| Subject: |
[novaroma] Another update |
| From: |
"Lauriat" <blauriat@--------> |
| Date: |
Mon, 18 Sep 2000 19:56:21 -0400 |
|
-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9067/8/_/61050/_/969412497/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->
Salvete!
I just wanted to let everyone know that progress is being made on the BU chapter of Nova Roma. I have around 20 people interested right now, though I don't honestly expect all of them to end up making a commitment. However, even if half of those back out there are still enough to make a decent group. Plus, I am doing three hours of solid recruitment tomorrow at a Student Activities Expo and on Thursday I have a meeting with the faculty advisor I found (who, by the way, had heard of Nova Roma before I even mentioned it!). Last night I attended a two-hour programming orientation and workshop and tomorrow night is the first meeting of Nova Roma, BU for all interested people. The paperwork to make the group official is due a week from tomorrow and from the time I turn it in it will take about a week to find out if the group is accepted by the Student Activities Office. So if Fortuna is on my side this will work out and we will have our first collegiate chapter!
If anyone has any questions, comments or concerns at this stage, please let me know.
Valete,
Lauria Maria Crispa
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] Senatorial Voting (Was: Why The Poll?) |
| From: |
cassius622@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 19 Sep 2000 21:43:45 EDT |
|
-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9068/8/_/61050/_/969414236/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->
In a message dated 9/19/00 5:00:11 PM Pacific Daylight Time, Lykaion1@--------
writes:
<< The question was posed because I personally think people should have the
courage of their convictions. Why should someone not want to stand by his
or
her vote publically? And such a system would allow us to see who is making
allliance with who, and who might have spoken publically one way, only to
vote another way. Let's have some light on. There is no good reason why
they need secrecy. What is there to hide from?
>>
Salvete,
As a Senator, I have sometimes regretted my votes not being public. This is
most especially the case when I find myself in the minority on a very
important vote, and disagree greatly with the Senators who have overridden
me.
Yet rather than simply having votes public, I would prefer to have an
opportunity to write a "dissenting" statement for the records on such issues.
This would help to show the means by which Senate decisions are made, and
would also archive ideas that might be useful later on. I'm not sure overall
voting record is as important as the *reasons* why votes are cast. Numbers
have little meaning if they are not accompanied by explanations.
For instance, I voted against the "Stalking Lex" which was approved during
the last Senate session. Does that mean that I support Citizens being free to
harass and threaten one another inside and outside of NR, without thought of
consequences? No. I was for some aspects of the Lex, but against others.
My major disagreement was that as the Lex is written, evidence is brought
before NR officials only and is evaluated internally -- even though NR
officials have *no way* to conclusively prove that the accusing evidence
hasn't been falsified. (That would require ISP checks and other Internet
verifications that can only be done by police and other macronational
officials.)
I had hoped the law could be reworded so that any person accused of Internet
Stalking could have immediate recourse for the case to be brought before such
officials. This way a case could be quickly and conclusively proven or
disproved, rather than debated only on the merits of "probability" within
Nova Roma. I feel this would greatly reduce the risk of false or frivolous
accusations being made. My recommendation was not adopted by the Senate -
and only time will tell if the system in place can adequately evaluate such
cases.
Would a public "voting record" reflect the above? No. Therefore I don't
believe it's an adequate gauge of a Senator's ideas, attitude or conduct.
Valete,
Marcus Cassius Julianus
Senator
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Senatorial Voting (Was: Why The Poll?) |
| From: |
Lykaion1@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 19 Sep 2000 22:06:26 EDT |
|
-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9068/8/_/61050/_/969415592/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->
Salve Cassius,
I think that a public record would be a good thing because if a
senators vote were public, people could engage that senator in dialogue {if
they felt strongly enough about the issue} and get such explanations. This
may be an annoyance to the senator, but this is an occupational hazard for
those who would be politicians. In the end, the same question remains: what
is there to hide from?
GLF
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Senatorial Voting (Was: Why The Poll?) |
| From: |
"L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@--------> |
| Date: |
Tue, 19 Sep 2000 19:11:04 -0700 |
|
-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9068/8/_/61050/_/969415863/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->
Actually your still missing the point Festus. In the Senate there is a
brief amount of time as stated by the laws of Nova Roma. If I recall them
correctly there are 4 days of debate and 2 days of voting. Given that short
amount of time, I dont think it would be prudent for citizens who dont know
exactly what is going on in the Senate to debate the issue further than what
is going on on the main list.
Remember, the Senate is a closed-body. The discussions that we have there
are probably going to be even more thorough than we would on the main list.
Given the smaller body of people involved. I do agree with Cassius's point
of view and I think his assessment is absolutely correct in this issue.
Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
----- Original Message -----
From: <Lykaion1@-------->
To: <novaroma@-------->
Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2000 7:06 PM
Subject: Re: [novaroma] Senatorial Voting (Was: Why The Poll?)
>
>
> Salve Cassius,
>
> I think that a public record would be a good thing because if a
> senators vote were public, people could engage that senator in dialogue
{if
> they felt strongly enough about the issue} and get such explanations.
This
> may be an annoyance to the senator, but this is an occupational hazard for
> those who would be politicians. In the end, the same question remains:
what
> is there to hide from?
>
> GLF
>
>
>
>
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Senatorial Voting (Was: Why The Poll?) |
| From: |
Caius Flavius Diocletianus <3s@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 20 Sep 2000 09:38:52 +0200 |
|
-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9068/8/_/61050/_/969435570/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->
Caius Flavius Diocletianus Quiritibus S.P.D.
I made my way to the poll yesterday and voted for "no". The Senate is of course,
as Censor Sulla Felix said, a closed body. And furthermore, the Senate has only
limited time to debate and decide. The Senate is not a parliament elected by
public vote but mainly a consulting body. The important things are the results
of the Senates debates, the Senatus Consultum. These results are published by
the Tribunes. Who of the Senators voted for or against an item and why is mainly
unimportant. The results of voting are important. All citizens, also Senators,
have the chance to debate these results on the public list after they were
published.
The Senate has limited time, so it´s very important that the Senate is able to
discuss and decide without interventions from outside. This has nothing to do
with someones convictions or the courage of standing to the own opinions. It´s
necessary to keep the Senate able to work efficiently. I´m working in a
municipal administrations and had saw more than one time, that discussions
became unefficent because of public interventions. Bilateral political and
frivolous accusations followed soon.
The Senate is a closed body, this means, in my opinion, that a Senatus Consultum
is issued in the name of the Senate, not in the name of the different Senators.
The question of fractions in the Senate is heavily unimportant for the same
reason. And the point, why someone voted in another way as he spoke publically,
is also unimportant. I was of course for more than one time convinced in a
deep-going discussion by better arguments.
Politics are a public in Nova Roma. They are public because all political
questions can be discussed on the main list by **all** citizens. A Senatus
Consultum is a different matter. It´s made non-public, but can also discussed
publically after it was made and published. Noone interested in roman politics
is left outside.
Valete
Caius Flavius Diocletianus
Citizen
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] Polls |
| From: |
marcusaemiliusscaurus@-------- |
| Date: |
Wed, 20 Sep 2000 11:24:06 -0000 |
|
-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9068/8/_/61050/_/969449056/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->
Salvete citizens of Nova Roma.
I'm not a senator. But I think I agree with both Sulla Felix and
Cassius Julianus. We're told beforehand when there's a senate
meeting and what the topics of discussion are (From my limited
knowledge and experience!) by our Tribunes of the Plebs. We can
discuss topics with the senators before and after the meeting, and we
can ask them what their vote was, and if they choose, they can tell
us. I can only speak for Britain, but when we elect our officials,
our votes are not available to whoever wants to have a look. I'm
aware we don't elect senators, but why should their votes be any more
public than our votes? In a way I agree, Festus. What is there to
hide? However, why should they have to explain their reasoning to us
as a senator, when most of them do so as a citizen in any case?
Sorry if this is a confusing message,
Marcus Scribonius Curio Britannicus.
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Poll results for novaroma |
| From: |
LSergAust@-------- |
| Date: |
Wed, 20 Sep 2000 07:31:38 EDT |
|
-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
Free @Backup service! Click here for your free trial of @Backup.
@Backup is the most convenient way to securely protect and access
your files online. Try it now and receive 300 MyPoints.
http://click.egroups.com/1/6348/8/_/61050/_/969449501/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->
Salvete Quirites
Two of these polls seem to me to be based on confused thinking.
On the one hand, there is no business before the Senate on a daily basis,
so daily reports by the Tribunes would be a collossal bore - most days
there is *nothing* to report. The Senate is called into session
periodically and given an agenda for the session. The Tribunes report the
agenda when it is posted. Beyond that, there are occasionally
out-of-session commments on this or that issue, but rarely anything that
calls for an announcement to the citizens at large.
On the other hand, as far as I am concerned, whether each Senator's vote
on a given issue is made public or not is a decision to be made by the
Senate, which is constitutionally empowered to make it's own rules. As
others have pointed out here, the Senate of Nova Roma is not an elected
body but a body of "elders" and senior statesmen. It *is not* answerable
to an electorate. They work for the long-term interests of Nova Roma and
not to please a group of voters. It is *not* the same kind of body as the
houses of the U. S. Congress or the British Parliament.
To date, I have refrained from reporting the individuals' votes in the
Senate because I did not think I should presume to do so unless Senators
expressed a desire for that information to be posted. In some instances,
also, I thought that revealing which way this person or that person voted
would be to invite more personal acrimony in our public business, of
which we've had more than enough already.
If the Senate makes a rule on the matter, one way or the other, I will be
happy to announce each of their votes or not, as they choose. Well,
perhaps "happy" is not the word to use, since it would be a lot more work
that way.
Valete,
Lucius Sergius Australicus Obstinatus
Tribunus Plebis
certe, Toto, sentio nos in Kansate non iam adesse.
(You know, Toto, I have a feeling we're not in Kansas anymore.)
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] Senatorial Voting Records: Objections and Answers |
| From: |
Lykaion1@-------- |
| Date: |
Wed, 20 Sep 2000 09:31:18 EDT |
|
-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9068/8/_/61050/_/969456694/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->
OBJECTION: The Senate is a closed body and is not answerable to the voters.
ANSWER: Not entirely. Senators can still run for and hold elective offices
outside the senate. Voting records can allow citizens to evaluate their
characters, ideologies, alliances {who tends to vote with who in blocks} and
either support such candidates, or target them for defeat. If these
politicians are allowed to hold elective offices, their voting records should
be fair game.
OBJECTION: The senate has limited time. It has only 4 days for debate and
two for voting.
ANSWER: This is irrelevant. Posting of the voting record takes place AFTER
the debate and vote, and thus does not intrude on this limited time.
OBJECTION: If voting records are public, would-be demogogues can twist this
information, cast it in whatever light they see fit, to achieve their own
political ends.
ANSWER: Senators can issue statements, individually or in blocks, explaining
why they voted a certain way on this or that issue. There is nothing to
prevent their doing so.
OBJECTION: It is not prudent for the public to continue debating an issue
after the senate has taken the time and effort to decide the matter.
ANSWER: What is this? St. Augustine saying 'Rome has spoken; the matter is
settled'? Even if a consul acts on a Senatus Consultum Ultimata, that matter
can be revisited and even overturned later by another senate vote and a later
consul. Without the citizenry, there is no Nova Roma, and as long as
citizens are concerned with an issue, it is a live issue, and only arrogance
can say "We have decided; the matter is closed", while the members all remain
safe in the dark.
OBJECTION: Is it fair that the votes of citizens electing magistrates are
private while you expect the senate votes to be public?
ANSWER: Yes. When a man or a woman wants to be more than a private citizen,
and desires to be in a role which leads and shapes the present and future of
the state, that person gives up a certain amount of anonymity and privacy. A
public figure is just that, a PUBLIC figure. As Labienus pointed out, we do
indirectly elect senators, since we vote for Praetors, and being a praetor
makes one elegible for the senate. If these individuals want to lead, let
them do so openly and show their leadership abilities through public voting
records. Let their records {and their explanations, should they choose to
issue them} speak for themselves, so we can decide who to vote for when
senators run for additional offices and ask us for our votes. The question
then, should be "Is it fair that a magistrate should be held accountable for
his acts, while a senator can remain hidden and anonymous?"
The senate can lead well. It can also lead into mischief and screw up. We
all know that the citizens will not always agree with each other on which
vote is good and which bad. I happen to think the recent votes on the Fabian
Stalking Lex and the requirement of a public apology from Fimbria are bad
decisions. Others will think they are good. But whether we think they be
good or bad, let us see who is responsible. We can know who to praise, or
who to criticize, and who to vote for when they come asking for our votes
around election time!
OBJECTION: Some senators already take part in public debates on issues
anyway. We then know where they stand, so why public voting records?
ANSWER: Not all do. Some senators are very scarce. And while those can do
come forward on their own can be commended for this, there is nothing to stop
them from secrecy. There is also nothing to stop them from speaking one way
in public, and voting another way in secret. This is not a choice they
should have, just as it is not a choice any elected magistrate should have.
If the senators are open and honest mean and women, what is there to fear?
OBJECTION: Under the Constitution, the senate sets it's own rules of
procedure.
ANSWER: Yes, it does. And it should do the right thing and change the
current rule! Again, if our senators are honorable mean and women, what is
there to fear from coming into the light? The senates role remains the same
regardless.
OBJECTION: {from a personal email} "Why do you hate the senate so much now?
If you do not like the Nova Roma consitution, why are you even here?"
ANSWER: I {and those who vote with me in the public poll} do NOT hate the
senate, nor do we hate the Constitution! I have absolutely no problem with
the role of the senate as described in the Constitution. We just happen to
think the senate should change it's way of tallying its votes, and this poll
is our way of asking them to do so.
In the end, there is no good compelling reason for secrecy, and there are
benefits to openness and honesty. The senate should change this rule.
Gaius Lupinius Festus
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] The Poll |
| From: |
Marcus Traianus Valerius <marcustrajanvalerius@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 20 Sep 2000 08:03:52 -0700 (PDT) |
|
Salve,
I have been reading with interest the posts on the
following poll:
When the senate takes a vote on some issue, should the
individual senators be identified with how he or she
voted?
I did originally vote Yes, but after further research,
thought and reading the posts on this issue changed my
mind and voted no.
The driving force behind this was the Senate itself
and its roll in Nova Roma. I do believe that, as all
Governing Bodies, our glorious Senate is and should be
accountable to the people of Nova Roma. I don’t mean
on a day to day level, but on the whole. If the
Senate were to oppress the people, in this virtual
world, it would be up to each citizen to say enough
and resign his or her citizenship. For with out the
people tem Senate would be nothing.
However, individual Senator’s should not directly be
held accountable to the people They are not elected by
the citizens and unless they want to, as Senator
Marcus Cassius Julianus, write a letter of dissent or
make the people aware of there vote I think it should
remain private.
I think our Senate is a reasonable and just body and
if an issue were debated further here in this list
would take that under advisement for the next session,
or at the very least have someone then explain the
issue from the point of view of the whole Senate. Not
every citizen will be happy with the decisions of the
Government all the time this is just the way it is.
That is my 2 cents worth. In closing I would like to
ask if there is a good computer program to help me
learn Latin.
Thanks for you time.
May the Gods bless Nova Roma
mTv
=====
Multas felicitates!
Marcus Traianus Valerius
Citizen Of Nova Roma
*********************************************************
E-Mail : MarcusTrajanValerius@--------
Home Page : www.geocities.com/marcustrajanvalerius
*********************************************************
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send instant messages & get email alerts with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com/
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Senators Voting |
| From: |
"Nicolaus Moravius" <n_moravius@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 20 Sep 2000 16:50:06 GMT |
|
-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9068/8/_/61050/_/969468613/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->
Quiritibus salutem
Personally, I have always found polls irritating - the result often depends
on the way a question is put, the question is usually too simple to address
the complexity of an issue, and both politicians and poll-sponsoring
lobbyists will always find flaws in a result they don't like.
As for the way a senator votes, s/he may well do so against his/her
previous, publicly expressed beliefs, having been swayed by compelling
arguments voiced only in the Senate and thus outside the public domain.
There are, of course, some senators who don't participate in public debate,
but I would have thought that any citizen is free to ask senators
individually how they voted, and why, and I would be very surprised if any
senator simply refused to do so, point blank.
Provided the requests were courteous and pertinent, I think Festus or anyone
else would be justified in concluding that, in such circumstances, a senator
did have something to hide.
I say this without prejudice to the fact that some matters laid before the
Senate are highly sensitive in nature, and therefore confidential: we must
also remember that, as things stand in NR, a senator is midway between - to
use a British analogy - a member of the House of Lords and a Cabinet
Minister without portfolio. While debates and votes in the Lords are
recorded because they are in the public domain, Cabinet debates are not.
Obviously not all items debated and voted on in the councils of government
can or should be made open to public scrutiny and query, especially on the
Main List which is accessed by non-citizens.
As a senator elect, I can promise this much to Festus and those who share
his understandable frustration: as soon as I am permitted to take my seat in
that assembly, I shall be happy to discuss privately how I vote, and why,
with any citizen who cares to ask me - provided, of course, that I am not
forbidden to do so in any particular instance because of a confidentiality
rule (in which case I shall say so).
Bene valete,
Vado.
>The question was posed because I personally think people should have the
>courage of their convictions. Why should someone not want to stand by his
>or
>her vote publically? And such a system would allow us to see who is
>making
>allliance with who, and who might have spoken publically one way, only to
>vote another way. Let's have some light on. There is no good reason why
>they need secrecy. What is there to hide from?
>
>GLF
> I think that a public record would be a good thing because if a
>senators vote were public, people could engage that senator in dialogue {if
>they felt strongly enough about the issue} and get such explanations. This
>may be an annoyance to the senator, but this is an occupational hazard for
>those who would be politicians. In the end, the same question remains:
>what
>is there to hide from?
>
> GLF
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] Bee Keeping in Britannia (or Apiary in Albion) |
| From: |
"Nicolaus Moravius" <n_moravius@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 20 Sep 2000 16:55:51 GMT |
|
-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
Is your group spending too much?
Get a long distance rate as low as 4.9 ¢/min.
Start saving now!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9186/8/_/61050/_/969469053/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->
Gratias ago, mea Fulvia! I have forwarded this to the Britannia e-list.
Ave,
Vado.
> Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 17:10:57 -0400
> From: "J. T. Sibley" <jrsibley@-------->
>Subject: Re: Beekeeping
>
>Salvete omnes! Came across this on another list (Archaeology Institute of
>America) and maybe some of you in the UK can go to this?
>
>jane
>S. Ambrosia Fulvia
>
>Nick Eiteljorg wrote:
>
> > AIA LIST DIGEST Conferences 00-01-f-021
> >
> > Date: Friday, September 15, 2000
> > Messages included: 1
> > Subjects: #1: AEGEANET bee-keeping (34 lines)
> >
> > Unless marked as originating from the AIA, messages neither represent
> > Institute pronouncements nor imply Institute support or endorsement.
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 12:10:45 -0700
> > From: "Lucia Nixon" <lucia.nixon@-------->
> > Subject: #1: AEGEANET bee-keeping (34 lines)
> >
> > This is an abbreviated message. For details, please contact the
>correspondent
> > directly. -- ed.
> >
> > BEE-KEEPING IN THE GRAECO-ROMAN WORLD
> > Tuesday 7 November, 2000
> > 2.15-7.00 p.m.
> > Talbot Hall, Lady Margaret Hall, Oxford
> >
> > This half-day conference will have two parts: the first will present
> > archaeological evidence for bee-keeping (including material from
> > Sphakia, SW Crete, which through the Sphakia Survey has produced one
> > of the best assemblages of finds from the ancient world, and from
> > Isthmia); the second will be a lecture at 5.00 p.m. by Dr Eva Crane,
> > the leading authority on world bee-keeping, on 'The transmission of
> > bee-keeping round the ancient Mediterranean'. Principal
> > participants will include: Eva Crane, Jane Francis, John Ellis
> > Jones, Lucia Nixon, Nicholas Purcell and Simon Price. There will
> > also be a small display of bee-keeping artefacts.
> >
> > People are invited to come to the whole conference, or just to the
> > lecture at 5.00 p.m. There will be drinks after the lecture.
> >
> > For further information contact Lucia Nixon
> > (lucia.nixon@--------) or Simon Price
> > (simon.price@--------).
> >
> > Ms L.F. Nixon
> > Magdalen College
> > Oxford, U.K.
> > OX1 4AU
> >
> > tel. +44-1865-276117
> >
> > fax +44-1865-276094
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > End of AIA LIST DIGEST Conferences 00-01-f-021
> > ***********************************
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Roman Days West |
| From: |
DTibbe2926@-------- |
| Date: |
Wed, 20 Sep 2000 18:26:33 EDT |
|
-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9068/8/_/61050/_/969488802/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->
Salve,
This happens to most groups after a while. The legionairies of Legio VIII
Augusta in UK 'mutinied' over a point of principal. After this there was no
going back so the entire officer corp left the group and are no longer
involved in reenactment.
<< The 9th Legion is apparently breaking up. No 9th Legion, no
military camp to host the Nova Romans at during the Great Western War.
At any rate, political strife happens in any human organization, whether it
be
a formally recognized government or a social group of military reenacters.
That it's happening to the 9th Legion as a social group makes it no less
difficult for its members. >>
Publius Claudius Lucentius Severus
cornicularius (veteranus)
Legio VIII Augusta MGV
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Senatorial Voting |
| From: |
DrususCornelius@-------- |
| Date: |
Wed, 20 Sep 2000 18:51:24 EDT |
|
-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9068/8/_/61050/_/969490306/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->
Salvete!
I thank Festus for bringing this matter to the people. I am still unsure
as far as this matter is concerned. Originally I thought that the the
individual Senators' votes should be publicized, being the die hard Socialist
that I am :) But after hearing the arguments of my Pater and other citizens,
I'm begining to lean in the other direction. The Senate is an institution
unlike the modern liberal bodies such as the American House of
Representatives or the British House of Commons. Usually I support anything
that will make a nation more democratic. But I think the point of having a
Senate is not necessarily to represent the will of the people, but their best
interests. If the Senate votes a certain way, we should look at the result
as a Senatus Consultum not as an idividual consultum from a single Senator.
However, if I were a Senator myself, I would let my opinion be known publicly
on most matters.
Thanks for y'all's time,
Drusus Cornelius Claudius
(feeling like he hasn't helped any)
|
| Subject: |
Re:[novaroma] The Poll |
| From: |
Lykaion1@-------- |
| Date: |
Wed, 20 Sep 2000 19:51:17 EDT |
|
-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9068/8/_/61050/_/969493884/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->
In a message dated 9/20/00 11:04:45 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
marcustrajanvalerius@-------- writes:
<< I did originally vote Yes, but after further research,
thought and reading the posts on this issue changed my
mind and voted no. >>
Too bad. You were already on the right side of things. :}
<<If the Senate were to oppress the people, in this virtual
world, it would be up to each citizen to say enough
and resign his or her citizenship.>>
Yes, but why wait for things to become that drastic? A voting record
lets everyone know who voted which way, and so the people can react before
things get to such a point.
<<However, individual Senator’s should not directly be
held accountable to the people They are not elected by
the citizens.....>>
Yes, they are voted in by the people indirectly. But even if they were not,
why should they not be accountable, when it is the people they wish to lead?
<>
So do I. Which is why I think they should change the rule.
So far, the other side has given various reason why the secrecy rule is in
place. But so far, no one has demonstrated what good comes from it. Only
why it is there, how the senate is a closed body, etc. No one has shown how
the change would be bad.
Even if the only result of changing the rule is more information about the
goings on in government, that is a positive good. No good is served by
secrecy which is not given to the magisterial offices.
If there is nothing to hide from, no secrecy is needed. So, perhaps someone
can explain just what is needed to be hidden, and why.
Gaius Lupinius Festus
|
