#legisou

[we-are-a-dragon]

DM: The ball is a great opportunity for networking. You can talk to your fellow knights, get to know more of the nobility, learn some of the big movers in Persia right now. The Crown Prince of the Legisal Empire seeks you out - he's very charming, very diplomatic.

Adam (playing Billie): Is he hot?

DM: He's a half-dwarf - tall for a dwarf, very fine luscious hair, chiseled features.

Tati (playing Seraph): Looks like Thorin from the Hobbit movies?

DM: Yeah, okay. He talks very pretty but doesn't give anything up. It's all legalese.

Adam: But not malicious?

DM: No, he's not trying to trick you into anything. His country stands to lose a lot of territory if the empire of Gandarall is re-established, so he wants you as an ally.

Tati: Can I have Alwel as my +1 standing behind me whispering translations of all the prince-speak?

DM: Yeah, that's funny.

[meteorologistaustenlonek]

" “Courses with a curriculum based on unproven, speculative, or exploratory content are best suited as [electives].” However, being a truly informed citizen requires awareness of current events, movements, and perspectives. In a high-quality science course, students should learn the latest scientific literature and understand the ways novel findings upend older ones. Scientific advancement requires speculation, so students need to discern trustworthy data and build strong hypotheses based on observations not yet solidified as fact. "

[punky-pelunky]

One legisates against railroad strikes and pretends to be pro-prole, and the other one does the same but without a law. Both are functionally the same.

Both parties are clearly not the same. #VoteBlue

[mongowheelie]

I found this on NewsBreak: US Supreme Court Vacates Decision to Withhold Legisative Voting Actions From Public Scrutiny

I found this on NewsBreak: US Supreme Court Vacates Decision to Withhold Legisative Voting Actions From Public Scrutiny

No more hiding when they screw over the indigenous people!

[il-advisory]

Director Disqualification

The Consequences and Implications

In the world of business, directors play a crucial role in steering companies towards success. However, when directors fail to meet their legal obligations, the consequences can be severe. Ranging from disqualification to lasting damage to one’s professional reputation. In this article, we delve into the intricacies of director disqualification, exploring what it entails, the consequences, and options for appeal.

What is Director Disqualification?

Director disqualification is a legal action that prevents a person from serving as a director or managing a company for a set period of time. This also applies to individuals with managerial responsibilities, even if they aren’t officially listed as directors. Most cases of disqualification arise from company insolvency, leading to potential investigations by the Insolvency Service, Companies House, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA), the courts, or insolvency practitioners.

Several behaviors can lead to a director being deemed ‘unfit,’ including:

Failing to file a confirmation statement or annual accounts

Neglecting proper accounting records or submitting inaccurate accounts

Defaulting on tax payments owed by the company

Personally benefiting from the company’s assets

Continuing to trade while the company is insolvent

Furthermore, as of October 2016, the updated  ‘Disqualified Directors Compensation Orders’ legisation stipulates the possibility of directors, in some instances, being personally responsible for their company’s debts and any outstanding obligations to HMRC. This implies that, apart from the disqualification itself, directors may find themselves burdened with substantial financial responsibilities.

Consequences of Disqualification:

Disqualification can last up to 15 years, during which the affected individual must step down from their current managerial position. They are also barred from being a director in any UK or overseas company dealing with the UK. Additional restrictions may include limitations on positions of trust, such as serving on school, charity, or police boards, as well as practicing certain professions like law or accountancy. Breaching these restrictions can result in heavy fines or even imprisonment.

The length of disqualification depends on the severity of the offense:

Lower category offences – a disqualification will normally last between 2 and 5 years. This is generally for offences such as negligence, usually due to poor judgement rather than an act carried out with malicious intent.

Mid-tier offences – a disqualification will normally last between 6 and 10 years. Offences in this category are more serious and potentially pose a risk to public interest.

Serious offences – a disqualification of up to 15 years. These are usually cases that involve fraud, embezzlement or serious criminal behaviour.

Understanding the implications of director disqualification is crucial for company directors. By adhering to legal responsibilities and seeking professional advice, directors can mitigate the risk of disqualification and its severe consequences on their careers and personal lives. If you are a director facing disqualification, please reach out to us now for free, professional advice at info@iladvisory.co.uk.

[jeanjauthor]

Depictions of an illegal thing is not the same thing as actually real-world doing that illegal thing...and yes, it is STUPID AF to ban talking about the illegal thing.

There’s a bill being proposed that a GAY REPUBLICAN LEGISLATOR challenged on that very STUPID AF thing!  A REPUBLICAN understood how stupid the legisation is!  What is the legislation?  Banning ANY discussion of sexuality, gender, etc.

He gave the example to the woman proposing the state legislation,  “You know who George Washington is, right?  Right.  Who is Martha Washington.”  And the woman responded,  “His wife!”  ...And he said,  “But the way you worded this bill, you cannot talk about her like that.” 

Think about that, folks.

You cannot talk about Martha Washington in the concept of her being George Washington’s wife,  because that is discussing her gender and her sexual orientation.

...Hell, the way the law was worded, you wouldn’t be able to teach sentence structure using,  “She picked up the ball and threw it to him,”  because it talks about gender identity.

That’s how chucklefuck-level stupid stuff like this is.

If you try to ban descriptions or depictions of “illegal things,”  then you’ve destroyed several genres.  Murder mysteries are the biggest example, because murder is illegal, chucklefucks!  There goes an entire very popular category of storytelling!

Any thefts that drive a plot?  There goes any and all heist and caper and “get it back to its rightful owners!” stories.  No movies like National Treasure, or the Indiana Jones movies.

Hell, the original Star Wars involves a jailbreak scene!

So yeah, you don’t get to ban descriptions of “illegal” stuff.  And I put the quote-marks in illegal, since too many people assume that if they don’t like something, it must be illegal!  *gasp, pearl-clutch!*

“But my Christian vaaaluuuuues!!”

Yeah, except your “Christian” values aren’t really Christian, are they?  Christ taught to clothe the poor, feed the hungry, be compassionate toward the needy, and y’all are out there screaming for homeless people to be locked away, cheering on the cops tossing their belongings in their tent camps into the fucking garbage, including legal documents, because cops don’t fucking care, and you’re having joygasms and hateraptures seeing people being treated cruelly...which is what Christ was against...

Y’all have NO moral ground to stand on.

If you don’t want to read it, use the tags to make sure you don’t read it.

We’re not holding a weapon to your body, forcing you to read it.

Take responsibility for your own choices for once!

Full offense and pun fully intended, but I genuinely think the very existence of "dead dove, do not eat" was a fucking canary in the mines, and no one really paid attention.

Because the tag itself was created as a response to a fandom-wide tendency to disregard warnings and assume tagging was exaggerated. And then the same fucking idiots reading those tags describing things they found upsetting or disturbing or just not to their taste would STILL click into the stories and give the writer's grief about it.

And as a response writers began using the tag to signal "no, really, I MEAN the tags!"

But like.

If you really think about it, that's a solution to a different problem. The solution to "I know you tagged your story appropriately but I chose to disregard the tags and warnings by reading it anyway, even though I knew it would upset me, so now I'm upset and making it your problem" is frankly a block, a ban and wide-spread blacklisting. But fandom as a whole is fucking awful at handling bad faith, insidious arguments that appeal to community inclusion and weaponize the fact most people participating in fandom want to share the space with others, as opposed to hurting people.

So instead of upfront ridiculing this kind of maladaptive attempt to foster one's own emotional self-regulation onto random strangers on the internet, fandom compromised and came up with a redundant tag in a good faith attempt to address an imaginary nuance.

There is no nuance to this.

A writer's job is to tag their work correctly. It's not to tag it exhaustively. It's not even to tag it extensively. A writer's sole obligation, as far as AO3 and arguably fandom spaces are concerned, is to make damn sure that the tags they put on their story actually match whatever is going on in that story.

That's it.

That's all.

"But what if I don't want to read X?" Well, you don't read fic that's tagged X.

"But what if I read something that wasn't tagged X?" Well, that's very unfortunate for you, but if it is genuinely that upsetting, you have a responsibility to yourself to only browse things explicitly tagged to not include X.

"But that's not a lot of fic!" Hi, you must be new here, yes, welcome to fandom. Most of our spaces are built explicitly as a reaction to There's Not Enough Of The Thing I Want, both in canon and fandom.

"But there are things on the internet that I don't like!" Yeah, and they are also out there, offline. And, here's the thing, things existing even though we personally dislike or even hate or even flat out find offensive/gross/immoral/unspeakable existing is the price we pay to secure our right to exist as individuals and creators, regardless of who finds US personally unpleasant, hateful or flat out offensive/gross/immoral/unspeakable.

"But what about [illegal thing]?!" So the thing itself is illegal, because the thing itself has been deemed harmful. But your goddamn cop-poisoned authoritarian little heart needs to learn that sometimes things are illegal that aren't harmful, and defaulting to "but illegal!" is a surefire way to end up on the wrong side of the fascism pop quiz. You're not a figure of authority and the more you demand to control and exercise authority by command, rather than leadership, the less impressive you seem. You know how you make actual, genuine change in a community? You center harm and argue in good faith to find accommodations and spread awareness of real, actual problems.

But let's play your game. Let's pretend we're all brainwashed cop-abiding little cogs that do not own a single working brain cell to exercise critical thinking with. 99% of the time, when you cry about any given thing "being illegal!!!" you're correct only so far as the THING itself being illegal. The act or object is illegal. Depiction of it is not. You know why, dipshit? Because if depiction of the thing were illegal, you wouldn't be able to talk about it. You wouldn't be able to educate about it. You wouldn't be able to reexamine and discuss and understand the thing, how and why and where it happens and how to prevent it. And yeah, depiction being legal opens the door for people to make depictions that are in bad taste or probably not appropriate. Sure. But that's the price we pay, creating tools to demystify some of the most horrific things in the world and support the people who've survived them. The net good of those tools existing outweighs the harm of people misusing them.

"You're defending the indefensible!" No, you're clumsily stumbling into a conversation that's been going on for centuries, with your elementary school understanding of morality and your bone-deep police state rot filtering your perception of reality, and insisting you figured it out and everyone else at the table is an idiot for not agreeing with you. Shut the fuck up, sit the fuck down and read a goddamn book.

[benazirs-blog]

Chicken Xacuti( Pronounced Shakooti)

Cooking, recipes, how to benazir's blog Before we get started on this recipe for this post I want to adress a very important issue. It has been brought to my attention that Canada our nieghbor to the north has been going through some types of legisation like we have here in USA that will strip our rights away. Now in Canada there were some kind of bullshit anti streaming messures and it is…

[minglana]

aragonese doesn't back off in its effort to also exist in audiovisual platforms

[ara] Dica agora, la lechislación cheneral de l'audiovisual nomás ha establiu percentaches obligatorios de contenius y financiamiento minimas pa lo castellán, sin indicación ni reconoixencia d'atras luengas existents en o Estau espanyol, dillá d'a retorica vueda de conteniu que existe en atros textos legals. Esto impide que los ninos, los chovens y lo publico per lo cheneral desfruten de l'amplio abanico disponible de programas, series y cintas en a suya luenga.

[cat] Fins ara, la legislació general de l'audiovisual només ha establert percentatges obligatoris de continguts i finançament mínims per al castellà, sense indicació ni reconeixement d'altres llengües existents a l'Estat espanyol, més enllà de la retòrica buida de contingut que existeix en altres textos legals. Això impedeix que els nens, els joves i el públic en general gaudeixin de l'ampli ventall disponible de programes, sèries i pel·lícules en la seva llengua.

[en] Until now, general legisation of audiovisuals has only established mandatory minimal content and financial percentages for Spanish, without indication or recognition of other existing languages in the Spanish state, other than the empty existing rhetoric in other legal texts. This prevents kids, young people and the general public enjoying the wide variety of programs, series, and movies available in their mother tongue.

minority languages in spain deserve media content in our own languages too!

[we-are-a-dragon]

DM: After the Herald of Mercy and the crown have been on display for the requisite three days they're taken back to the palace for safekeeping. Your coronation ceremony will take place the next day and there will be a ball in the evening. Half of Suda turns up to the parade ground for the ceremony. There are about 40 important people on the stage - other knights, heads of the noble families, some archmage from the other side of Persia. The Crown Prince of the neighbouring Legisal Empire is there.

Adam (playing Billie): Do they pass the sword and crown down the line of nobles?

DM: That actually was my plan, yes. Every dignitary tries them on to prove once again that nobody but you has the grace to wield them. Some of the heads of the noble houses are visibly disappointed. There's a moment of tension when the Legisal Prince tries them on and even scattered boos. They're passed through all the knights including you guys, but skip Billie.

Tati (playing Seraph): Do the crowd notice she's skipped?

DM: Definitely. Finally it comes to Emperor Cherish. Instead of handing them back to the Master of Ceremonies when he's tried them on, he turns to Billie and goes down on one knee. The crowd is dead silent.

Adam: I take the crown.

DM: It blazes into shining gold and brilliant emeralds as soon as it touches your head. There's a ripple through the crowd.

Adam: I turn to Cherish and go down on my knee too. I put my hand on the sword without taking it.

DM: The dented iron blade transforms into its full blue and gold glory with you both holding it, almost too dazzling in the sun to look at.

Adam: And then I grab it and jump up and cheer!

DM: The crowd erupts. The cheering is deafening. You were already beloved in this city. The cheers go on for a long time.

[orcane-rivals-of-aether-real]

reblog if you would like to pleg a legise To the fag

Everyone has to look at this page from my sibling’s childhood notebook-

[captainkirkk]

WAIT WHAT IF HOLE-IN-THE-WALL TEA SHOP BECOMES LIKE A SECOND JASMINE DRAGON TO HIM! HOMEY AND SWEET AND SHE HAS NO PROBLEM PUTTING HIM TO WORK (he can hide in the back and do dishes or mix teas idk. He'll never admit he's got a weakness for the house blend which is a sweet-burn cinnamon-vanilla-milk mess)

Big sister!server isn’t even the owner. The actual owner has no idea that the Fire Lord is using their cafe to destress, either by people watching in the corner, or talking BSS’s ear off, or donning an apron and working around the cafe for free. When the owner inevitably finds out, they have a small heart attack while BSS laughs maniacally at their pain.

Zuko, meanwhile, just wants to hide from legisation for a little while and pretend the rest of the world isn’t counting on him. Let this kid do menial tasks in peace.

[aline-v-blog]

#bevintage 🌼#legisou #paris #parisbynight #18eme #pigalle #retro #blackandwhite #seanconnery #gun #design #deco (à 18th arrondissement of Paris)

[meandmybigmouth]

THEY HAVEN’T OVERTURNED THE 100′S OF GOP VOTER SUPPRESSION BILLS LEGISATED ON REPUBLICAN LIES AND ACTUAL GOP ELECTION FRAUD SO WHY WOULD THEY ON THIS ONE?

[thesustainedworldatransverse]

You guys, our rights are in danger, among many other things.

Heeeeyyyy... so Brexit huh? And a General Election on 12th December. Great huh? Big powerful Conservatives party that think they can't be toppled because so many boomers will vote for them... just great huh?

Just in case anyone is disabled, wants equality, or relies on the current government for basic human rights, i quote from the article what the plans are after we leave the EU;

The bill states: “The Charter of Fundamental Rights is not part of domestic law on or after exit day.”

Vote. Make sure you vote. For anyone except Conservative or UKIP. Google tactical voting to see who is best to vote for in your area to oust the Conservatives. Because if you don't then we'll be heading back to pre-ww2 era bigotry, racism, and discrimination.

Share this far and wide. Even if you arent a brit please share.

[radioclasic]

Alegeri Bulgaria: Partidul lui Boiko Borisov a câștigat cu 24,2%

Alegeri Bulgaria: Partidul lui Boiko Borisov a câștigat cu 24,2%

Partidul conservator al premierului Boiko Borisov, Cetăţenii pentru Dezvoltarea Europeană a Bulgariei (GERB), a câștigat alegerile legisative de duminică cu 24,2% potrivit rezultatelor oficiale parțiale, transmite luni Reuters. Potrivit comisiei electorale centrale au fost numărate 42,5% din voturi. Pe locul al doilea se plasează o nouă mișcare populistă antisistem, condusă de o vedetă TV, iar…