the Top R&B/Hip-Hop Albums and was certified 2× Multi-Platinum on October 20 the same year.

Upon its release, "Are You That Somebody?" received critical acclaim from music critics, with them praising its off-beat innovative production. In 1999, Aaliyah earned a Grammy Award nomination for Best Female R&B Vocal Performance for the song. Initially, it was ineligible to chart on the Billboard Hot 100 because it was an airplay single not commercially released to retail stores but in December 1998, Billboard changed its policy to allow airplay-only songs to chart, and the song eventually peaked at number 21. Internationally, the song achieved even greater commercial success, peaking at number one in New Zealand and number three in the Netherlands. It also peaked at number 11 in Canada and the UK.

An accompanying music video for "Are You That Somebody?" was directed by Mark Gerard with choreography orchestrated by Fatima Robinson. It received acclaim from the music industry, receiving Best R&B Video and Best Video from a Film nominations at the 1999 MTV Video Music Awards. The video also earned a nomination for Outstanding Music Video at the NAACP Image Awards. Throughout the years, critics have praised the video for its choreography, with many highlighting the flamenco routine depicted in the final scene.

"Are You That Somebody?" received a total of 68,8% yes votes! Previous Aaliyah polls: #217 "Try Again".

[drchucktingle]

dq

finally had time to get informed about @xiranjayzhao, rebecca f kuang and @neil-gaiman being removed from hugo ballot without explanation and hugos claiming they were 'disqualified' but not being able to say why. there is something about this that i think only i can say so here goes:

i philosophically believe my story SPACE RAPTOR BUTT INVASION deserved its nomination because of my views on art, but i also know my views are rare and extreme. my circumstances were very unique and strange, so consider this: EVEN SPACE RAPTOR BUTT INVASION WAS NOT DISQUALIFIED

look up the circumstances of my nomination if you are unfamiliar. apparently that was NOT enough for a disqualification but some mysterious thing about the work of @xiranjayzhao, rebecca f kuang and @neil-gaiman is?

again i am not saying i should have been disqualified and i could write a dang 50 page thesis on art theory and why i believe in my nomination, but compared against the current situation it says a LOT. i am very disturbed and saddened by the treatment of these authors.

[synchodai]

I get this impression that House of the Dragon doesn't get that "named" heirs aren't really the norm in Westeros. If it were that easy for someone to just give everything to their favorite child, Randall Tarly wouldn't have needed to force Sam to go to the Wall and Tywin could have simply chosen Cersei over Tyrion as heir of Casterly Rock.

If we look at the history Westeros borrows from, the concept of "naming" heirs wasn't really a thing in medieval England. Landed gentry didn't have direct say over the order of succession until the Statute of Wills in 1540. Before then, land and subsequent titles could only be inherited through agnatic primogeniture.

Agnatic primogeniture prioritized the living, eldest, trueborn son. Claims can only be passed on patrilineally. This means that a grandaughter can inherit a claim of her grandfather's titles through her father, but a grandson cannot be given the same through his mother. However, if his mother finally does have land and titles under her own name (not under her father's), only then does her son and other children enter the line of succession.

The reason it was like this was because it kept land and titles under one family. Daughters are less preferred because when they are married, they become part of their husband's family — meaning that any titles they receive will be inherited through a new line. This wouldn't be an ideal situation because it gives two families claims to the titles. The more claimants there are, the more unstable the hold the owner has.

In other words, agnatic primogeniture was practiced for stability. Because back in the day, titles weren't just property or land. They came with governorship over a people, so a stable and predictable transfer of titles was necessary to avoid civil conflicts and questions of legitimacy.

A landed lord or lady wasn't given the right to designate heirs for a few reasons:

Most of them were vassals who oversaw the land in the name of someone higher up. It technically isn't even theirs to give away (see: feudal land tenure).

The wishes of a human being are less predictable than having a determined line of succession based on birth order. What if he becomes incapable of declaring an heir either through illness or disability? What if he's captured and a bad actor forces him to name this person heir under threat of violence?

People died unexpectedly all time. This was before germ theory and modern medicine — child mortality was extremely high. With no refrigeration technology, a single poor harvest could mean dying from starvation. Bandits, cutthroats, and raiders were a constant threat. They could not afford to rely on a person choosing a different heir every time the old heir drops dead, because the landed lord/lady could die just as suddenly.

Even 21st century families stab each other in the back over who gets grandma's house — so imagine having an uncertain line of succession in the middle ages over a life-defining lordship and without a modern-day court system to mediate.

Going back to HotD, whenever Targaryens did go against the established line of succession, they could only have done it by consolidating the support of their vassals. Only royalty seemed to have the power to bend agnatic primogeniture, but even then they were beholden to it.

When Jaehaerys I ascended the throne over Aerea, it was mainly because there were those who saw Maegor the Cruel's act of disinheriting Jaehaerys as null and void. This restored Jaehaerys place in the line of succession above Aerea.

And when Rhaenys was passed over for Baelon, Jaehaerys had to convene his lords and offer compelling reasons as to why — her young age, her lack of an heir, her Velaryon last name, etc. It wasn't a given that just because she was a woman that she was ineligible. If he was doing it purely out of misogyny, he still had to legally justify his misogyny in order to strip away her rights.

Even after consolidating support, the book mentions Jaehaerys I and Viserys I's respective hold on the crown was still weakened. Even though their claims were backed by reasons cosigned by a powerful majority, they still had to ensure the security of their rule through other means. There were people who doubted their right to rule, and those people had to be placated with gifts (by Viserys) or intimidated into submission (by Jaehaerys).

So we come to Viserys I who never gave his vassals a reason why Rhaenyra should supercede his three sons other than, "I said so." Had he convened with his lords and maybe made the argument that a first marriage takes precendence over a second one, then maybe he could have set a new precedent and gathered support.

But no, he didn't. He relied on the power of his own words and the lords' personal oaths — oaths that he didn't exactly plan how he would enforce posthumously.

And the Realm did not choose to adopt a different succession law after Jaehaerys's designation of Baelon in 92 AC or the Council of Harrenhal choosing Viserys on 101 AC. If those two events did change anything, it was that now women were exempt from the line of succession for the crown and only the crown. It did not set the precedence that monarchs could freely choose heirs. It did not upend the whole system; it only made a tweak, as most lawful policy-changes do, by carving out at an exception. It was a committee, not a revolution.

Before and after the Dance, no other monarch, lord, or lady "declared" an heir that went against agnatic primogeniture, save for Dornish who have cognatic (equal-gender) primogeniture instead. Ramsay had to get rid of Roose Bolton's living trueborn son AND be legitimized by the crown in order to be recognized as heir (only a crowned monarch can legitimize baseborn children which is another world-building pillar a lot of people miss). Randall basically had to force Sam to abdicate because he wanted his younger brother to inherit instead. And of course, Tywin despite his intense hatred of Tyrion is forced to acknowledge him as his heir.

The rigidity of the line of succession is a major and constant source of conflict in the series, so it baffles me that people really thought that characters could just freely choose their heirs. That's why we have a civil war. It wasn't a misunderstanding. It's the expected consequences of someone carelessly going against a foundational tenent of the society they inhabit.

[booasaur]

I still see claims that Biden simply can't do much about this genocide.

Yet another person has resigned, one who has served for a long time and is not naive to what being in the US government requires.

Frankly she allows more than my liberal ass would!

But things have gone too far even for her.

The reason this report is so important is that if found in violation, Israel would have become ineligible to receive US weapons.

Effectively, the White House interfered with a State Department report to falsely declare Israel isn't starving Palestinians so they could continue sending them weapons to kill Palestinians. This isn't on Congress, this isn't him being restrained from taking actions. He very much did take actions.

[alwaysbewoke]

Thomas Jennings was a free man born in 1791 in New York City. He was 30 years old when he was granted a patent for a dry cleaning process. In his early 20s Thomas Jennings became a tailor, and later opened a dry cleaning business in the city. As a tailor. Jennings' skills were so admired that people near and far came to him to alter or custom tailor items of clothing for them. Eventually, Jennings reputation grew such that he was able to open his own store on Church street which grew into one of the largest clothing stores in New York City. While running his business Jennings developed dry-scouring. He had many customers complain of their clothes being ruined by stains and so he began experimenting with cleaners and mixtures that would remove the stains without harming the material. He earned a large amount of money as a tailor and even more with his dry scouring invention and most of the money he earned went to his abolitionist activities. In 1831, Thomas Jennings became assistant secretary for the First Annual Convention of the People of Color in Philadelphia, PA. Thomas L. Jennings Dry Scouring technique created modern day dry cleaning. Jennings was fortunate that he was a free man at the time of his invention. Besides all the other indignities and cruelties slaves had to face, they were also ineligible to hold a patent. Under the US patent laws of 1793 a person must sign an oath or declaration stating that they were a citizen of the USA. While there were, apparently, provisions through which a slave could enjoy patent protection, the ability of a slave to seek out, receive and defend a patent was unlikely. Later, in 1858, the patent office changed the laws, stating that since slaves were not citizens, they could not hold a patent. Furthermore, the court said that the slave owner, not being the true inventor could not apply for a patent either. Thomas Jennings died in New York City in 1856.

[pherson-of-the-year]

Send me your nominations for the Pherson of the Year

Since I know we all love polls and brackets I've decided to create a tournament for the 2024 Pherson of the Year - inspired by the Time Person of the Year - where through democracy we will pick the person who has done the most for phannie culture this past year (we will be using the concept of person very loosely)

You can send your nominations in my ask box, once I feel I have received enough nominations I will create a tournament bracket and post 24-hour long polls until we reach a winner

Anyone and anything can be eligible as long as it is in some way related to Dan and Phil

The only ones who are ineligible are Dan and Phil themselves and also anything that is literally just them in a costume (so no Sister Daniel, sorry kids)

Go nuts, be creative with your nominations cause I want some silly polls

This is run by @personthattoleratesme cause I'm bored

[theguildawards]

We're All Fired Up!!

Hey everyone!

The Guild Awards are back for the second term of 2024! We hope everyone had a wonderful summer season! Thank you to those who participated last term for making it so enjoyable. We look forward to all the new fanfiction and fanart to be nominated for this term.

Shout out to @pencilofawesomeness for creating last term's banners! If you haven't received yours, please reach out to one of the mods asap!

Our roulette category for this term is Best NSFW Fanfiction. This is defined as: Sexual Content/Smut with plot. Both one-shots and specific chapters from multi-chapter fics are accepted in this category. If coming from a multi-chapter fic, a link for that specific chapter is required and must include content depicting an act of sexual nature. (i.e.: intercourse, masturbation, heavy petting - etc.

As a reminder, there is a Winner Ban in place. This means that once any piece of artwork or fanfiction has won an award for a category, it automatically becomes ineligible and cannot be nominated again for that category. However, it can be nominated for other categories after two consecutive terms have passed (ie: one year since that piece won) as long as it fits within that definition. We do not have a rule against nominating an author/artist back into the category they won for in the past, as long as its a different piece of work that is being nominated.

In addition, we are also going to have a mobile-friendly Google Doc with all current nominations listed. This will be updated as frequently as possible so you can be aware of all the nominations that have currently been reviewed and notified. Hopefully this will help everyone select their own nominations. You can access this doc here.

If it was not mentioned above, chances are it hasn’t changed. Please be aware that the moderators always take suggestions regarding how the awards are run and category changes into consideration. You can read up on the most recent FAQs, Rules of Eligibility, and Categories for more information. [these links are only available on desktop]

For ease of access, we also include a mobile-friendly Google Docs for the FAQs, Rules of Eligibility, and Categories that will be kept up-to-date each term, which can be viewed here.

The Second Term 2024 Nomination Period will begin October 1st and will end October 31st. Please send in your nominations through the submit button. If you have any questions or concerns, don’t hesitate to send in an ask or reach out to one of the mods!

Don’t forget we also have a discord that is open to everyone!

Mods: @classysassy9791​, @kiliinstinct​, @phoenix-before-the-flame​, @ratretro​, @phoeneboxfairy​

Please reblog and spread the word of the start of the new term!

[queerandprochoice]

So I’m about three weeks post-op for my hysterectomy and I’ve been thinking about something a lot lately.

I have O- type blood, meaning I’m a universal blood donor. Anyone can receive my blood, and O- is in constant demand because of this. If there’s no time to blood test in an emergency situation, O- is essential.

I’m nearly 26, and I’ve never donated blood. Why? Because I’ve never been eligible. The guidelines for donation are extremely strict in order to protect both donors and recipients. You have to meet age requirements, weight requirements, sexuality requirements, and can be ineligible because of a host of health conditions, because of certain medications, having new tattoos or piercings, travel to certain areas, etc. You can get turned away for being even slightly anemic.

Blood donations save lives; just one donation can save three people’s lives. It’s relatively quick, mostly painless, and extremely low-risk. But we don’t force anyone to donate; it’s entirely voluntary. If I was required to donate blood as frequently as possible, I theoretically could save a dozen or so people a year, but we don’t do that because that would be a violation of my rights. We don’t force people who are ineligible to donate anyway because it still might save a life. We don’t try and pressure people into donation if they don’t want to. Nobody says “well if you didn’t want to donate blood, you shouldn’t have gotten your blood typed.” There are no fake blood donation clinics that coerce you into donating if you’re ineligible or uninterested. There are no incentives or bribes or remuneration to convince people to donate blood, aside from a juice box and maybe some cookies. We don’t make cis men donate every 56 days, or cis women every 84 days. We don’t let underweight or underage people donate. We don’t deny people certain medications because they might want/have to donate blood. We protect the privacy of blood donors.

Blood donations save lives, but we only allow people to donate under extremely safe and 100% voluntary conditions. Are there some legitimate problems with some of the requirements, especially those related to gender and sexuality? Yeah absolutely, a lot of them are super outdated and homophobic. But the point is that our society values personal choice and bodily autonomy, as well as the health and safety of the donors, over potential lives saved. The same principles of consent and bodily autonomy apply to organ donation. You can’t even remove organs from a corpse to use for transplants unless that person had consented while they were alive.

Before I went into surgery, I also had to sign a consent form that would allow me to receive a blood transfusion if it was necessary.

We don’t allow forced blood or organ donations, and we have pretty stringent requirements for blood donors, because we value safety, consent, and bodily autonomy over quantity of life. And yet, anti-choicers want to force people to undergo pregnancy and birth—a far more dangerous, lengthy, and painful ordeal—because “it’s a life.” A ten year old isn’t old enough to donate blood, but is apparently old enough to carry a pregnancy to term.

It’s pretty fucked up how when it comes to abortion rights, it seems like health and safety, consent, and bodily autonomy suddenly don’t matter anymore.

Also, please consider donating blood if you can.

[log6]

In a letter to Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., the State Department confirmed that Hamas is a designated foreign terrorist organization and that the State Dept. has the power to revoke visas.

"The Department of State also has broad authority under the [Immigration and Nationality Act] to revoke visas," the agency said. "We exercise the authority when there is information or evidence indicating a visa holder may be ineligible for a U.S. visa."

Additionally, it said that when it receives "derogatory information" indicating ineligibility, it takes "immediate action" which can include revocation of visas.

"Even after issuance of a visa, the Department of State works closely with the Department of Homeland Security and other partner agencies to ensure every visa applicant is continuously screened to ensure they remain eligible for travel to the United States," it told Rubio.

The department also said it "shares your outrage regarding Hamas’ brutal attack against the State of Israel and its citizens."

[archive.org mirror]

[bookstattoosandtea]

Release Blitz, Excerpt & Giveaway: Roughing the Kicker by Rheland Richmond & Emerson Beckett

Release Blitz, Excerpt & Giveaway: Roughing the KickerBy Rheland Richmond & Emerson Beckett The Package Deal Series, Book 6 Do you believe in fate? Yeah, me neither until the sexy Navy SEAL I hooked up with three years ago suddenly reappears back in my life in the form of one of my best friends’ older brother. And now, they want me to share a room with him in the Keys. “Can you share a room with…

[genshin-impact-updates]

Xbox Player Recruitment: Genshin Impact Xbox Series X|S Test Player Recruitment Now Open

Genshin Impact is about to launch on Xbox, and we're launching the "Xbox Test" for Travelers to experience and provide feedback.

Sign up to participate now!

After joining the test server, complete certain testing tasks on the server for a chance to receive a certain amount of Primogems as a reward on the official server.

*Please note that this recruitment is only for Xbox players. Test participants must have an Xbox Series X|S device; otherwise, they will not be able to participate in the test.

How to Apply

Fill out the survey:

>>>Link<<<

Please read the survey carefully and fill it out accurately. If you are eligible for the test, we will notify you via the contact information provided in the survey.

Submission time

September 6, 2024 11:00 (UTC+8) – September 23, 2024 11:00 (UTC+8)

Estimated start time:

Early October

Device Requirements

Currently Supports

Xbox Series S

Xbox Series X

Confidentiality Notice for Test Content

This player recruitment for the test is focused on Xbox content, and most of the content is still in a state of adjustment.

Considering that leaks from the test server could lead to misunderstandings of the official version's content and negatively impact Travelers' experience with the official release, we thus require Travelers participating in the player database to keep the test content completely confidential and not disclose it in any form (including but not limited to screenshots, live streams, videos, etc.).

Therefore, Travelers who have the opportunity to participate in the test will need to sign a confidentiality agreement.

If it is confirmed that a tester has leaked information, they will be dealt with in accordance with the relevant clauses of the confidentiality agreement.

All content on the test server does not represent the quality of the final release. Please refer to the content of the official version for reference.

Notes

1. This test is only for Xbox, and eligibility is tied to the device used for the initial login. Switching to other devices is not allowed. If you change devices and trigger a ban, it will not be lifted. Account sharing or trading is strictly prohibited, and such actions will be considered a breach of the confidentiality agreement.

2. For important information regarding the test recruitment and relevant details, Travelers should rely on official channels such as HoYoLAB. Please refrain from trusting false information from unofficial sources.

3. All Travelers must fill out the information accurately. We will carefully verify the authenticity of the information provided. If there are discrepancies between the submitted information and the actual details, it may result in ineligibility for this test. If errors in the survey are due to personal reasons, we will consider it as a forfeiture of your test eligibility.

4. The test server does not support in-game purchases. After the current test period ends, all data will be deleted. Test eligibility is only valid for the current test and cannot be inherited, transferred, or sold.

5. Please ensure that you are 18 years old or older. Otherwise, you will not be eligible for the test, and we will not enter into a confidentiality agreement with you.

[doyoulikethissong-poll]

No Doubt - Sunday Morning 1997

"Sunday Morning" is a song by American ska punk band No Doubt for their third studio album, Tragic Kingdom (1995). It was written by Gwen Stefani, Eric Stefani, and Tony Kanal, produced by Matthew Wilder, and released as the album's fifth single on May 27, 1997. The material on Tragic Kingdom documented Gwen Stefani's former relationship with Kanal, which had lasted seven years. Kanal referred to "Sunday Morning" as his favorite No Doubt song in an interview with Rolling Stone magazine in 1997.

The song was not released as a commercial single in the US, making it ineligible to enter the Billboard Hot 100 chart due to rules at the time. However, it managed to peak at number 35 on the Mainstream Top 40 component chart. It also reached number two in Iceland and the top 40 in Australia and Canada.

"Sunday Morning" received a total of 60,4% yes votes!

[patriottruth]

Dumb donald Chump crossed all my lines, so I told his crimes to the FBI. 'Cause Kamala needed cold hard proof, so I gave her some. Now she's got the envelope, where you think she got it from?

To report donald j. trump and all of his potential allies to the FBI for the federal crimes of 2024 election fraud:

https://tips.fbi.gov/home Choice 1: Federal Election Crime

Choice 2: Voter/Ballot Fraud/Corrupt Election Official

For the "Subject" information, choose "This subject is a business" Business Name: Electors and governors attempting to elect insurrectionist Donald J. Trump in violation of Sec3/14A

When did the crime occur? 11/05/2024

Where did the crime occur? Specific location: AL, AK, AZ, AR, FL, GA, ID, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MI, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NC, ND, OH, OK, PA, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, WV, WI, WY

How did you discover the election fraud? Donald J. Trump is an impeached, congressionally investigated, criminally indicted and prosecuted insurrectionist attempting to hold federal office in violation of Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.

What false information was provided? The lies that a U.S. national popular vote, or a ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court, could clear Donald J. Trump's insurrectionist disqualification, instead of a two-thirds vote of the House and Senate.

Did the individual receive something in exchange for their illegal voting activity? Unknown

Did the subject vote multiple times or vote when ineligible to vote? Yes

Did an election official violate a voting law? Yes

Were ballots from the election destroyed? Unknown

Were vote tallies falsified? Unknown

Was there a voting machine/tabulation/software malfunction? Unknown

Please provide a brief description of the incident: On December 17th, 2024, state electors and governors from Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming will be faced with the choices of engaging in fraud by an elections official or other individual, conspiracy against the United States, corruptly obstructing, influencing, and impeding an official proceeding, and conspiracy against rights by giving aid and comfort to disqualified insurrectionist Donald J. Trump in violation of Section 3 of the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. State electors and governors attempting to vote for and create certificates of ascertainment to elect Donald J. Trump would be instantly disqualified from holding office per Sec3/14A, thereby rendering all their actions unlawful.

Are you reporting on behalf of yourself or someone else? Someone else

Victim Information: First Name: Kamala Middle Name: Devi Last Name: Harris Date of Birth: 10/20/1964 Phone Number: Business: (202) 456-1111 Email: vice.president@whitehouse.gov Address: 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20500

Complainant Information: Please uncheck any fields you would prefer not to answer. You don't have to enter your personal information here if you don't want to.

Reported To Law Enforcement: Have you reported this information to another law enforcement or government agency (local, state, or federal)? No

At this point, you can click "Show All" to review your tip. Once you're satisfied with it, just click "Submit Tip" and you're good to go.

For anyone suggesting this is inaccurate, here you go (compiled from Wikipedia):

Article 2: Clause 3: Electoral College See also: Twelfth Amendment to the United States Constitution, Twentieth Amendment to the United States Constitution, Contingent election, Electoral College abolition amendment, Efforts to reform the United States Electoral College, and National Popular Vote Interstate Compact The Electors shall meet in their respective States, and vote by Ballot for two Persons, of whom one at least shall not be an Inhabitant of the same State with themselves. And they shall make a List of all the Persons voted for, and of the Number of Votes for each; which List they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the Seat of the Government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate. The President of the Senate shall, in the Presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the Certificates, and the Votes shall then be counted. The Person having the greatest Number of Votes shall be the President, if such Number be a Majority of the whole Number of Electors appointed; and if there be more than one who have such Majority, and have an equal Number of Votes, then the House of Representatives shall immediately chuse [sic] by Ballot one of them for President; and if no Person have a Majority, then from the five highest on the List the said House shall in like Manner chuse [sic] the President. But in chusing [sic] the President, the Votes shall be taken by States, the Representation from each State having one Vote; A quorum for this Purpose shall consist of a Member or Members from two thirds of the States, and a Majority of all the States shall be necessary to a Choice. In every Case, after the Choice of the President, the Person having the greatest Number of Votes of the Electors shall be the Vice President. But if there should remain two or more who have equal Votes, the Senate shall chuse [sic] from them by Ballot the Vice President.

Electoral College Elector Selection Process Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 of the Constitution requires each state legislature to determine how electors for the state are to be chosen, but it disqualifies any person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, from being an elector. Under Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment, any person who has sworn an oath to support the United States Constitution in order to hold either a state or federal office, and later rebelled against the United States directly or by giving assistance to those doing so, is disqualified from being an elector. Congress may remove this disqualification by a two-thirds vote in each house. (Wikipedia)

Conspiracy against the United States, or conspiracy to defraud the United States, is a federal offense in the United States of America under 18 U.S.C. § 371. The statute originated under a federal law enacted in 1867 that was codified in the Revised Statutes of the United States in 1874, in a subsequent codification of federal penal statutes in 1909, and ultimately in the United States Code in 1948. The crime is that of two or more persons who conspire to commit an offense against the United States, or to defraud the United States.

Statute 18 U.S.C. § 371 provides that:

If two or more persons conspire either to commit any offense against the United States, or to defraud the United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

Corruptly obstructing, influencing, or impeding an official proceeding is a felony under U.S. federal law. It was enacted as part of the Sarbanes–Oxley Act of 2002 in reaction to the Enron scandal, and closed a legal loophole on who could be charged with evidence tampering by defining the new crime very broadly.

This part of the Act later became known as a charge against defendants associated with the 2021 U.S. Capitol attack for attempting to obstruct that year's Electoral College vote count, as well as former President Donald Trump for broader alleged activities to obstruct the election. In June 2024, the Supreme Court ruled in Fischer v. United States that the statute could only be applied when the defendant impaired a physical document or object used in an official proceeding or attempted to do so, a higher bar for conviction than had been used in trials to that point.

Legal basis The crime is codified as 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2). The relevant subsection reads:

(c) Whoever corruptly—

(1) alters, destroys, mutilates, or conceals a record, document, or other object, or attempts to do so, with the intent to impair the object's integrity or availability for use in an official proceeding; or (2) otherwise obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.

The term "official proceeding" is defined in 18 U.S.C. § 1515(a)(1) to include proceedings before federal judges, Congress, federal government agencies, and regulators of insurance businesses.

Conspiracy against rights is a federal offense in the United States of America under 18 U.S.C. § 241:

If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person […] in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same;…

They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

Charges of conspiracy against rights concerning federal election offenses cover activities subverting the integrity of federal elections and do not require direct action towards an individual voter. Election conspiracies prosecuted under conspiracy against rights can be classified as either public schemes (where public officials commit a §241 violation under color of law) or private schemes (where conspirators impinge on the ability for voters to vote).

Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel announced on July 18, 2023, that she had charged sixteen individuals with eight felony counts each, including forgery and conspiracy, alleging they had knowingly signed certificates of ascertainment falsely claiming they were "duly elected and qualified electors" for Michigan. One defendant entered into a cooperation agreement with prosecutors in October 2023 in exchange for charges against him being dropped. Nessel's office disclosed during an April 2024 court hearing that Trump, Meadows, Giuliani and Ellis were unindicted co-conspirators.

On August 1, 2023, at the request of Jack Smith and the Justice Department, a federal grand jury indicted Trump on charges of conspiracy to defraud the United States, conspiracy against rights, obstructing an official proceeding and conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding. The indictment accused Trump of orchestrating a criminal conspiracy to subvert the 2020 election, and identified the fake electors scheme as part of the conspiracy.

On August 15, 2023, Trump and eighteen others were indicted in Georgia. The defendants, who included Trump, Giuliani, Eastman, Meadows, Chesebro, Sidney Powell, David Shafer and Shawn Still among others, were charged with a variety of offenses, many of which related to involvement in the fake electors plot. On October 20, Chesebro pleaded guilty to conspiring to file a false document and was sentenced to five years of probation; he also agreed to testify against the other defendants. Three other defendants (including Powell) also pleaded guilty to charges.

On December 6, 2023, a Clark County, Nevada, grand jury indicted six Republican party officials, including the chair of the Nevada Republican Party, on two felony charges each of submitting fraudulent documents to state and local officials.

By December 2023, 24 fake electors had been criminally charged in three states, and Chesebro was "a witness in all of the cases". However, in January 2024, the Attorney General of New Mexico stated that the fake electors couldn't be prosecuted given the laws of that state.

An Arizona grand jury named eleven alleged fake electors in an April 2024 indictment. Among those named were former Arizona Republican Party chair Kelli Ward and Tyler Bowyer, chief operating officer of Turning Point USA. Names of seven others charged were redacted from the indictment, and Trump was listed as "Unindicted Coconspirator 1". The Washington Post reported the redacted individuals were Mark Meadows, Rudy Giuliani, Jenna Ellis, John Eastman, Christina Bobb, Boris Epshteyn and Mike Roman. The Post reported that names of those indicted who were not in Arizona were redacted until they could be served with their indictments.

[ofmd-buys-boats]

#TinyCrewBigRaffle is LIVE!

Practical Info

What could I win? One of seven authentic Our Flag Means Death tiny boat props as pictured on our Social Media accounts. These are tiny boats that were damaged on their trip to the UK from Aotearoa New Zealand, but have been repaired for this raffle. Each winner will be assigned a tiny boat at random - no requests regarding preference will be accepted. 

How do I enter? 

Make a donation to any of the 7 recipient charities. Every value of £5 / US $5 / €5 equals one entry, e.g., you would receive 2 entries for a donation of £10 to a single charity OR 2 separate donations of £5 to 2 different charities (this applies to any of the listed currencies).  

Complete the Raffle Entry form with your proof of donation - this must include: name, donation amount and currency, and time and date of donation. Any other unnecessary personal or financial information can be redacted. You must complete the entry form before the close of the raffle for your entry to be valid. 

How much is one entry if my currency isn’t £ / US$ / € ? If your currency is not USD, GBP, or EURO, the number of entries you receive will be based on the amount you donated, converted into the charity's currency using the exchange rate at the time of your donation. Each entry will equal the donation amount in the charity's currency. For example, a donation of $9 CAD to the Sheldrick Wildlife Trust is equivalent to £5 and will count as one entry. Where is the entry form?  https://forms.gle/kTLhXyApmZGid44Y7

How many times can I enter?  As many times as you like!  There is no limit to the number of times you can donate across the raffle period or complete the entry form with new / unsubmitted donations. 

When can I enter?  The raffle is now open for entries!

When does the raffle close? 23:59 Thursday 21st November 2024 (GMT) 

When will we know the winners?  The winners will be announced between Friday 22nd November and Sunday 24th November 2024. We are working on something special for this, but we can’t share details until we are certain we can make it happen. Full details of when and how we will announce the winners will be shared across our social media accounts and via our email updates when they are confirmed. 

If I win, how will I receive my Tiny Boat?  Amy or Christina (depending on your location) will ship you your tiny boat, at no cost to you, with tracking. All winners will be contacted directly by email for your preferred mailing address - if you do not reply within 14 days a replacement winner will be selected. If you are attending the Republic of Pirates convention and win, you can collect your tiny boat in person (proof of identity will be required). For all tiny boats sent by post, tracking information will be shared once sent. 

What is a Gift Entry?  Anyone who is unable to donate can sign up to potentially receive a Gift Entry. These are entries donated by those ineligible to enter or donated by anyone who wishes to Gift an entry.  (Gift Entries will be assigned at random, and anyone who makes a donation will not qualify to receive a Gift Entry. If you were on the Gift Entry list, and then made a donation at a later time, your name will be removed from the Gift Entry list.) 

Where do I sign up for a Gift Entry?  https://forms.gle/Rod2M45aPTWmq5nT6

How do I donate a Gift Entry?  Complete the standard Entry Form (https://forms.gle/kTLhXyApmZGid44Y7)  and select the Gift Entry option in Section 2 to Gift your entire donation or a single Raffle Entry from your donation. 

Where is the list of charities?  Our Charity Pack - containing the full charity details and links to donate - can be viewed / downloaded here: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1Xy4sOhWRUXgseKB_PcT_znCTsSDdVLus?usp=drive_link

Can I donate to a different charity?  For a valid Raffle Entry, your donation must be made to one of the 7 selected recipient charities as listed on our social media and in the Charity Pack here: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1Xy4sOhWRUXgseKB_PcT_znCTsSDdVLus?usp=sharing

Do I have to donate to all of the charities? No. You can make your donation(s) in any way you want, be this to a single charity or multiple. The number of entries you receive is based on the total amount you donate. 

What is a Bonus Entry?  We will be awarding bonus entries for the following: 

• If you donate to all 7 charities you will receive 1 bonus entry

• Sharing publicly on social media (with OFMD.Buys.Boats tagged or linked) after making a donation. Please indicate in the Entry Form where you intend to share so we can track your Bonus Entry. You can share and tag as many times as you like, but you will only receive 1 bonus entry total from sharing.

How can I win an entry?  We will be running a competition to win entries to the raffle, launching on Saturday 26th October, across our social media accounts. 

Who is not eligible to win?  Any member of the original Tiny Crew (people who already have Tiny Boats from the original auction) will not be able to win, but will still be able to donate / Gift an entry.  See Rules for disqualification criteria.

Can I still donate if I don’t want to win a Tiny Boat? Yes! We want to have an accurate total of how much money we have raised for each charity when the raffle closes so please still complete the entry form. In Section 2 either select to make your donation a Gift Entry or select the No Entry option. 

FAQ

When will you announce how much was raised?  As soon as possible after the close of the raffle, date and time to be confirmed. 

Can I win more than once?  No. If a name is drawn for a second a time, a replacement will be immediately drawn. 

You said the Tiny Boats have been repaired, how damaged are they?  All Tiny Boats have been repaired using their original parts - no replacements have been made. Photographs of each prize is available on all our social media accounts. 

How have the charities been selected?  We are committed to supporting charities that are meaningful to the cast and crew of Our Flag Means Death, whether they’re ones they have selected for us or have supported through their own fundraising efforts. 

We have been in direct contact with Lindsey Cantrell (maker of the Tiny Boats and S2 On Set Dresser), Megan Vertelle (S2 Set Decorator) and Con O’Neill (Izzy Hands), who have all nominated the charities we are supporting in their name.  

Additionally, the Tiny Crew Big Raffle team have selected: 

• Cure Kids NZ, on behalf of Taika Waititi (Ed Teach / Blackbeard), previously supported. 

• Kitten Rescue LA, on behalf of Rhy Darby (Stede Bonnet), which he currently supports through kitten fostering, and donated a signed cast photo to their recent fundraising auction. 

• World Central Kitchen, on behalf of David Jenkins (Pirate Daddy), which he has supported on IG. 

Why only 7 and not a charity for each of the main cast?  Honestly, we'd have loved to. The Our Flag Means Death cast and crew have supported so many great charities, but, we want to raise a meaningful amount for the ones chosen for this raffle. Our initial list had over 16 charities, and that wasn't even all of them!

How do I know this isn’t a scam?  We will never ask for any money for Raffle Entries to be sent to us! All donations are to be made directly to the selected charities using their donation platforms / websites. You can also see from our Instagram post history (https://www.instagram.com/ofmd.buys.boats/) various Tiny Boats out in the wild with their new Co-Captains. 

Can I help?  If you would like to help, signal boosting (sharing) the raffle is always welcome! You can find a selection of graphics by following the Shareable Media link in our profile, which will continue to be updated. 

The Rules / T&Cs 

• Donations must be made to the charities officially selected for the Tiny Crew Big Raffle as detailed below and in our Charity Pack:

Inner-City Arts 

Mermaids (UK) 

True Colors United

The Sheldrick Wildlife Trust

Cure Kids NZ

Kitten Rescue LA

World Central Kitchen 

• Proof of donation showing the following information must be included with the Entry Form to be a valid Entry: 

Name of donor 

Date of donation 

Amount (including currency) of donation 

Recipient charity 

Email address (preferred where possible, but not required)

There is no limit to the number of entries per person. 

• Each value of £5 / US $5 / €5 of donation will equal one Raffle Entry, e.g:  A donation of US$20 to a single charity = 4 total Raffle Entries OR a donation of £5 to Charity A and a second donation of £10 to Charity B = 3 total Raffle Entries 

• Donations made in any currency not listed must equal the amount of one entry in the currency of the selected charity.  

• No one may win more than one Tiny Boat. If an entrant’s name is drawn a second time, a replacement winner will be drawn.  

• Prize Tiny Boats will be assigned at random. No requests regarding preference will be accepted. 

• Existing owners of a Tiny Boat / members of the original Tiny Crew are able to donate and donate Gift Entries, but are not eligible to win. 

• You are only eligible to receive a Gift Entry if you have not submitted your own donation. 

• No resale of any winning tiny boat for profit.

• The Tiny Crew Big Raffle Team reserves the right to confirm the amount of any donation made with the recipient charity before assigning Raffle Entries. 

Disqualification criteria: 

• Anyone found to be digitally manipulating donation receipts or proof of donation (excluding the removal of identifiable financial information) will result in complete disqualification from the Raffle and all Entries will be invalid. 

• Multiple submissions of the same donation(s) will result in all entries related to that donation being disqualified. New donation entries will be accepted, provided the entry criteria is met.