Subject:	[novaroma] Virtue and Oratory
From:	cassius622@--------
Date:	Sun, 3 Dec 2000 19:16:32 EST

Salvete Omnes,

There is something I've always wanted to post to the Nova Roma list, and this
election season seems to be an appropriate time.

The following short text is taken from the "Autobiography of Benjamin
Franklin." I hope everyone will forgive me posting from an author that isn't
Roman, but this is some of the most productive advice I've ever read on the
art of communication. It has always helped me in writing posts and debating
with others, (when I remember it!) and it seemed to me that others might find
it useful in the course of their public oratory.

This is from a section of Franklin's "Autobiography" that is sometimes
published under the title "The Means and Manner of Obtaining Virtue."

**********
"My list of virtues contain'd at first but twelve; but a Quaker friend having
kindly informed me that I was generally thought proud; that my pride show'd
itself frequently in conversation; that I was not content with being in the
right when discussing any point, but was overbearing, and rather insolent, of
which he convinc'd me by mentioning several instances; I determined
endeavouring to cure myself, if I could, of this vice or folly among the
rest, and I added Humility to my list) giving an extensive meaning to the
word.

I cannot boast of much success in acquiring the reality of this virtue, but I
had a good deal with regard to the appearance of it. I made it a rule to
forbear all direct contradiction to the sentiments of others, and all
positive assertion of my own. I even forbid myself, agreeably to the old laws
of our Junto, the use of every word or expression in the language that
imported a fix'd opinion, such as certainly, undoubtedly, etc., and I
adopted, instead of them, I conceive, I apprehend, or I imagine a thing to be
so or so; or it so appears to me at present. When another asserted something
that I thought an error, I deny'd myself the pleasure of contradicting him
abruptly, and of showing immediately some absurdity in his proposition; and
in answering I began by observing that in certain cases or circumstances his
opinion would be right, but in the present case there appear'd or seem'd to
me some difference, etc. I soon found the advantage of this change in my
manner; the conversations I engag'd in went on more pleasantly. The modest
way in which I propos'd my opinions procur'd them a readier reception and
less contradiction; I had less mortification when I was found to be in the
wrong, and I more easily prevail'd with others to give up their mistakes and
join with me when I happened to be in the right.

And this mode, which I at first put on with some violence to natural
inclination, became at length so easy, and so habitual to me, that perhaps
for these fifty years past no one has ever heard a dogmatical expression
escape me. And to this habit (after my character of integrity) I think it
principally owing that I had early so much weight with my fellow-citizens
when I proposed new institutions, or alterations in the old, and so much
influence in public councils when I became a member; for I was but a bad
speaker, never eloquent, subject to much hesitation in my choice of words,
hardly correct in language, and yet I generally carried my points.

In reality, there is, perhaps, no one of our natural passions so hard to
subdue as pride. Disguise it, struggle with it, beat it down, stifle it,
mortify it as much as one pleases, it is still alive, and will every now and
then peep out and show itself; you will see it, perhaps, often in this
history; for, even if I could conceive that I had compleatly overcome it, I
should probably be proud of my humility."
******************

Happy Campaign Season, folks. Vote early, vote often! ;)

Valete,

Marcus Cassius
Candidate for Consul



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/975889047/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Virtue and Oratory
From:	SyanneRose@--------
Date:	Sun, 3 Dec 2000 19:23:40 EST

Salve Cassius,


I look forward to reading this book. I thank you for posting this.


Vale
Aeternia

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/975889457/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Virtue and Oratory
From:	"pjane@-------- " <pjane@-------->
Date:	Mon, 04 Dec 2000 01:24:11 -0000

Justinia Cassia shared with me a more concise version of a similar
message, which I thought worthy of expressing to you all:

"If you've lost your temper, you've lost the argument."

P. Cassia


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/975893062/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	[novaroma] English anyone?
From:	Gian G Reali <piscinus@-------->
Date:	Sun, 3 Dec 2000 21:33:45 -0800

Salve pater Moravi Vado

Vado Scripsit:
"Since M. Marcius' elevation to the Senate and his posts to this and
other NR e-lists, it will have become evident to most citizens that
Marcus Marcius Rex has a better command of English than some native
English speakers (I don't want to embarrass anybody)."

Mei pater! Could it be ME to whom you refer? Or yourself perhaps. As
one gentle lady has commented before concerning our chats, "We are
divided by a common language."

Having corresponded with mi pater Vado several times in recent months,
and having chatted with him on occasion, along with mea soror Natalia,
and of course the gentle lady, mea mater Aletheia, I have indeed noticed
a frightful amount of misunderstanding when we try to converse in
*English*. Maybe it was all the Welsh singing in the background...Ser y
nos a haul y dydd, O gwmpas oll yn gwmpawd sydd...mwyn hau, ta'id fy!
;^ ) Worse still would be for us to meet in person and have to rely on
audibly understanding each other!

Where as, having also chatted, IM'd and corresponded with Marcius Rex on
various occasions, I know he commands a knowledge of English far better
than that of my own crude American. And I must say, I understand Marcius
Rex far better than I am able to understand any of meae Moravia in
Britannia.

No discredit to Lucius Equitius, but it would be a far greater credit
to Nova Roma to have as Censor someone with the qualifications of M.
Marcius Rex. A diplomat for the Austrian government, a professor of law
in Vienna, a man involved in writing proposals for international
financing of foreign assistance, and soon to be reposted to the United
States. If we are truly serious about becoming a sovereign micronation
could we ask for anyone better qualified? On top of which the role of
the Censor is to meet with as many new citizens as possible. Marcius Rex
is fluent in more than German and English, while his Latin is excellent
as well. In a time when roughly half of our new Citizens are from
Europe, would it not make more sense to have as one of our Censors, a
person who is European and who could represent us on two continents with
equal ease. There are a lot more individuals a Censor must deal with
than just his colleague. Marcius Rex has a lot more to offer Nova Roma
than merely his superior ability to speak in English

Vale
Gn. Moravius Piscinus
Tribunus Plebis petitor
Flamen Cerealis
Retarius et Rogator Sodalitatis Latinitatis
Rogator Sodalitas Musarum

http://www.diocletianus.de/elect/piscinus
________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/975898108/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Class war
From:	Gian G Reali <piscinus@-------->
Date:	Sun, 3 Dec 2000 21:52:40 -0800

Salvete Omnes;

Vedius scripsit:
<<There seems to be a shared opinion among some individuals that one
group of
Citizens within Nova Roma is somehow conspiring to oppress or otherwise
keep
down another group. To some, this has been expressed as the Popularii
being
oppressed by the Optimates, or the Patricians oppressing the Plebeians.>>

Respondeo:
A very interesting notion you have expressed here, Vedius, for there is
a group, mostly patricians but not all, who call themselves Optimates and
have made such claims. It is those same Optimates who decry their
opponents as being Populares. Who among the Plebeians call themselves
Populares? Who is it that flings epitaphs around so freely?

And what of this matter of the Plebeians being oppressed by patricians?
Should I look for patrician spies lurking about in the Comitia Plebis
chat room? Could there be some patrician offering honors and postions,
and maybe even a Senate seat, if only some Plebeian would act as his spy,
become the "eyes and ears" of some group of Optimates to keep watch over
the activities of the Comitia Plebis Tributa? The mere suggestion of
such would be regarded as influence peddling in some states, a
prosecutable offence in most civilized nations. But of course the the
Plebeians should not be suspiscious of any such Optimate plots should
they Vedius? As a candidate for Consul, Vedius, were evidence brought to
you that such an offense had been committed, what would you do about it?

Surely there cannot be any suppression of Plebeians by Patricians in
Nova Roma or we might have greater evidence that such existed. We might
for example make note of the fact that some 40 Plebeians voted in last
year's election, yet only five Plebeians from last year are apportioned
to the Rural Tribes. Since you wrote the Lex Vedia Tributorum yourself,
Vedia, I am sure you are familar with its provisions in section III that
"No Citizen shall be removed from one tribe to be included in another,
save those who are transferred to the urban tribes by their failure to
vote in the annual magisterial elections." So that can only mean that
ALL those now in the Urban Tribes could not have voted in last year's
magisterial election, and that if only five of last year's voting
Plebeian's are now in the Rural Tribes, then the other 35 who voted must
have all left Nova Roma.

But there can be no supiscion of Patricians oppressing Plebians by
manipulating tribal apportionment. If that were true there must be other
evidence of it. We might find that both Tribuni Plebis were assigned to
one or another of the Urban Tribes. We might find the four newly
elevated Plebeian Senators are in the Urban Tribes. We might find that
Plebeians who stood as candidates in last year's elections were removed
from the Rural Tribes, contrary to your Lex Vedia, and were reassigned to
the Urban Tribes. After all if such individuals who were so involved in
Nova Roma as to run for office, or serve in its offices, or serve as
Provincial Praetors, then surely they would be expected to vote in the
elections they themselves ran in. Therefor they could not be reassigned
to Rural Tribes, except in violation of your law.

And even if something of that nature had occurred, there are checks and
balances in the Nova Roma system of government that would have discovered
such an abuse. There are two Censors who oversee the apportionment.
Censor Sulla has told me in direct response to my questions about the
century and tribe apportionment, that he had personally reviewed all
assignments last April. If there had been any misassignments, surely
Sulla would have noticed it. Surely Censor Sulla would have reported
misapportionments to his colleague. Surely both Patrician Censors would
have corrected any such misassignments. Assuming of course there were
evidence that such had occurred.

And what of the other check on any such patrician plots against the
Plebeians. Are there not two Tribuni Plebis to protect the interests of
the Plebeians? Would not Tarquinius Caesar and Sergius Australicus have
done something about any patrician effort to limit, inhibit, or otherwise
manipulate the voting system of Nova Roma? where was Tarquinius Caesar
when such a plot was being unfolded? Where was Sergius Australicus last
April when Censor Sulla reviewed the apportionment? If there were any
irregularities, if Australicus and Tarquinius had voted in last year's
elections and now found themselves in an Urban Tribe, surely they would
notice it? Surely they would question it? Surely they would make an
inquirey and have it corrected? Wouldn't they?

I must ask you, Vedius, if you, as Consul, were to discover such a
misuse of authority in office by senior patrician magistrates, so as to
manipulate the voting process in favor of one group of citizens over
another group of citizens, what would you do about it? And if there was
a pattern to the way individual cives had been misapportioned so that it
could not be construed as merely accidental, what then may we expect of
you as Consul to do to the indivdual or individuals who were responsible?

And if there were such things occurring in Nova Roma, there would likely
be other things of a similar nature occurring as well. It would be of
the gravest matter to everyone in Nova Roma. No one magistrate, no one
Comitia, nor the Senate alone should be responsible to deal with such a
thing. It would have to be made as a collective effort. Quietly,
civilly, by a group of individuals representing divergent interests but
who had proven themselves capable of working with others to resolve
problems rather than create problems.

Iterum scripsit:
<<So why, then, do some insist on pitting one group against another? Why
do
some seek to magnify (and indeed reverse) the differences between the
Orders? Why do some claim oppression where none really exists?>>

Respondeo:
Indeed, Vedius, why? Why do some form a Faction and refer to themselves
as Optimates? Why do they seek to so magnify differences between
themselves and all others in Nova Roma? Cui bono, Vedius? What is to be
gained by flinging hysterical epitaphs and making claims that others want
to tear down the Republic? Cui bono, Vedius? Such accusations that you
make about the claims of others, from who have you heard such claims
made? I remind you, Vedius, of an ancient Roman proverb: "Sapiens nihil
affirmat quod non probat."

Gn. Moravius Piscinus
Tribunus Plebis petitor
Flamen Cerealis
Retarius et Rogator Sodalitates Latinitates
Rogator Sodalitas Musarum

http://www.diocletianus.de/elect/piscinus
________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/975898124/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Plebiscitum
From:	Gian G Reali <piscinus@-------->
Date:	Sun, 3 Dec 2000 21:13:25 -0800

Salutum Quiritibus:

I address this primarily to Tarquinius Caesar, Tribunis Plebis:

I am glad to see that someone has made an effort to consider Nova Roma
developing a source of income for our res publica other than a tributum
(direct taxation). Even more so, I am glad to see the Citizens of Nova
Roma are being asked to consider this tax proposal, rather than have
another magistrate arbitrarily issuing an edict without due
consideration. The tax proposal made by the Consul Fabius seems to have
the misplaced notion that taxes in any form constitute a nation's GNP. I
don't know where he learned his economics, but a nation must have a GNP
before it can be taxed. Your proposal is also a tax. It does have some
firmer footing than Consul Fabius' in that it seeks to tax Equestori who
do business through Nova Roma. It does tax them in two ways, first by
licensing businesses, even though you do not call it as such, and
secondly by charging an unspecified percentage of their profits, which
amounts to a sales tax.

Your proposal did not stop at taxation however. You took it a step
further to set up some "advisory board" of businessmen, to monitor the
conduct of business inside a non-profit organization, to advise the
Senate on how much money the People of Nova Roma should give them, the
businessmen, to support their businesses in our organization with us.
Talk about putting the foxes in charge of the hen house. This is worse.
This is like put all the utility company together on a Public Utilities
Commission to fix your rates, and then offering to pay for their
advertising and expenses too. The only thing that prevents Nova Roma
from really being ripped off by this proposal is that it would not raise
enough money to make it worth someone's effort to fleece us. This is a
very poorly written, ill-conceived plan. Riddled with unsound business
practises. If you walked into my offices and tried to sell this plan to
me, as a businessman, I would have laughed you right out of the door.
Seriously, I have done worse to incompetent salespeople who have tried to
pitch me far better plans for my business than what you have offered us
here. I know you live in some virtual reality, Tarq, but when it comes
to money, please, let's get real

Let us take a look at the plebiscitum as it has been presented:

<<Plebiscita Tarquinia de ordo Equestor

<<The Purpose of the Equestrian Order

<<The primary function of the Equestrian Order shall be
to collect and generate funding to meet the
requirements of maintaining and promoting the growth
of Nova Roma, through buisness, commerece, and other
means, public or private, within Nova Roma or outside
of it. The Equestrian Order will secondarily act as a
"financial advisory board" which will assist in the
allotment of official funds in the manner defined below.>>

<<II- The members of the Equestrian Order shall
provide, in concert with one or more of the Quaestors,
advice in the form of a draft national budget, other
financial documents and statements, and reports of a
quarterly or greater frequency, to the Senate, and
make available such advice to elected magistrates at
the Senate's direction.>>

<<I II- In advance of the Kalends of Martius, the Ordo
Equester will submit to the Senate a draft national
budget, and participate, at the Senate's discretion,
in debate, consultations, and hearings with elected
magistrates to finalize the National budget as a
reasonable, well-balanced, and feasible fiscal plan.>>

On the surface there seems little to object to in this section.
However, below you make out that the Equestrian Order is composed of the
very same businessmen from whom funds are collected, the same businessmen
who are to receive funds from Nova Roma to promote their businesses, and
that they are to prepare the monthly, quarterly, semiannual and annual
reports of an organization that seems to be responsible for overseeing
their activities. You have also placed the preparation of a
organizational draft budget in the hands of this body. The idea that
businessmen operating in Nova Roma should be part of the process of
advising the Senate with regard to fiscal policies is a good idea. But
you seem to be proposing some form of Board of Commerce combing the
oversight responsibilities of a government agency with a Small Business
Association for self promotion of those very same business it is to
oversee. Would we want our public utilities commission to be composed of
utility providers?

And I must question this whole notion of a non-profit organization
such as Nova Roma is suppose to be, having within it a board of private
businessmen that promotes "buisness, commerece, and other means, public
or private, within Nova Roma or outside." Is Nova Roma a nonprofit
organization for promoting charitable, religious and educational
projects, or is it some kind of trade association for the benefit of
private enterprises?


<<II I- Members of the Equestrian Order who deal in
"roman goods" shall continue to be entitled to pursue
buisness interests public or private, within Nova Roma
or outside of it.>>

Exactly who is determining what products and services are "roman goods"
and which are not? The businessmen inside the Equestrian Order who are
selling those same products and services?

<<II II- Members who promote or sell goods, products or
services of a Roman or Nova Roman nature, shall be
continue to be entitled to reasonable support and
encouragement from the senate and People of Nova Roma.>>

What eaxactly is this "reasonable support" to be supplied by the "People
of Nova Roma"? This sounds as though you are promising something to the
businessmen. As a businessman myself, I would want to know exactly what
I was being offered by affiliating with this Equestrian Order.

<<II III- Members who engague in "nonRoman" commerce,
may, meeting other conditions stated below, be
accepted into the Ordo Equester. However, they will
not be entitled to support and encouragement (such as
advertising), and will be granted so only with the
approval of both Censores along with a Senatus
Consultum approved by 2/3rds of the Senate. >>

Here again, who is determining what is "nonRoman commerce"? Who is
determining whether these businessmen are "meeting other conditions"?
What "other conditions"? What kind of support are you offering to some
but not all members of the Order? And this "encouragement" you offer.
May I assume as a businessman, paying dues into this affiliation, that
there is advertising available for me to use? Is there a cost for using
it? Can I declare it as a business expense? And if I am not getting
free advertising, because I have for some reason been determined to be
selling "nonRoman" goods and services by some unspecified group, then
exactly what am I to receive as a benefit to this Order?

<<II IIII- Members who are not engagued in any commerce
but meet all other requirements below may be enrolled
on the conditions explained below.>>

A member of the Order but not engaged in any commerce, and still meeting
the requirements? Am I meeting the requirements as one engaged in
"Roman" or "nonRoman" commerce?

<<II V- Any commerce, trade, or type of buisness the
Equestrians are involved in must be deemed legal by
local governing laws and Nova Roman laws. >>

I think you may want to consider this provision further. On the one
hand we as an organization might want to have a little more control over
what businesses we associate with as an organization, than to simply say
it needs to be legal in some country. "Local governing laws" broadly
seeks to address the issue being associated with illegal activities. But
is Nova Roma then to be monitoring business activities being conducted
through its domain? Who is monitoring? The businessmen of this
Equestrian Order or some other Nova Roma authority? Are you proposing
that Nova Roma begin regulating on international internet trade where
other macronations have dared not tread? And if Nova Roma does not, what
relationship would our non-profit, charitable, religious, and educational
organization have to such businesses as may be linked to our website?
How responsible would Nova Roma be, as an organization, for activities
conducted through our websites, through the support, encouragement, and
promotion of our Equestrian Order? If all a businessman must show is
that his business is legal where he lives, can he be refused entrance
into our Equestrian Order? If a businessman opens a legal house of
prostitution in Nevada, and dresses all his employees in Roman costumes
can he join your Equestrian Order without having to gain approval of his
business activities first? Or how about a Sudanese slave market, on
line? How about a business that sells elephant ivory, black bear livers,
or exotic plants and animals? Would Nova Roma want to be associated with
just any business? And if you say no, does not that businessman have a
right to sue Nova Roma for your denial of equal access in enterprise?
What is Nova Roma's liability in any business it sponsors, promotes, or
otherwise supports? And what is its liability in discriminating between
businesses within the framework that this plebiscitum provides in the way
it is currently written?

<<III I- Members of the Equestrian Order shall be
required to pay a set annual membership fee in no less
than quarterly installments, of $25.00 per month, US
dollars ($300 per year), which will, for now, provide
the bulk of the official budget. >>

Does anyone have the least amount of understanding of what this section
says? You are charging members fees so they can participate in
commercial ventures inside your non-profit organization. In the first
place I doubt that is legal. It smacks of being a kickback. Secondly,
any monies collected do not become a BUDGET. You are talking about fees
to be placed in some fund, and then the use of the collected funds will
need to be budgeted if you intend to expend them. Then kindly stipulate,
the official budget of what? What fund is the money going into to? Is
this the same fund overseen by the businessmen to help support the
businesses they own?

<<III II- The only exclusion being the members who
engague in buisness of "Roman type" who shall be
required to pay a percentage of their profits to the
treasury (as defined in the constitution), but are not
required to meet the minimum fee. >..

Rideo magna voce! Ok, you are offering me free online advertisement in
exchange for a cut of my profits? Of my PROFITS? And in addition, I
don't have to pay any minimum fees if I "engague" in "Roman type
business"! This is TOOOOOOOoooo much! Baby, sell the house, we are
moving to Nevada! Even the IRS is not about to collect a thing from me
for the first few years, except maybe payroll contributions, and then
only if I don't have everyone work as self-employed. And I will
guarantee you I will be opening up a new house every five years. You want
a cut of my PROFITS? ROFL.

IIII I- Prospective members shall seek support and
nomination from existing members of the Order, who may
them present them for acceptance by the Censors.

Well this is much better. A Good Old Boy System! "Yeah, sure, I can
get you in, for a cut of your take." Sounds like a recreation of Roman
practise to me, uh-huh.

IIII II- The Censors should consider the moral and
legal aspects of the buisness a prospective member is
involved in, though the main criteria will be I. the
annual membership fee, and II. the participation in
the financial advisory commitee.

Really!? Whose legal system again? And by whose moral codes are we
adjudicating membership in your Order? But real inclusion depends more
on my annual membership fees which is a cut of my PROFITS, and all I have
to do is participate in advising the Senate on how much money they need
budget to support my legal business. ORCAE ITA! Yeah, sure, baby! I
can live with that. Where do I sign? (IN MAGNA VOCE RIDEO!)

II III- One who is rejected shall have the right to
appeal the decision to the Comitia Populi within two
market days of notification of rejection.

Oh, please! Put it down in writing too. I want my lawyers to see this!

V I- Members are required to meet the financial
obligations of membership, and must do so in a
consistent and timely manner.

Pro di immortales, I promise I will be consistant in paying a cut of my
PROFITS as my memebrship fees in your exclusive club for businessmen,
where I get to advise the Senate on how much money the rest of Nova Roma
should pay ME in support of MY business activities! Mehercule, pollicito
testes quos libet adde deos!

V II- Accepted members will be required to swear a
legally and morally binding oath.

I think I just did that.

V III- Accepted members will be required to put extra
time, as well as money, into Nova Roma. This includes,
but is not limited to: the strategic and accurate
planning of a yearly budget, long term financial
planning and goals for Nova Roma, the active pursuit
of pertinant merchants to advertise on the Nova Roma
site at a small charge, creating and improving old and
new sources of income.

Now this could be difficult. I am not sure I could get up off the floor
long enough to attend any of your meetings. Oh, and I see you are asking
for me to pay "extra...money" upon my acceptance. Is that like a bribe?
You are solliciting bribes? You want me to bribe you so I can have the
privilege to pay fees, and taxes, in exchange for what? Advertising?
That must be some package deal you're selling. $300 per year too! RVM!
I don't know, Tarq. $300 A direct mailer contract runs about $300 a
month. Cable tv is $700 an add, or you could really splurge and maybe go
the same amount per minute on the local stations. Cut me a deal I might
get 12 radio spots in a week for $500 if I feed the DJ's free food. But
in each of those cases, you get what you pay for. And if you are going
to try to sell me any kind of advertising plan it has to cost effective.
All you got is a prospective market of 600 people. You're going to have
to show me some figures to sell this one.
Why don't you come around in person some time. There are these fellows
in Youngstown I think you need to meet before you start messing in their
territory. "I gotta da picka de ice fer ya." And while you're in town
I'll rent out a local club, put you on stage for a busines luncheon.
You'd be an over night hit.

V IIII- Membership in the Order is not lifetime, and
may be continued only as long as the proper
contributions, as outlined above and in the
constitution, are fully and puctually meet.

Lifetime? Life is short, vide supra.

VI I- Members of the Ordo Equestor will receive
fifteen (XV) "century points" for current enrollment
in the Album Equestrium, but will remain a member of
their original class (either Plebeian or Patrician)
for all other voting purposes.

OH! And I get extra points, too? Please, please stop, you're killing
me!

VI II- Members who remain enrolled in the Album
Equestrium for five (V) concurrent years shall recieve
ten (X) century points for past service if, at that
time they decide to cease their contributions and
leave the Ordo Equestor.

VI III- Members who serve less than five (V) straight
years but more than one (I) in the Ordo shall be
entitled to three (III) century points for past
service.

Oh, but I will be reapplying once every 4 years,11 months, and 20 days
as a new business each time. Vide supra. Hmm..and if I declare
bankruptcy on this one business, liquidate everything by selling it to
my new corporation...oh, and fire all the girls so that my new
corporation can hire them, with state tax incentives for hiring
unemployed working girls...put the new business in the name of a disabled
veteran for additional tax incentives...Tell you what, I'll buy your
points at 3 cents a point, sell them back to you at 2 cents, make a
profit of 5 cents a point and declare overhead expenses at 7 cents a
point. Now how much do I owe Nova Roma for their cut of my PROFITS?
Don't worry, I already know what the going rate in Youngstown is for
their cut.

VII I- In the last quarter of each year, the Senate and magistrates
will asses the productiveness of each member of the Ordo over the
past year, and may call members of the Ordo for review
by the Censors.

Itane, ain vero? You know Larry Flint started in Ohio, just across the
state from me. And Gerry Springer was mayor of the same City of
Cincinnati that tried to assess the performance of Hustler in their town.
Real government officials, with real lawyers could not prevent them from
conducting business there. How do you propose to safeguard Nova Roma?
Where do you propose to access the funds necessary to pay the legal fees
in any suit brought against our organization?

VII II- The Censors shall then examine the
Equestrian's "record" over the past year, and
determine whether or not he may continue to be
enrolled in the Ordo Equestor.

Vide supra.

VII III- Subtractions from the ranks of the
Equestrians may be announced at any time by the Censors.

Scilicit! Iterum vide supra. Better still! Arbitrary decisions at a
moment's notice. Now I can hire a cheap lawyer and still clean out the
treasury.

VII V- An expelled member may appeal his expulsion to
the comitia populi within two market days of
notification of expulsion.

Ain vero? R.V.M.


************

Ita me di ament! Just give me a moment to compose myself.
Tarq, it looks like you are attempting to merely expand on what Nova
Roma already does in allowing other businesses to advertise through its
domain. But you want to complicate it all the more. And for what?
Where is the advantage to Nova Roma or to any businessman in this plan?
And when you make the businesses, or their representatives, a part of a
group inside your organization, and one that has a functional role in the
decision making process of your organization, you have stepped into a
whole new realm. The fact that these would be commercial enterprises
inside a nonprofit organization makes for a differnt problem. You may be
able to do that, but you would need to rewrite your application for
incorporation as a non-profit corporation. Probably you would need to
disincorporate Nova Roma as it is, and then reincorporate under a new
organizational structutre. Non-profit still? Not impossible maybe, but
you are crossing into a grey area and would have to change the
description of Nova Roma. Is that really your intent? To tear
everythiung down and start over? Where did I hear that before?

Look, if you want to sell some plan to a businessman, keep it simple and
show where the benefit of the proposal lies. Your proposal does not
offer someone engaged in honest business practises anything unless you
can show that by being a member it would benefit my business. You have
only ambiguities here. You can't even tell me how large of a % you want.
I am only cautioning that you should give this proposal more
consideration. Before you start trying to sell this idea, I suggest you
put your efforts in developing a product to sell. I think you need to
seriously consider going back for some real advice on your proposal. And
do seek some professional advice. If you like, I will even offer to
proof-read it for you, before you offer another plebiscitum in the
Comitia Plebis Tributa.

As for the legal, but not so honest businessmen..and they are out
there...You don't know much about American business practises, do you? I
know a certain furniture store, L...., that would love to open a store in
any space you'd be leasing. I had a restaurant across the way from them,
Tarq. They went out of business and reopened under a new name every
three years; same location, same furniture, same ownership. And when
they would switch over, they never paid their employees a dime, never
paid their suppliers, never delivered a single piece of furniture ordered
through them, and no taxes did they pay either. All legal. All they
ever had to pay were the licensing fees and court costs. Your proposal
would actually cost them more. And for any of you in the area of
Cleveland, Ohio, who may not know to which furniture store I refer,... A
salute!

Curate ut valeatis.

Gn. Moravius piscinus
Tribunus Plebis petitor
Flamen Cerealis
Retarius et rogator Sodalitatis Latinitatis
Rogator Sodalitas Musarum

http:www.diocletianus.de/elect/piscinus
________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/975898126/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	[novaroma] To Australicus on Dignitas
From:	Gian G Reali <piscinus@-------->
Date:	Sun, 3 Dec 2000 08:09:09 -0800

Salvete Australice et Quirites

As I had written in an earlier post, entitled "Dignitas":
<<As a group of friends, we hope to help organize various chats, forums,
assist in translations of e-mail lists, and simply promote communication
in varied ways. Individually we have already been performing such tasks
on a personal level. Together we thought we might be able to do more.
And further, we believe there are many others in Nova Roma who will be
interested in further advancing communication in and among our ever
growing community in Nova Roma.>>

I do not see the Amici Dignitas to be anything other than a collection
of Citizens who share a common interest in stimulating dialogue on issues
affecting the internal processes of Nova Roma. Subscribed to the list is
a diverse group who range across the political spectrum of our res
publica. I make note of the fact that among the group of subscribers to
the Dignitas Forum list are both Apollonius Formosanus and Cornelius
Sulla. I cannot think of any other two individuals in Nova Roma who so
consistently take exception to one another. And then there is also Sulla
and myself who have repeatedly had political differences over a range of
issues.

Further, I submit that in the process of forming this discussion group,
and establishing the list itself, that its basic premise that differences
between individuals may be overcome by dialoguing, has already bore
fruit. As witness to that, I note two other subscribers, Maria
Peregrinus and Livia Cornelia. On the Nova Roma main list there were
posts that separated these two with bad feelings towards one another.
They have since reconciled with one another, and mainly because of the
efforts of some members of the Amici Dignitatis. That is not to say that
they agree with one another on any and all political issues. I also note
that there are a few Senators subscribed to the list. I am sure that
they do not form some Faction or Party within the Senate, as you are
better able to attest than I. Vado, Sulla, Marcius Rex, Labienus
Fortunatus, Cassius. That would be some combination to see. What these
Senators do share in common is a willingness to continue working together
and talking to one another in spite of their differences over any given
issue.

When the elections are all said and done, whoever wins, everyone will
have to work together, so that together Nova Roma may progress further.
There will remain differences of opinion over what direction Nova Roma
might take. The discussions and debates over such issues will only in
part take place in the Senate. It will also take place on other lists.
The NR Laws list is one. Issues may spill into the Collegium Pontificum
as they had before. New for the coming year is the Comitia Plebis chat
room and the Comitia Plebis Tributa list. Even before these were
established by others, I had been dicussing the same innitiatives with
some individuals, and the possibility of creating a Plebian web site
that will link to both the Comitia Plebis chat room and the Comitia
Plebis Tributa list, as well as provide some informational pages.
Whether I win one of the Tribuni Plebis positions or not, I will still
work towards building such a site. There will be a new dynamic in Nova
Roma as the Plebeian aspect of ancient Rome is further explored, and
developed in Nova Roma too. The Plebeian initiatives will only be one
small part of several developments in the future of Nova Roma. The
Dignitas Forum list is not meant to replace or overshadow any of these
other initiatives. The Amici Dignitas' stated goal is to assist and
stimulate several lists. They also seek to eventually sponsor other
initiatives that will stimulate communication inside Nova Roma in diverse
places, in diverse mediums. What we hope to accomplish is first to have
people talking. Next, to encourage them talking together, sharing ideas,
arguing out differences.

What I have just stated above about Plebeian initiatives may appear to
some as though I am advocating some "Movement" to overthrow the Nova Roma
Republic and its magistrates. I am not. And those who have communicated
with me know that what I promote is quite the opposite. I look to build
up the Plebeian institutions as an added dimension of Nova Roma's overall
community. Does that mean things in Nova Roma might be changed by such a
development? Certainly. But I do not see any community as remaining
static. Any society is an organism that is constantly changing, growing,
developing. How I view such things are that they are only natural
developments in an expanding community. Our community is a collection of
individuals and ideas all coming together. Opening up additional means
by which people may express themselves and communicate with one another
is comparable to building up an infrastructure of roads and highways that
assist in the development of our community.

You have properly asked that all members of the Amici Dignitas publicly
state their positions on "Formosanus' revolutionary Manifesto." Do I
support Formosanus' statement? No. Does Formosanus' statement represent
the Amici Dignitatis? No, absolutely not. The Amici have argued against
the Formosanus statement. Only a few have posted to the list itself on
the statement he made. Others have been arguing with Formosanus in
private over the nature of his statement. It is clear that the Amici do
not support the radical elements of his ideas. Even the individual he
seeks to champion has asked Formosanus to put an end to his continuous
diatribe on the matter. She has argued most strenuously that he stop
waiving her situation about like some revolutionary banner. Formosanus
will not defer to her wishes anymore than he will submit his conscious to
anyone. Some of the Amici have been involved in a quieter campaign of
reconciliation. Formosanus does not agree that such efforts should be
made solely in private. It is his right to disagree. It is his right to
voice his opinion. It was the right of Festus to voice his opinion too.
Are we to assume that because Festus posted insults at the British on
Nova Roma's main list that Nova Roma is anti-British? Are we to assume
that since Festus posted statements suggesting women not be allowed to
vote in our res publica that Nova Roma is anti-feminist? Are we to
assume that since Festus posted an invitation that all Americans in Nova
Roma join with the American Fascist Party that Nova Roma itself must be a
fascist organization?

The Dignitas Forum was set up to allow individuals to continue such
arguments, in long ongoing strings, on an alternate list so that the main
list would not need be so over burdened as it has in these past several
months. Go back to the period when the Amici Dignitatis were just a
group of friends discussing issues of the day. Go back to the context in
which the idea for this list was first born. Go back to the statement of
the Amici Dignitas and judge them by their expressed purpose, not some
statement made by one individual who has so far taken advantage of a
means provided by the Amici Dignitatis. Or you may go back to my earlier
statement, "Dignitas" message 16552 on the Nova Roma main list. You
cannot judge the entire medium provided by the Amici Dignitatis solely by
one indiviual who has thus far used it. And you cannot judge the entire
Amici Dignitatis solely by one initiative they may have taken thus far.

I again invite all Nova Romans to subscribe to the NR_Dignitas Forum
list where discussion of all political views are allow. The views
expressed on the list are not necessarily those of its sponsors.

Valete

Gn.Moravius Piscinus
Civis Novae romae
Tribunus Plebis petitor
Flamen Cerealis
Retarius et Rogator Sodalitatis Latinitatis
Rogator Sodalitas Musarum

http:www.diocletianus.de/elect/piscinus

http://www.egroups.com/message/NR_DignitasForum
________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/975898129/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	[novaroma] Attention Livia Cornelia
From:	"pjane@-------- " <pjane@-------->
Date:	Mon, 04 Dec 2000 03:02:44 -0000

Livia, I am getting a "delivery failed" message when I try to send you
private e-mail. There may be something wrong with your ISP's mail
server.

The rest of you, please forgive this intrusion on your time/bandwidth.

P. Cassia



-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/975899040/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	[novaroma] Questions about voting
From:	"Caius Fabius" <SPQR_HQ@-------->
Date:	Sun, 03 Dec 2000 19:20:21 -0000

I have a few questions about voting....

I received a email tellinh me my voter code and the link, buttelling me to
vote between 7 Decem and 14 Decem.
Is this on the Julian calendar, or the Gregorian calendar?

I am suspecting the latter, since no refernces were made to the ides, et
al....

either way.... the 11th, 12th, 13th and 14th are religious holidays and the
14th is the day for legal actions?
On the 12th we can only vote in the AM or the PM, but I don't know which
one? I get so confused...


also good idea, sending the email codes out for voting.
Bad idea, sending them out a week early, when some people get 100+ emails a
day.... If you delete your code, is there a remedy? (I am not admitting
anything) hehehe

C Fabius

Can you vote twice? and If I don't vote for either candidate, will a vote be
assigned or will it end up in the courts? Which party is the Green Party?


_____________________________________________________________________________________
Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/975899635/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	[novaroma] Response to Austraicus
From:	"M. Apollonius Formosanus" <bvm3@-------->
Date:	Mon, 4 Dec 2000 05:01:39 +0100

M. Apollonius Formosanus Tribuno Sergio Australico Obstinato et
omnibus Quiritibus S.P.D.

Sic Obstinatus:

"Now if you could refrain from trying to represent your candidacy as
a crusade of the White Knights against a bunch of dirty, evil trolls,
then perhaps the appearance of ad hominem arguments could be
avoided?"

I just wanted to make a slightly philosophical answer to the whole
tone and system of presumptions of your post.

You give me the impression that you believe that:

1. All persons are (approximately?) equal in character and morality
of conduct.
2. Purported differences in degree of morality are irrelevant to the
judgement of individuals and the conduct of government.
3. I and the Amici Dignitatis specifically are without a right to
make any evaluations of the moral character of others or their
actions.
4. It is wrong to wish to maximise the number of more moral
characters in positions of power over others.

In other words, you seem to perceive correctly that this is a moral
campaign and a moral struggle, and based on that you wish to deny the
reality of moral distinctions among people and in that matter
discredit our whole campaign, and indeed (in contradiction to your
premises) you wish to paint us as evil because we make such
distinctions.

In response to such an amoralistic and apparently cynical attack I
affirm that:

1. Although no one is 100% good or 100% evil, there are very
different proportions in different people sometimes.
2. Moral character is very relevant to the judgement of people and
the conduct of government.
3. I and the Amici Dignitatis have at least as much right as anyone
else to make moral evaluations of ourselves and others.
4. It is right, prudent, and entirely praiseworthy to try to increase
the number of morally virtuous persons in govenment.

I recognise that in acting on the basis of moral indignation and
moral aspiration and moral judgement it naturally eventuates that we
may wind up deciding that someone is not predominantly a good human
being insofar as we have evidence available. In public I would most
of the time for the sake of moderation and concord say only that
certain specific actions are immoral and wrong.

In the end, though, the questions of motivation may come up and the
question of predicting future actions. It then becomes difficult to
avoid saying that a persons inner character is corrupt. And for
candidates that is very relevant, is it not?

Neither I nor anyone else in the Amici Dignitatis desires to insult
others publicly for the sake of doing so. But we do believe that
there must be public recognition that some people have a tendencey to
behave more decently to others and more fairly than others. We are
trying very hard to be such people and not their contrary.

One goal of Nova Roma was once to make the Virtues real - which
implies knowing the difference between virtue and vice and their
practitioners. NR has not succeeded in this, perhaps because people
are much more used to thinking in terms of rule-based ethics than
virtue-based ethics these days. However, our moralism is rooted in
that founding idea of Nova Roma.

If you deny people the right to be motivated by moral idealism and
the desire to see it win in the world over immoral and amoral desire
for power, then you condemn all progress in the moral realm of
society. Whether in the realms of anti-slavery, anti-racism, or
anti-sexism.

You have the right to disagree with whom we consider vicious or
virtuous. What is troubling is your desire to negate the importance
and reality of moral differences and blur everything into a kind of
grey so that we seem to have no reason for being or legitimacy in
trying to bring about changes for the better.

If you think we are evil, say so and give the reasons why you think
so - but *don't* try to make us out as evil just because we believe
that we are better than others who have engaged in evident injustices
and cruelties. To be so is takes no extraordinary virtue!

Marcus Aurelius says something that is very much to the point and
has always inspired me:

"Reserve your right to any deed or utterance that accords with
nature. Do not be put off by the criticisms or comments that may
follow; if there is something good to be done or said, never renounce
your right to it. Those who criticise you have their own reason to
guide them, and their own impulse to prompt them; you must not let
your eyes stray towards them, but keep a straight course and follow
your own nature and the World-Nature (and the way of these two is
one)."

It is in this spirit that I and, I think, all the Amici Dignitatis
are displaying at trying to renovate things in Nova Roma. Please do
not despise us just because we are idealists and just because we have
a little self-confidence. Nor because we have good eyes for moral rot
and the mususe of power. Consider the things that we are for:
democracy, respect for the dignitas of each individual civis and
non-political courts for the rule-guided resolution of conflicts in
the light of the previous two criteria. That should not threaten
anyone. Indeed, those are things that anyone should welcome.

Valete!


Marcus Apollonius Formosanus << CANDIDATVS PRAETORIVS >>
Paterfamilias Gentis Apolloniae (http://www.crosswinds.net/~bvm3/)
Moderator et Praeceptor Sodalitatis Latinitatis; Scriba Censorius              
ICQ# 61698049 AIM: MAFormosanus MSN: Formosanus
Civis Novae Romae in Silesia, Polonia
The Gens Apollonia is open to new members.
Ave nostra Respublica Libera - Nova Roma!
________________________________________
Si vis omnia tibi subicere, te subice Rationi. (Seneca)
(Se vi deziras subigi al vi chion, subigu vin al Racio)
________________________________________


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/975902548/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] On the Amici Dignitatis
From:	Fortunatus <labienus@-------->
Date:	Sun, 03 Dec 2000 22:03:44 -0600

T Labienus M Octavio S P D

> > A battle, for what? Are the amici dignitatis really the enemies of
> > the republic, as some politicians suggest us?
>
> No one really knows. We do not know how much of Apollonius' manifesto
> is supported by the rest of the Amici, nor what plans you have made
> among yourselves to act as a unified group. All that we do know is
> that the signitories of that document have been acting much like a
> political party.

I believe that I have earned, at least to some small degree, the benefit
of the doubt here. Does anyone here who has seen my history in Nova
Roma unfold actually believe that I would associate with people that I
thought were enemies of the republic? Has anyone here ever caught me in
a lie or known me to deliberately twist the truth? Have I ever given
anyone any reason to doubt my sincerity? Have I ever knowingly
misrepresented my convictions or my intentions?

I say again that while I agree in principle with much of what Formosanus
says, I also disagree with him on many points. So, at least this one
Amicus Dignitatis does not entirely support Formosanus' manifesto.

I also reiterate that the Amici Dignitatis, as I understand it to be, is
not a political party, but rather a non-partisan group dedicated to
furthering political discussion, with the principles outlined in its
statement as pointers toward what its members would prefer to see in
government.

I also state for the umpteenth time that I do not consider myself to be
a member of any political party, though I am part of a circle of friends
who generally agree on some basic political principles (but not
necessarily on the implementation of said principles). I follow my
convictions, and not some party platform. Neither the Statement of the
Amici Dignitatis nor Formosanus' manifesto is a party platform.

I can offer no specific proof that the above three statements are true.
I do hope, however, that my past actions and words lend enough weight to
my present speech that you can at least agree that it is probable that I
am not lying now.

> Your intentions are a mystery. It would help if each of the Amici
> would state whether they supported Apollonius' goals to "remove"
> Lucius Cornelius and Quintus Fabius from office, and to defeat any
> tax proposal that comes from the Senate.

Though I occasionally fail, I do my best to oppose or support anything
brought up by any person on its merits, without regard to who that
person is. There is much that L Cornelius has done that I disagree
with, but I will only attempt to remove him from the censorate (though I
am uncertain that I could succeed in doing so) if I feel that he has
abused that position. I have yet to see unequivocal evidence of such
abuse.

I have seen some evidence that Q Fabius and I have extreme differences
of opinion on many issues. Differences of opinion are inevitable, and
are not reason enough for me to attempt to completely remove him from
Nova Roman politics. And, as with the case of L Cornelius, I am at a
loss as to how I would do so.

Vale
T Labienus Fortunatus

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/975902584/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Questions about voting
From:	Jeff Smith <JSmithCSA@-------->
Date:	Sun, 3 Dec 2000 20:41:33 -0800 (PST)

--- Caius Fabius <SPQR_HQ@--------> wrote:

> Can you vote twice? and If I don't vote for either
> candidate, will a vote be
> assigned or will it end up in the courts? Which
> party is the Green Party?

You can vote twice, but one must be for Buchanan.
We'll be able to determine your INTENT, even with our
chad-less ballot. ;)

Lucius Aetius Dalmaticus

=====
LTC JEFFREY C. SMITH
HQ USAREUR/7A
CMR 420, BOX 2839
APO AE 09063-2839

"It's what you learn after you know it all that counts." --Jean Rostand

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Shopping - Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products.
http://shopping.yahoo.com/

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/975904894/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	[novaroma] Test to list
From:	<gmvick32@-------->
Date:	Sun, 03 Dec 2000 21:56:04 -0700

Test to list. Apologies

Livia


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/975905406/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	[novaroma] Cut off for Announcements
From:	Jeff Smith <JSmithCSA@-------->
Date:	Sun, 3 Dec 2000 20:51:43 -0800 (PST)

Salvete!

What is the cut-off for announcement of candidates for
office?

Lucius Aetius Dalmaticus
Rogator

=====
LTC JEFFREY C. SMITH
HQ USAREUR/7A
CMR 420, BOX 2839
APO AE 09063-2839

"It's what you learn after you know it all that counts." --Jean Rostand

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Shopping - Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products.
http://shopping.yahoo.com/

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/975905517/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Test to list
From:	"Pompeia Cornelia" <scriba_forum@-------->
Date:	Mon, 04 Dec 2000 04:53:23 -0000

Loud and clear, Livi.......PO



>From: <gmvick32@-------->
>Reply-To: gmvick32@--------
>To: novaroma@--------
>Subject: [novaroma] Test to list
>Date: Sun, 03 Dec 2000 21:56:04 -0700
>
>Test to list. Apologies
>
>Livia
>

_____________________________________________________________________________________
Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/975905607/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	[novaroma] Final response to Formosanus
From:	LSergAust@--------
Date:	Mon, 4 Dec 2000 01:27:02 EST

Marcus Apollonius Formosanus, I am shocked and saddened by not only the
ideas you reveal in this post, but the shockingly open way you present
them. I will not attempt to elucidate them because they are stated here
so plainly that surely no-one who reads your words carefully can fail to
see the kind of thinking that lies behind them. I suspect that by so
revealing yourself you have just doomed your own candidacy.

I have seen to my satisfaction that of the others who participate in the
Amici Dignitatis list, few if any agree with the way you want to go. You
are attempting to drag them with you, but they have too much character to
be sucked in by the noble-sounding catchwords you dangle as bait. I
hereby apologize to each of them for having lumped them into any kind of
group with you on the basis of their subscription to your list.

I would ask where you find a basis for your bizarre "impressions" of what
I "believe," but I know that what you say is really based not on your
impressions of me but on what serves your own purposes. You seek to use
me as you use others.

I am saddened because I thought I liked you. Now I no longer wish to
converse with you. Our dialog is over.

L. Sergius Aust. Obst.


On 12/3/00 10:01 PM M. Apollonius Formosanus (bvm3@--------) wrote:

>M. Apollonius Formosanus Tribuno Sergio Australico Obstinato et
>omnibus Quiritibus S.P.D.
>
>Sic Obstinatus:
>
>"Now if you could refrain from trying to represent your candidacy as
>a crusade of the White Knights against a bunch of dirty, evil trolls,
>then perhaps the appearance of ad hominem arguments could be
>avoided?"
>
>I just wanted to make a slightly philosophical answer to the whole
>tone and system of presumptions of your post.
>
>You give me the impression that you believe that:
>
>1. All persons are (approximately?) equal in character and morality
>of conduct.
>2. Purported differences in degree of morality are irrelevant to the
>judgement of individuals and the conduct of government.
>3. I and the Amici Dignitatis specifically are without a right to
>make any evaluations of the moral character of others or their
>actions.
>4. It is wrong to wish to maximise the number of more moral
>characters in positions of power over others.
>
> In other words, you seem to perceive correctly that this is a moral
>campaign and a moral struggle, and based on that you wish to deny the
>reality of moral distinctions among people and in that matter
>discredit our whole campaign, and indeed (in contradiction to your
>premises) you wish to paint us as evil because we make such
>distinctions.
>
> In response to such an amoralistic and apparently cynical attack I
>affirm that:
>
>1. Although no one is 100% good or 100% evil, there are very
>different proportions in different people sometimes.
>2. Moral character is very relevant to the judgement of people and
>the conduct of government.
>3. I and the Amici Dignitatis have at least as much right as anyone
>else to make moral evaluations of ourselves and others.
>4. It is right, prudent, and entirely praiseworthy to try to increase
>the number of morally virtuous persons in govenment.
>
> I recognise that in acting on the basis of moral indignation and
>moral aspiration and moral judgement it naturally eventuates that we
>may wind up deciding that someone is not predominantly a good human
>being insofar as we have evidence available. In public I would most
>of the time for the sake of moderation and concord say only that
>certain specific actions are immoral and wrong.
>
> In the end, though, the questions of motivation may come up and the
>question of predicting future actions. It then becomes difficult to
>avoid saying that a persons inner character is corrupt. And for
>candidates that is very relevant, is it not?
>
> Neither I nor anyone else in the Amici Dignitatis desires to insult
>others publicly for the sake of doing so. But we do believe that
>there must be public recognition that some people have a tendencey to
>behave more decently to others and more fairly than others. We are
>trying very hard to be such people and not their contrary.
>
> One goal of Nova Roma was once to make the Virtues real - which
>implies knowing the difference between virtue and vice and their
>practitioners. NR has not succeeded in this, perhaps because people
>are much more used to thinking in terms of rule-based ethics than
>virtue-based ethics these days. However, our moralism is rooted in
>that founding idea of Nova Roma.
>
> If you deny people the right to be motivated by moral idealism and
>the desire to see it win in the world over immoral and amoral desire
>for power, then you condemn all progress in the moral realm of
>society. Whether in the realms of anti-slavery, anti-racism, or
>anti-sexism.
>
> You have the right to disagree with whom we consider vicious or
>virtuous. What is troubling is your desire to negate the importance
>and reality of moral differences and blur everything into a kind of
>grey so that we seem to have no reason for being or legitimacy in
>trying to bring about changes for the better.
>
> If you think we are evil, say so and give the reasons why you think
>so - but *don't* try to make us out as evil just because we believe
>that we are better than others who have engaged in evident injustices
>and cruelties. To be so is takes no extraordinary virtue!
>
> Marcus Aurelius says something that is very much to the point and
>has always inspired me:
>
>"Reserve your right to any deed or utterance that accords with
>nature. Do not be put off by the criticisms or comments that may
>follow; if there is something good to be done or said, never renounce
>your right to it. Those who criticise you have their own reason to
>guide them, and their own impulse to prompt them; you must not let
>your eyes stray towards them, but keep a straight course and follow
>your own nature and the World-Nature (and the way of these two is
>one)."
>
> It is in this spirit that I and, I think, all the Amici Dignitatis
>are displaying at trying to renovate things in Nova Roma. Please do
>not despise us just because we are idealists and just because we have
>a little self-confidence. Nor because we have good eyes for moral rot
>and the mususe of power. Consider the things that we are for:
>democracy, respect for the dignitas of each individual civis and
>non-political courts for the rule-guided resolution of conflicts in
>the light of the previous two criteria. That should not threaten
>anyone. Indeed, those are things that anyone should welcome.
>
>Valete!
>
>
>Marcus Apollonius Formosanus << CANDIDATVS PRAETORIVS >>
>Paterfamilias Gentis Apolloniae (http://www.crosswinds.net/~bvm3/)
>Moderator et Praeceptor Sodalitatis Latinitatis; Scriba Censorius
>
>ICQ# 61698049 AIM: MAFormosanus MSN: Formosanus
>Civis Novae Romae in Silesia, Polonia
>The Gens Apollonia is open to new members.
>Ave nostra Respublica Libera - Nova Roma!
>________________________________________
>Si vis omnia tibi subicere, te subice Rationi. (Seneca)
>(Se vi deziras subigi al vi chion, subigu vin al Racio)
>________________________________________

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/975911229/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] To Australicus on Dignitas
From:	Lucius Cornelius Sulla <alexious@-------->
Date:	Sun, 03 Dec 2000 23:46:12 -0800

Ave,

Just to comment on the part that reflects to me, you can disabuse yourself, Gn.
Moravius that I am anyway connected with the Dignitas. It is almost joke-like that
you brought me in. Here is why, I was (yes was) subscribed to that list. The day
Formosanus made his post about his manifesto, I was immediately notified by
citizens of Nova Roma who support me that another attempt in trying to formulate
impeachment proceedings was afoot. And, this was not the first attempt to
forumlate popular support in an impeachment hearing. Consular Candidate N.
Moravius Vado also tried to disrupte the government of Nova Roma by trying to
initiate impeachment proceedings against me. So, my involvement in the list was
limited to observer only. Let anyone subscribe to that list and see if I had any
involvement in that list whatsoever.

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
Censor of Nova Roma

Gian G Reali wrote:

> Salvete Australice et Quirites
> I do not see the Amici Dignitas to be anything other than a collection
> of Citizens who share a common interest in stimulating dialogue on issues
> affecting the internal processes of Nova Roma. Subscribed to the list is
> a diverse group who range across the political spectrum of our res
> publica. I make note of the fact that among the group of subscribers to
> the Dignitas Forum list are both Apollonius Formosanus and Cornelius
> Sulla. I cannot think of any other two individuals in Nova Roma who so
> consistently take exception to one another. And then there is also Sulla
> and myself who have repeatedly had political differences over a range of
> issues.
>
> Further, I submit that in the process of forming this discussion group,
> and establishing the list itself, that its basic premise that differences
> between individuals may be overcome by dialoguing, has already bore
> fruit. As witness to that, I note two other subscribers, Maria
> Peregrinus and Livia Cornelia. On the Nova Roma main list there were
> posts that separated these two with bad feelings towards one another.
> They have since reconciled with one another, and mainly because of the
> efforts of some members of the Amici Dignitatis. That is not to say that
> they agree with one another on any and all political issues. I also note
> that there are a few Senators subscribed to the list. I am sure that
> they do not form some Faction or Party within the Senate, as you are
> better able to attest than I. Vado, Sulla, Marcius Rex, Labienus
> Fortunatus, Cassius. That would be some combination to see. What these
> Senators do share in common is a willingness to continue working together
> and talking to one another in spite of their differences over any given
> issue.
>
> When the elections are all said and done, whoever wins, everyone will
> have to work together, so that together Nova Roma may progress further.
> There will remain differences of opinion over what direction Nova Roma
> might take. The discussions and debates over such issues will only in
> part take place in the Senate. It will also take place on other lists.
> The NR Laws list is one. Issues may spill into the Collegium Pontificum
> as they had before. New for the coming year is the Comitia Plebis chat
> room and the Comitia Plebis Tributa list. Even before these were
> established by others, I had been dicussing the same innitiatives with
> some individuals, and the possibility of creating a Plebian web site
> that will link to both the Comitia Plebis chat room and the Comitia
> Plebis Tributa list, as well as provide some informational pages.
> Whether I win one of the Tribuni Plebis positions or not, I will still
> work towards building such a site. There will be a new dynamic in Nova
> Roma as the Plebeian aspect of ancient Rome is further explored, and
> developed in Nova Roma too. The Plebeian initiatives will only be one
> small part of several developments in the future of Nova Roma. The
> Dignitas Forum list is not meant to replace or overshadow any of these
> other initiatives. The Amici Dignitas' stated goal is to assist and
> stimulate several lists. They also seek to eventually sponsor other
> initiatives that will stimulate communication inside Nova Roma in diverse
> places, in diverse mediums. What we hope to accomplish is first to have
> people talking. Next, to encourage them talking together, sharing ideas,
> arguing out differences.
>
> What I have just stated above about Plebeian initiatives may appear to
> some as though I am advocating some "Movement" to overthrow the Nova Roma
> Republic and its magistrates. I am not. And those who have communicated
> with me know that what I promote is quite the opposite. I look to build
> up the Plebeian institutions as an added dimension of Nova Roma's overall
> community. Does that mean things in Nova Roma might be changed by such a
> development? Certainly. But I do not see any community as remaining
> static. Any society is an organism that is constantly changing, growing,
> developing. How I view such things are that they are only natural
> developments in an expanding community. Our community is a collection of
> individuals and ideas all coming together. Opening up additional means
> by which people may express themselves and communicate with one another
> is comparable to building up an infrastructure of roads and highways that
> assist in the development of our community.
>
> You have properly asked that all members of the Amici Dignitas publicly
> state their positions on "Formosanus' revolutionary Manifesto." Do I
> support Formosanus' statement? No. Does Formosanus' statement represent
> the Amici Dignitatis? No, absolutely not. The Amici have argued against
> the Formosanus statement. Only a few have posted to the list itself on
> the statement he made. Others have been arguing with Formosanus in
> private over the nature of his statement. It is clear that the Amici do
> not support the radical elements of his ideas. Even the individual he
> seeks to champion has asked Formosanus to put an end to his continuous
> diatribe on the matter. She has argued most strenuously that he stop
> waiving her situation about like some revolutionary banner. Formosanus
> will not defer to her wishes anymore than he will submit his conscious to
> anyone. Some of the Amici have been involved in a quieter campaign of
> reconciliation. Formosanus does not agree that such efforts should be
> made solely in private. It is his right to disagree. It is his right to
> voice his opinion. It was the right of Festus to voice his opinion too.
> Are we to assume that because Festus posted insults at the British on
> Nova Roma's main list that Nova Roma is anti-British? Are we to assume
> that since Festus posted statements suggesting women not be allowed to
> vote in our res publica that Nova Roma is anti-feminist? Are we to
> assume that since Festus posted an invitation that all Americans in Nova
> Roma join with the American Fascist Party that Nova Roma itself must be a
> fascist organization?
>
> The Dignitas Forum was set up to allow individuals to continue such
> arguments, in long ongoing strings, on an alternate list so that the main
> list would not need be so over burdened as it has in these past several
> months. Go back to the period when the Amici Dignitatis were just a
> group of friends discussing issues of the day. Go back to the context in
> which the idea for this list was first born. Go back to the statement of
> the Amici Dignitas and judge them by their expressed purpose, not some
> statement made by one individual who has so far taken advantage of a
> means provided by the Amici Dignitatis. Or you may go back to my earlier
> statement, "Dignitas" message 16552 on the Nova Roma main list. You
> cannot judge the entire medium provided by the Amici Dignitatis solely by
> one indiviual who has thus far used it. And you cannot judge the entire
> Amici Dignitatis solely by one initiative they may have taken thus far.
>
> I again invite all Nova Romans to subscribe to the NR_Dignitas Forum
> list where discussion of all political views are allow. The views
> expressed on the list are not necessarily those of its sponsors.
>
> Valete
>
> Gn.Moravius Piscinus
> Civis Novae romae
> Tribunus Plebis petitor
> Flamen Cerealis
> Retarius et Rogator Sodalitatis Latinitatis
> Rogator Sodalitas Musarum
>
> http:www.diocletianus.de/elect/piscinus
>
> http://www.egroups.com/message/NR_DignitasForum
> ________________________________________________________________
> GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
> Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
> Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
> http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.
>


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/975917167/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] On the Amici Dignitatis
From:	"Caius Flavius Diocletianus" <3s@-------->
Date:	Mon, 4 Dec 2000 10:01:48 +0100

Salve, M. Octavi Germanice,

I hope that you took the chance to read the statement. If you did, I´m sure
that you admit that there´s no inflammatory content in it.

Octavius worte:

Salve Cai Flavi Diocletiane,

> One main topic seems to be the Statement of the Amici Dignitatis, and
> the persons who signed it.

Actually, the statement itself has not attracted much attention. The
posting of Marcus Apollonius that followed it has received much more
criticism, for it was much more inflammatory than your statement.

> A battle, for what? Are the amici dignitatis really the enemies of the
> republic, as some politicians suggest us?

No one really knows. We do not know how much of Apollonius' manifesto
is supported by the rest of the Amici, nor what plans you have made
among yourselves to act as a unified group. All that we do know is
that the signitories of that document have been acting much like a
political party.

Your intentions are a mystery. It would help if each of the Amici
would state whether they supported Apollonius' goals to "remove"
Lucius Cornelius and Quintus Fabius from office, and to defeat any
tax proposal that comes from the Senate.

Respondeo:

The Amici Dignitatis is a group of persons who signed a document, which
lists several points of political behaviour. It´s not the manifesto of a
political party. All signees are independent persons. We want to promote
politicial discussions, and this is in my opinion not an action against our
Res Publica. This is our common goal, not more, not less.

Our intentions are not mystery, I brought them on the point above. The
signees of the statement I know are all democrats by heart and mind. This
alone does not endanger the Res Publica. They are all Novoromani by heart
and mind. If they were not, why should they stay in this micronation?

You know about the special relationship between Sulla, Fabius and
Formosanus. For my person, Sulla is the elected Censor and Fabius is the
elected Consul at this time. I don´t want to remove them from office. I´m a
democrat, and I know that there are elections enabling all citizens to
decide about the magistrates and their actions and politics.

The same it´s about the tax proposal. I´m not generally against or for
taxes. The proposal has to be discussed to find the best solution for our
Res Publica. This is the normal process to decide about any proposal, in
Nova Roma and elsewhere in our democratic macronations.

> Now citizens, it´s the time for you to decide: Who argues
> inflaming? Are these really the Amici Dignitatis?

It was one of the Amici who first called the actions of our
magistrates "evil". It was one of the Amici who linked the Censors'
edict on names to the Nazi Holocaust. It was one of the Amici who
stated an intent to "remove" Censor Sulla from office. Before the
campaign season even started, Marcus Apollonius Formosanus had
set the tone for its debate.

Respondeo:
You are right in one point: It was ONE of the amici dignitatis. But it was
not one of the amici dignitatis who used words such "atomic bomb". I don´t
want to balance these expressions and words. It´s waste of time for me. And,
please, are the whole magistrates in office enemies of the republic, because
one of them used a similar vocabular like Formosanus? This would be to easy.

One thing I have learned in my life: If someone offends me with harsh words,
I will not answer him with the same vocabulary. Acting so will lead the
whole debate into a devil´s circle, with no benefit for anyone.That´s a sort
of entertainment, but it´s not the way professionals act.

Vale
Caius Flavius Diocletianus
Citizen, Democrat,
Candidate for Praetor Urbanus
www.diocletian.de/elect/diocletianus/




-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/975920746/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Question
From:	Lucius Cornelius Sulla <alexious@-------->
Date:	Mon, 04 Dec 2000 01:14:13 -0800

Michel Loos wrote:

> Lucius Cornelius Sulla wrote:
> >
> > Ave!
> >
> > I have a question. If a Senator is running for Tribune of the
> > Plebs......and gets in. Does he still vote as a Senator? Or does he
> > just act as Tribune of the Plebs?
>
> A senator is a senator, whatever his other functions are.
>
> M' Verus Limitanus

Thank you for your answer. But, does anyone know how it was done in ancient
Rome?

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix



-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/975922452/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	[novaroma] A candidacy for Tribunus Plebis
From:	"Alexander I.C.Probus M." <alexanderprobus@-------->
Date:	Mon, 04 Dec 2000 10:34:45 -0000

Salvete honoratissimi Qvirites!
I, Alexander Probus, stand before you to announce that I wish to
stand for election as Tribunus Plebis.

I would not like to bore you with stuff on my qualifications but it
seems to be necessary to share you something about me.

I am a Nova Roman for about two and a half year and am very proud to
be citizen of our Republic. I serve to Her and Her people as
Propraetor Pannoniae.

In my civil life I am 34 years old civil engineer, MSc and PhD degree
on building services and work in http://www.ecbratislava.sk as a
project manager. I am married with one son and all we live in
Bratislava Slovakia.

What is my vision on Nova Roma? I see Her as a great family of
peoples with different ethnic, educational, religious and cultural
background united around the ideals of the glorious ancient past,
dreaming for better and fair treatment. I do believe and am absolutly
sure all of us joined with a common interests and admiration on Roman
history, religious tolerance, philosophy and artes tend to apply that
values in your real life comunication within and outside Nova Roma.
As a Tribunus Plebis I will assist to everyone Plebeian or Patrician
supporting her/his efforts for polite and fair treatment. I will do
the best I can to improve the comunication between our citizens and
will support with all my heart and mind making friendship in our
Republic. We are only 500 persons only and it is too little to fight
with each other. If there will be good will all of us will be good
and well comunicating polite peoples. That is what I dream for. Not
for any political games, separation nor contraversal discussions. I
promise not to use the intercessio for any group of citizens
interests and to assist to everyone who personaly need my support.

But I will use the intercessio for blocking any too hurried decission
of our magistrates targeting any of our citizens personaly.
Benevolence, generousity and politness are my guidlines both to
friends moreover to opponents.

I wish to other candidates for Tribunus Plebis office success and
good luck in the electional campaign.

I also appologize to all of you for my not very good English. My
limited vocabulary does not allow me to use witty phrases nor
complicated verbal constructions. That is why I need to speak openly
and directly about what I think about.

Bene valete and nice and sunny weekend to all of you!

Alexander Iulius Caesar Probus Macedonicus




-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/975926103/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: Re: Cursus Honorum
From:	"S. Apollonius Draco" <hendrik.meuleman@-------->
Date:	Mon, 4 Dec 2000 11:42:53 +0100

S. Apollonius Draco L. Sergio Australico Obstinato patri Formosanoque SPD,

For common ease, I snipped out some parts of this large debate. I hope y'all
won't mind. If I didn't reply to something it means I agree or have no
opinion on it.

> LSAO: But when even the principals of the issue consider it over and done
> with, why do you insist on carrying on the animosity and using it (and
> them) to further your own political ends?

Even though I'm not as persistant in using the same example to explain many
things, I do think that there is a dangerous tendency to associate people
with the examples they give, as though they represent that whole example.
The underlying thing here is not some sort of 'crusade' against the 'evil
trolls', but in fact the system that allows the abuse of an edictum that
seemed perfectly reasonable, and the very same system that allowed the
casting of another edictum (returning cives) that (although the majority
agreed with it in a poll) was heavily disputed here in this list, but in the
end it could not be changed because it was a Censorial decision, and no one
else could stop it (with the exception of the Tribuni, of course - no
accusation intended).

Try to imagine this: One day we could have a Censor who is deranged, or an
ultra-rightist authoritarian who has the support of at least one Tribunus.
Can you imagine how many edicta would be passed? Without the rest being able
to do something, neither legally nor politically? It's not those simple,
stand-alone cases that have disturbed some of the AD, but rather the fact
that these cases were ever able to come into existence. If you say in your
defence that we should have better been silent in the first place so there
wouldn't have been a conflict at all, I think that this is a wrong
perception. Those edicta were cause of much disagreement and debates because
the system at that time (and if we don't do something, in the future)
allowed such things to be done - and not because we would just love to see
NR going down on its knees for us.

> LSAO: So now I'm compared to slavers and anti-feminists? Would it
> interest you to know that I'm the only "blond-haired, blue-eyed brother"
> in a dark-skinned Mississippi family, and that I just two weeks ago
> celebrated the 18th birthday of my foster son whom you would no doubt
> call "black" and that a former wife and I were founding members of the
> women's movement at our university during the early 70's? Perhaps it
> would serve you better to go back to talking about Nazis.

I think that the example of slavers and so on was only used to say that
progression, or change, is inevitable. What may be looked upon today as
normal or ok could be the most gross crime tomorrow.

> LSAO: So you are the sole voice of goodness and reason, and without you,
> nothing?

Did he say that? I don't think so. 1/600 is not the only 1/600... there a
599 more, of whom some have spoken here for what they perceive as goodness
and reason, too.

> LSAO: We don't even have a judicial system, since without the Comitiae
> there can be no such system. And I'm sure no-one here disagrees that the
> Comitiae must be made to function.

Hear hear.

> LSAO: To which statement do you refer, Marcus Apollonius? To the "cleaned
> up" one posted here a while back, or to the one quoted here by Graecus,
> or to the various statements you have made as an individual on the AD
> list?

Ho! This was not a statement, but something my pater said. Not everything
the AD say is a statement. I think you have some serious misperceptions on
the AD, as I said before. We are not rebels that are planning to "undermine"
the state, simply because some among us feel that there was an abuse of
power by some people. We do not want an "Athenian democracy" simply because
we use the word democracy. And I think, on a sidenote, that I should also
mention that neither you nor Graecus are members of the Dignitas Forum list,
so you must have obtained your sources elsewhere. Do I hear a distant voice
screaming "faction" somewhere at us? Believe it or not, but many people here
have "political allies", whether they are a party or not.

> LSAO: Whoa! Where is this "definite group against good government?" Once
> again you slip into the "black and white, good vs. evil" rhetoric. Who
> made you the good guy and the other side bad? Can you not present your
> candidacy and your proposals without all this talk about good and evil,
> and moral degeneracy, and Nazis, and slavery, etc., ad nauseam?

There's some truth in this, of course, but a candidate for Praetor is
talking about about justice, and justice inevitably involves moral
judgement.

> LSAO: I think that most of us see that we do not need to fear our
> Republic. Sometimes it does what we want and other times not - most of us
> learned as small children that such is life. What we need to fear is one
> who cannot accept that basic fact of life, and offers instead to
> *destroy* our Republic in the guise of "fine tuning" or "tweaking" it.

This is a far cry; many of the AD have already stated more than once in the
past few days that *nowhere* we claim the destruction of the Republic. Now
see who is also polarizing things? It reminds me of crusaders battling each
other and yelling the word 'evil' at each other without substantial proof.

> I wish you well, Marcus Apollonius, but if you are determined to
> undermine the recreation of the Roman Republic, then I wish you out of
> its public offices. There is nothing ad hominem in that.

Yes, I confess: we all became members of Nova Roma to destroy it. In other
words; I don't think this is right. He's doing what you, mi Australice,
perceive as 'undermine the recreation of the Roman Republic'. But I have to
remind you that you have very weak evidence for that. The only thing you
have is a quote from a list you aren't even a member of, plus a statement,
which you have in se nothing against.

Vale bene!
Sextus Apollonius Draco, civis Novae Romae
<< PETITOR AEDILIS PLEBIS >>
Legatus Galliae Borealis,
Procurator Galliae,
Vainqueur, ICQ# 32924725
--**--
There are no bad guys. Just disturbed guys.
--**--
Novaromain? Parlez-vous français? Cliquez ici!:
http://www.egroups.com/group/NRGallia_GalliaBelgicaF
Nieuwromein? Spreekt u Nederlands? Klik hier!:
http://www.egroups.com/group/NRGallia_BelgicaBataviaD
Novaroman? Interested in philosophy? Click here!:
http://www.egroups.com/group/NR_Philosophy
--**--



-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/975926706/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: Re: Cursus Honorum
From:	Lucius Cornelius Sulla <alexious@-------->
Date:	Mon, 04 Dec 2000 03:34:13 -0800

<SNIP>

> Even though I'm not as persistant in using the same example to explain many
> things, I do think that there is a dangerous tendency to associate people
> with the examples they give, as though they represent that whole example.
> The underlying thing here is not some sort of 'crusade' against the 'evil
> trolls', but in fact the system that allows the abuse of an edictum that
> seemed perfectly reasonable, and the very same system that allowed the
> casting of another edictum (returning cives) that (although the majority
> agreed with it in a poll) was heavily disputed here in this list, but in the
> end it could not be changed because it was a Censorial decision, and no one
> else could stop it (with the exception of the Tribuni, of course - no
> accusation intended).
>
> Try to imagine this: One day we could have a Censor who is deranged, or an
> ultra-rightist authoritarian who has the support of at least one Tribunus.
> Can you imagine how many edicta would be passed? Without the rest being able
> to do something, neither legally nor politically? It's not those simple,
> stand-alone cases that have disturbed some of the AD, but rather the fact
> that these cases were ever able to come into existence. If you say in your
> defence that we should have better been silent in the first place so there
> wouldn't have been a conflict at all, I think that this is a wrong
> perception. Those edicta were cause of much disagreement and debates because
> the system at that time (and if we don't do something, in the future)
> allowed such things to be done - and not because we would just love to see
> NR going down on its knees for us.

Ave.

Then we should immediately implement the Cursus Honorum as mandatory for all
applicants. Not only would this be in keeping with the traditions of ancient
Rome, it would also provide a check, by making sure that the People of Nova Roma
will never make that mistake. Said applicants would have to hold the office of
Quaestor, Praetor, Consul and then Censor! In that way, that person would have
to go through at least 4 elections before they are given the authority and power
that the Censors have!

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
Censor of Nova Roma


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/975930859/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: Piscinus and the Roman Republic
From:	"S. Apollonius Draco" <hendrik.meuleman@-------->
Date:	Mon, 4 Dec 2000 12:30:44 +0100

Salve Australice,

> >You are making four mistakes here; namely:
> >
> >1. The statement is not written by my pater, Marcus Apollonius
Formosanus,
> >but was mainly drafted by Gnaeus Moravius Piscinus. Direct your criticism
to
> >him instead.
> LSAO: I could swear I've seen these words over your pater's name
> somewhere, but if I'm mistaken in that it means little, since Marcus
> Apollonius has expressed all of these same views at one time or another.
> In that regard, I wonder why he didn't correct me on this point?

Perhaps he's not into nitpicking over words ;-).

> >2. If I sign a Statement, it means I agree. Period. Everyone here in NR
> >seems to be making a mistake of going ad hominem. It's about ideas in the
> >first place, not about the people that present them. Once you mix those
up
> >you've got a problem.
> LSAO: Then if your pater has signed on to Piscinus' statement, he has
> indicated agreement with the proposals therein, right? So then to
> criticize his advocacy of those proposals is legitimate. But here, again,
> it's not clear which statement we are talking about. There have been
> several: the original manifesto advertised here with respect to the Amici
> Dignitatis, the less public one talked about on the Amici Dignitatis
> list, and the one quoted here by Graecus within the past few days. It is
> understandable that we might get mixed up about what the real platform of
> that party is, is it not?

Actually there has been ONE public statement. A former version was released
on the Digntas Forum, but when that version proved unworkable and too
inflammatory, we removed it, and litterally erased as much references to it
as possible. The only confusion that lives here has been brought in by those
opposed to us, I daresay. But I must also note that lengthy replies in
various e-mails don't clear it up... Some don't get read, others get
misinterpreted. I wonder what the people think of all these seemingly
fruitless debates.

> >3. You find it justifyable that because we agree on a statement a
> >controversial citizen of this state also agrees with, we just need to
bare
> >with the chance of being shot as well. This is nonsense, as far as I'm
> >concerned. Reputation is again nothing much to fight over - it's
theideology!
> LSAO: Indeed, this is nonsense! I use a metaphor suggesting that people
> may be held to account for the views of the group they choose to be a
> part of, and you're going to turn it into a concrete threat to shoot
> people? Come on, Draco! I don't think you're a dummy - don't make me out
> to be one.

I already thought that you meant something like this, but I was merely
continueing on the same metaphor. Nevertheless, although it is
*understandable* that we get 'shot' as well, it is by no means justifyable.

> >Say, have you ever carefully read the Statement? Are you a member
> >of the Forum? Stop confusing people with their ideals, please.
> LSAO: Are you suggesting that we should vote for people only on the basis
> of the ideals they profess, rather than on an estimate of whether they
> are people who really hold those ideals? People should be consistent with
> the ideals they espouse: that's what is called "integrity." How can
> someone accuse everyone who disagrees with him of being an evil, morally
> degenerate fascist, and then turn around and complain of "ad hominem"
> attacks by his victims?

Don't we hold these ideals? Don't we try to live up to them? Personally I
could say that I'm trying my damnest hard. I am integer. That's a strong
declaration, and I know it, but I have never lied here in public about
anything (I have made mistakes, but these came forth from a lack of
knowlegde rather than morality). I must say that I don't understand some of
your own viewpoints. What are your morals? What are your ideals?

Vale bene!
Sextus Apollonius Draco, civis Novae Romae
<< PETITOR AEDILIS PLEBIS >>
Legatus Galliae Borealis,
Procurator Galliae,
Vainqueur, ICQ# 32924725
--**--
There are no bad guys. Just disturbed guys.
--**--
Novaromain? Parlez-vous français? Cliquez ici!:
http://www.egroups.com/group/NRGallia_GalliaBelgicaF
Nieuwromein? Spreekt u Nederlands? Klik hier!:
http://www.egroups.com/group/NRGallia_BelgicaBataviaD
Novaroman? Interested in philosophy? Click here!:
http://www.egroups.com/group/NR_Philosophy
--**--



-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/975931753/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Number of candidates
From:	"S. Apollonius Draco" <hendrik.meuleman@-------->
Date:	Mon, 4 Dec 2000 12:43:35 +0100

Salve, Marce Armini et omnes,

> Just to see if my list of candidates is complete:
> There are 2 candidates for the office of censor, and only one place in
this election (2/1)
> 3 for consul, and 2 places (3/2)
> Pretor, (5/2)
> Aedile Curule, nobody (0/2) :-(
> Quaestor (7/8)
> Tribunus Plebis (4/2)
> Aedile Plebis (2/2)
> Curator Araenae (1/1)
> Curator Differum (0/1)
> Curator Sermonem (1/1)
> Rogator (3/2)

DRACO: The complete list of candidates is available at the Dignitas Forum,
or you can e-mail me and I will send it to you. I think that there are four
candidates for Rogator.

> Perhaps, in the next election, someone (maybe the rogatores) can post in
the NR site a official list of candidates. (Yes, i know that Tarquinius and
Diocletianus posted their lists, but we need something absolutely impartial
... im not insinuating something!)
>
> Im with a doubt... if someone are the only candidate (say, to Curator
Differum), and nobody votes on him, even if there isn4t another candidate,
he will be declared the winner? (im just curious about this).
>
> Another question... if someone of age lesser than 21 candidate for
Plebeian Aedile (the age limit for this magistrature), and the Senate doesnt
grant the 2/3 exeption, what happens?
> My interpretation, learning the Constitution, is that he can candidate,
can be elected, but can4t exercise their magistrate powers, until he
reaches the age of 21. Is my interpretation correct?
>
> By the way, i have 29 years, but it seems that there are candidates have
less than the minimum necessary. I ask the Senate to concede the exeption to
whom haves the interest and energy to serve Nova Roma.

DRACO: Thank you, I hope to become your future collega :-). I also hope that
the Senate will grant me (and Britannicus) exemption of the law. May Nova
Roma prosper!

Vale optime,
Sextus Apollonius Draco
<< PETITOR AEDILIS PLEBIS >>



-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/975931758/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Virtue and Oratory
From:	"S. Apollonius Draco" <hendrik.meuleman@-------->
Date:	Mon, 4 Dec 2000 12:54:07 +0100

Salve Marce Cassi,

Albeit a late response to your posting, I wanted to express my full
agreement (damn, I used 'full agreement') with it :-).

Vale bene!
Sextus Apollonius Draco, civis Novae Romae
<< PETITOR AEDILIS PLEBIS >>
Legatus Galliae Borealis,
Procurator Galliae,
Vainqueur, ICQ# 32924725
--**--
There are no bad guys. Just disturbed guys.
--**--
Novaromain? Parlez-vous français? Cliquez ici!:
http://www.egroups.com/group/NRGallia_GalliaBelgicaF
Nieuwromein? Spreekt u Nederlands? Klik hier!:
http://www.egroups.com/group/NRGallia_BelgicaBataviaD
Novaroman? Interested in philosophy? Click here!:
http://www.egroups.com/group/NR_Philosophy
--**--
----- Original Message -----
From: <cassius622@-------->
To: <novaroma@-------->
Sent: Monday, December 04, 2000 1:16 AM
Subject: [novaroma] Virtue and Oratory


> Salvete Omnes,
>
> There is something I've always wanted to post to the Nova Roma list, and
this
> election season seems to be an appropriate time.
>
> The following short text is taken from the "Autobiography of Benjamin
> Franklin." I hope everyone will forgive me posting from an author that
isn't
> Roman, but this is some of the most productive advice I've ever read on
the
> art of communication. It has always helped me in writing posts and
debating
> with others, (when I remember it!) and it seemed to me that others might
find
> it useful in the course of their public oratory.
>
> This is from a section of Franklin's "Autobiography" that is sometimes
> published under the title "The Means and Manner of Obtaining Virtue."
>
> **********
> "My list of virtues contain'd at first but twelve; but a Quaker friend
having
> kindly informed me that I was generally thought proud; that my pride
show'd
> itself frequently in conversation; that I was not content with being in
the
> right when discussing any point, but was overbearing, and rather insolent,
of
> which he convinc'd me by mentioning several instances; I determined
> endeavouring to cure myself, if I could, of this vice or folly among the
> rest, and I added Humility to my list) giving an extensive meaning to the
> word.
>
> I cannot boast of much success in acquiring the reality of this virtue,
but I
> had a good deal with regard to the appearance of it. I made it a rule to
> forbear all direct contradiction to the sentiments of others, and all
> positive assertion of my own. I even forbid myself, agreeably to the old
laws
> of our Junto, the use of every word or expression in the language that
> imported a fix'd opinion, such as certainly, undoubtedly, etc., and I
> adopted, instead of them, I conceive, I apprehend, or I imagine a thing to
be
> so or so; or it so appears to me at present. When another asserted
something
> that I thought an error, I deny'd myself the pleasure of contradicting him
> abruptly, and of showing immediately some absurdity in his proposition;
and
> in answering I began by observing that in certain cases or circumstances
his
> opinion would be right, but in the present case there appear'd or seem'd
to
> me some difference, etc. I soon found the advantage of this change in my
> manner; the conversations I engag'd in went on more pleasantly. The modest
> way in which I propos'd my opinions procur'd them a readier reception and
> less contradiction; I had less mortification when I was found to be in the
> wrong, and I more easily prevail'd with others to give up their mistakes
and
> join with me when I happened to be in the right.
>
> And this mode, which I at first put on with some violence to natural
> inclination, became at length so easy, and so habitual to me, that perhaps
> for these fifty years past no one has ever heard a dogmatical expression
> escape me. And to this habit (after my character of integrity) I think it
> principally owing that I had early so much weight with my fellow-citizens
> when I proposed new institutions, or alterations in the old, and so much
> influence in public councils when I became a member; for I was but a bad
> speaker, never eloquent, subject to much hesitation in my choice of words,
> hardly correct in language, and yet I generally carried my points.
>
> In reality, there is, perhaps, no one of our natural passions so hard to
> subdue as pride. Disguise it, struggle with it, beat it down, stifle it,
> mortify it as much as one pleases, it is still alive, and will every now
and
> then peep out and show itself; you will see it, perhaps, often in this
> history; for, even if I could conceive that I had compleatly overcome it,
I
> should probably be proud of my humility."
> ******************
>
> Happy Campaign Season, folks. Vote early, vote often! ;)
>
> Valete,
>
> Marcus Cassius
> Candidate for Consul
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
>


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/975931766/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Final response to Formosanus
From:	"S. Apollonius Draco" <hendrik.meuleman@-------->
Date:	Mon, 4 Dec 2000 12:50:08 +0100

Salve Australice,

I am saddened to see that you stepped out of this discussion. You and my
pater both fight for what you think is right, and your dialogue was never a
constructive one to begin with. If it was the idea of some other candidates
to go for a round of Formosanus-bashing, you may have succeeded, but I don't
think that anyone who is tirelessly throwing himself into these long debates
(including the undersigned, I'm afraid!) will be furthering his own
reputation here. Personally I believe discussions should be firm, to the
point and concrete. Although I like to consider myself as an artistic
person, in my opinion there's no real room for abstract and emotional
concepts in a discussion - and that may have been what killed the
constructive dialogue here. Morals?

Vale,
Sextus Apollonius Draco, civis Novae Romae
<< PETITOR AEDILIS PLEBIS >>
Legatus Galliae Borealis,
Procurator Galliae,
Vainqueur, ICQ# 32924725
--**--
There are no bad guys. Just disturbed guys.
--**--
Novaromain? Parlez-vous français? Cliquez ici!:
http://www.egroups.com/group/NRGallia_GalliaBelgicaF
Nieuwromein? Spreekt u Nederlands? Klik hier!:
http://www.egroups.com/group/NRGallia_BelgicaBataviaD
Novaroman? Interested in philosophy? Click here!:
http://www.egroups.com/group/NR_Philosophy
--**--



-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/975931760/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	[novaroma] My "come-back"
From:	"Bart Van Wassenhove" <bart.vanwassenhove@-------->
Date:	Mon, 4 Dec 2000 13:18:09 +0100

Quintus Apollonius Flaccus Quiritibus S.P.D.
Although few cives will perhaps remember it, I was one of the people that almost left NR a few months ago. The reason for my discontentment at that moment was a conflict within the Sodalitas-Musarum-in-the-making and my frustration with the political state of affairs at that time.

I officially returned but I didn't show up for months because I didn't believe there was anything I could really do in NR: I had left the Sodalitas Musarum, I have no political rights (voting, candidacy . I'm only 17)

But as I saw how my distinguished frater was truly becoming a "homo novus" (I still followed NR politics behind the scenes), virtually founded the Provincia Gallia, and had become the moderator of a number of successful e-groups I realized that young people do have a voice in Nova Roma. I sincerely hope the senate will approve the candidacy of Sextus for aedilis plebis as a sign of goodwill to support this tendency.

Secondly, the foundation of the Dignitas Forum and the announcement of its statement greatly evoked my sympathic reactions; at the request of my frater, I also signed it and joined its eGroups list yesterday. Consequently, I wish to communicate my support to all the candidates associated with this alignment and its program.

These two facts I see as a source of new hope for my citizenship in our republic, and as a result I wish to engage myself more often in NR again. My first project will be the creation of a website for the Provincia Gallia and after that I would like to do something in the religious field.

Valete omnes !

Quintus Apollonius Flaccus



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/975932263/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Cursus Honorum
From:	"pjane@-------- " <pjane@-------->
Date:	Mon, 04 Dec 2000 12:49:33 -0000

Sulla asks:
> Then we should immediately implement the Cursus Honorum as mandatory for all
> applicants.

But WAS it mandatory in ancient Rome? I believe it was not enshrined in
law, or was so enshrined rather late in the Empire, but was rather a
matter of custom and tradition. Exceptions were made, as has been
pointed out here.

My learning in this area is admittedly scanty, and I would welcome
correction if my facts are wrong.

P. Cassia



-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/975934221/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: Cursus Honorum
From:	Lucius Cornelius Sulla <alexious@-------->
Date:	Mon, 04 Dec 2000 04:38:23 -0800

"pjane@--------" wrote:

> Sulla asks:
> > Then we should immediately implement the Cursus Honorum as mandatory for all
> > applicants.
>
> But WAS it mandatory in ancient Rome? I believe it was not enshrined in
> law, or was so enshrined rather late in the Empire, but was rather a
> matter of custom and tradition. Exceptions were made, as has been
> pointed out here.
>
> My learning in this area is admittedly scanty, and I would welcome
> correction if my facts are wrong.

Ave,

No of course it wasnt mandatory, but to prevent the issues that Sextus has raised,
the deranged Censor et al, the best check would be to test our office holders in
lower offices and as they build up experience, they move up the Cursus Honorum.
To me, it seems more likely, that a "deranged magistrate" as cited from Sextus,
would be one to bypass the Cursus Honorum, and probably be an untried magistrate.

So my post regading implmenting the Cursus Honorum would solve the issue that
Sextus raised.

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
Censor


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/975934710/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	[novaroma] Endorsement of Alexander Probus
From:	"Antonio Grilo" <amg@-------->
Date:	Mon, 4 Dec 2000 13:29:37 -0800

Salvete omnes

I'm standing here to endorse the candidacy of Alexander Probus for Tribunus
Plebis. Alexander is an honourable man who has done much for spreading Nova
Roma in Europe, specially in what concerns the Eastern Provinces. Besides, I
admire Alexander for his honesty, which is one of the most important virtues
a Tribunus Plebis must have.

Valete
Antonius Gryllus Graecus


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/975936636/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: Cursus Honorum
From:	Michel Loos <loos@-------->
Date:	Mon, 04 Dec 2000 11:30:54 -0200

"pjane@--------" wrote:
>
> Sulla asks:
> > Then we should immediately implement the Cursus Honorum as mandatory for all
> > applicants.
>
> But WAS it mandatory in ancient Rome? I believe it was not enshrined in
> law, or was so enshrined rather late in the Empire, but was rather a
> matter of custom and tradition. Exceptions were made, as has been
> pointed out here.
>

It was custom not law, Sulla tried to make it a law. But it was only
custom afterwards, a closely followed custom under the Empire.
But not respecting a custom was as harmful as not respecting a law.

For the exceptions I find doubtfull some of the ones that were published
here, but I don t have the list of magistrates at hand to verify.

M' Verus Limitanus

> My learning in this area is admittedly scanty, and I would welcome
> correction if my facts are wrong.
>
> P. Cassia
>

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/975936761/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] On the Amici Dignitatis
From:	Marcus Octavius Germanicus <haase@-------->
Date:	Mon, 4 Dec 2000 07:35:19 -0600 (CST)

Salve Cai Flavi,

> I hope that you took the chance to read the statement. If you did, I´m sure
> that you admit that there´s no inflammatory content in it.

I have read it, and agree that there is no inflammatory content in it. It is
merely a statement of principles that few people would disagree with.

That's why I wrote earlier:
>> Actually, the statement itself has not attracted much attention. The
>> posting of Marcus Apollonius that followed it has received much more
>> criticism, for it was much more inflammatory than your statement.

M. Octavius Germanicus
Curule Aedile, Nova Roma


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/975936923/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Question
From:	Michel Loos <loos@-------->
Date:	Mon, 04 Dec 2000 12:11:41 -0200

Lucius Cornelius Sulla wrote:
>
> Michel Loos wrote:
>
> > Lucius Cornelius Sulla wrote:
> > >
> > > Ave!
> > >
> > > I have a question. If a Senator is running for Tribune of the
> > > Plebs......and gets in. Does he still vote as a Senator? Or does he
> > > just act as Tribune of the Plebs?
> >
> > A senator is a senator, whatever his other functions are.
> >
> > M' Verus Limitanus
>
> Thank you for your answer. But, does anyone know how it was done in ancient
> Rome?

I am searching examples of Tribunes that already were senators, didn t
find for now.

In the early republic this would be an absurd the tribunes being created
to fight the
Patriciates of the Senate, under the empire Sulla s constitution for the
Senate was
used and only Quaestors became Senators, and the tribunate was held
before the
quaestorship.
Should we base our customs on the troubled 1st century ? All famous
tribunes were not
Senators (at the time they were tribunes), some were from senatorial
families like the
Grachii, but not senators.
I seem to remember that a former consul was killed why running for
tribune (because
it was not against the law but against tradition) in the Pompeian times,
but could not
find it for the moment.

The only obvious examples are the Imperors: They were Senators (even
princeps) and hold the Power of the Tribunes and of course acted as
both.


M' Verus Limitanus

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/975939161/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	[novaroma] Announcement of Candidacy for the Position of Quaestor
From:	"L. Tiberius Sardonicus" <sardonicus_@-------->
Date:	Sun, 03 Dec 2000 23:59:26 -0500

Salvete,

I, Lucius Tiberius Sardonicus, stand before the Senate and gathered Citizens
of Nova Roma in a whitened toga to announce my candidacy for the position of
Quaestor.

I've spent a good portion of the past two weeks swallowing whole a major
portion of the information on the Nova Roma website, as well as the archives
of this mailing list. I have not been a Citizen of Nova Roma long enough to
form a point of view whereby I can digest this information, but shall in due
time.

Briefly, my qualifications for Quaestor are as follows:

Four years of employment as an assistant manager of a supermarket in
Buffalo, NY. My duties as supervisor of the day-to-day operations of the
store involved receiving shipments of product, accounting for the details of
the order, and processing the necessary paperwork for billing.

12 years of service in the United States Coast Guard, six of which were in
the position of Regional Systems Manager(RSM). As RSM, I was primarily
responsible for keeping the information systems running and to that end was
required to submit annual and individual project budgets, prepare statements
of need, and procure expendables.

Two years as treasurer of a small club of approximately 50 members. Duties
included keeping accurate books for the bank account as well as petty cash,
collecting dues, and co-signing checks for accounts payable.

One year as Coordinator of a clinic in a local hospital. As such, I
scheduled appointments, assisted with in-office procedures and submitted
billing memos for services rendered to the billing office.

For the past two years, I've worked at a computer consulting firm as a
Technical Administrator. In that capacity, I advise clients concerning
technical issues, prepare IT budgets for various clients, and procure needed
hardware, software and services on projects ranging from $500 to $150,000 in
cost.

I am fully versed in various applications, including MS Word, Excel, and
Access.

I welcome any questions and concerns either on this list or in reply to my
individual e-mail address.

In service to Nova Roma,

L. Tiberius Sardonicus
Auxiliary, Legio VI
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/975939217/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	[novaroma] ATTN (Religio Romana): ante diem III Nonas Decembres (December 3rd)
From:	"Antonio Grilo" <amg@-------->
Date:	Mon, 4 Dec 2000 14:29:33 -0800

Salvete omnes!

Unfortunately I was not available yesterday and as such, I'm posting the
religious note of December 3 today.

Valete omnes
Antonius Gryllus Graecus
Pontifex
(Pontifex Lucius Equitius Cincinnatus provided the bulk of the info about
the festival of Bona Dea)

**********************************

This is one of the dies nefasti (N), a day on which no legal action or
public voting can take place.

Today is the festival of Bona Dea. Bona Dea can be identified with Tellus,
Maia, Fauna, Fatua or Ops (Macrobius, Saturnalia, 1, 12, 21), being thus a
fertility Goddess. This woman's festival to Bona Dea is not included in the
calendars, since it falls into a category between private and public
ceremonies and applies to only half the population, the women. It is private
in that it is not held in the temple of the Goddess, it is not attended by
the pontiffs or paid for by the State ('publico sumptu'). However, it is
attended by the Vestal Virgins, is held 'pro populo Romano' (i.e. for the
Roman people), and met in the house of a Consul or Praetor Urbanus. Further
its precise date is not fixed. In 63 BC it was held on the night of 3 in the
house of the consul Cicero, and 62 sometime in December (probably the 3rd)
in the house of the praetor Julius Caesar; due to the compulsory absence of
the men their wives preside.
Little is known about the nature of the rites. Plutarch (Parallel Lives:
Caesar, 9, 6) compares some of the nocturnal rites of Bona Dea to those of
the Orphics (Cicero even refers to the rites as 'mysteria'). We only know
that a sacred serpent appeared aside Bona Dea (Parallel Lives: Caesar, 5),
that vine-leaves cover the tabernacles, that representations of male animals
are veiled (Seneca, Letters to Lucilius, 97, 2) and that the image of the
male genital is forbidden (remember that this is a celebration for females
only). If we relate all these aspects, we find many similarities to the
Greek Bacchanalia in honour of Dionysus-Bacchus (alusion to the Orphics,
vine, the male organ, etc.), which were also women celebrations.
Nevertheless, it seems that the character of the celebration was not
orgiastic as described by the satirist Juvenal.
During the celebration of Bona Dea (called 'incredibilis cerimonia' by
Cicero), a pig is sacrificed (remember that a sow is the usual sacrifice for
chtonic deities such as Ceres and Tellus) 'pro populo Romano', wine under
the name of milk is offered to the Goddess (and drunk by the worshippers?),
the women dance to the sound of harps and flutes. It is uncertain whether
myrtle played any part in the ritual: according to Plutarch in was excluded
from the private use in the cult 'at home' (oikoi), because it was sacred to
Venus and might suggest sexual impurity, and Macrobius said that it was
banned from use in the temple (the temple of Bona Dea was celebrated on May
1st).

The month of December is sacred to Vesta.


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/975940265/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Endorsement of Alexander Probus
From:	"A. Artorius Arius Sarmaticus" <sarmaticus@-------->
Date:	Mon, 04 Dec 2000 14:36:35 -0000

Salvete Novoromani !

I also would like to say that it was with great pleasure that I've
learned about Alexander Probus' recent senatorship and now about his
candidacy for Tribunus Plebis! I'm certain that the candidacy of
Alexander is the most appropriate for the vacancy. I personally will
vote for him (though it seems he personally will not, thinking
another candidate is more appropriate!), and I call everybody give
him one's votes, as I know him for a year now, and all this time he
proved to be a good friend, a loyal ally and a very interested and
involved novaroman. He'd really could defend the interests and the
rights of the People (Plebs), as he always proved in permanent
discussions in different NR forums.

Valete,

A. Artorius Arius Sarmaticus,
ab Sarmatia



-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/975940623/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] On the Amici Dignitatis
From:	Marcus Octavius Germanicus <haase@-------->
Date:	Mon, 4 Dec 2000 09:06:52 -0600 (CST)

Salve Cai Flavi,

> The Amici Dignitatis is a group of persons who signed a document, which
> lists several points of political behaviour. It´s not the manifesto of a
> political party. All signees are independent persons. We want to promote
> politicial discussions, and this is in my opinion not an action against our
> Res Publica. This is our common goal, not more, not less.

Thank you for clarifying this. From this message of yours, and one posted
by Gnaeus Moravius Piscinus, it is clear that the Amici do vary considerably
in their goals, and are by no means unified in supporting the controversial
manifesto of Apollonius.

> You know about the special relationship between Sulla, Fabius and
> Formosanus. For my person, Sulla is the elected Censor and Fabius is the
> elected Consul at this time. I don´t want to remove them from office.

Excellent.

> You are right in one point: It was ONE of the amici dignitatis.

Right - and I feel much better about the rest of you now that you
have written this.

Vale, Octavius.

--
M. Octavius Germanicus
Curule Aedile, Nova Roma


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/975942431/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	[novaroma] The Amici Dignitatis Statement
From:	"M. Apollonius Formosanus" <bvm3@-------->
Date:	Mon, 4 Dec 2000 16:12:27 +0100

M. Apollonius Formosanus omnibus Quirites!

Piscinus scripsit:
"You have properly asked that all members of the Amici Dignitas
publicly state their positions on "Formosanus' revolutionary
Manifesto." Do I support Formosanus' statement? No. Does
Formosanus' statement represent the Amici Dignitatis? No, absolutely
not. The Amici have argued against the Formosanus statement."

Respondeo:

The Statement of the Amici Dignitatis was not written by me, but by
Piscinus himself. Amici Dignitatis are all expected to sign it, as
that is how we know who they are.

The Dignitas Forum *List* is a *neutral* forum, and there are people
there such as Sulla who are, to the best of my knowledge, are not
Amici, as they have not signed the Statement. (I would welcome their
signing.)

I have made myself nothing resembling a "manifesto" except my first
Position Paper, and it is certainly a moderate document, albeit one
calling for some necessary reform and development. I shall be making
further Position Papers available, reflecting my opinions on my
duties as Praetor (if elected) and my general values and suggestions
for the future of our Respublica. Please look to them, good citizens,
and not to isolated and misinterpreted fragments ripped out of
context by those who seem to wish me personally and all serious
reform generally ill.

Valete!

Marcus Apollonius Formosanus << CANDIDATVS PRAETORIVS >>
Paterfamilias Gentis Apolloniae (http://www.crosswinds.net/~bvm3/)
Moderator et Praeceptor Sodalitatis Latinitatis; Scriba Censorius              
ICQ# 61698049 AIM: MAFormosanus MSN: Formosanus
Civis Novae Romae in Silesia, Polonia
The Gens Apollonia is open to new members.
Ave nostra Respublica Libera - Nova Roma!
________________________________________
Si vis omnia tibi subicere, te subice Rationi. (Seneca)
(Se vi deziras subigi al vi chion, subigu vin al Racio)
________________________________________


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/975942795/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] On the Amici Dignitatis
From:	Marcus Octavius Germanicus <haase@-------->
Date:	Mon, 4 Dec 2000 09:25:07 -0600 (CST)

Salve Tite Labiene Fortunate,

> I believe that I have earned, at least to some small degree, the benefit
> of the doubt here.

Absolutely.

> Does anyone here who has seen my history in Nova Roma unfold actually
> believe that I would associate with people that I thought were enemies
> of the republic?

No. I have worked with you and corresponded with you many times, in
our position as Censors' scribes, and have confidence in your integrity
and honor, and that you do support the best interests of the Republic.

> I say again that while I agree in principle with much of what Formosanus
> says, I also disagree with him on many points. So, at least this one
> Amicus Dignitatis does not entirely support Formosanus' manifesto.

Thank you. That needed to be said.

> I can offer no specific proof that the above three statements are true.
> I do hope, however, that my past actions and words lend enough weight to
> my present speech that you can at least agree that it is probable that I
> am not lying now.

Yes. I believe that you are an independent thinker, that you are not
adhering to any "party platform", and that you do not support the
revolutionary manifesto. Thank you for making this known to all.

Vale, Octavius.

--
M. Octavius Germanicus
Curule Aedile, Nova Roma


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/975943540/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] On the Amici Dignitatis
From:	RexMarcius@--------
Date:	Mon, 04 Dec 2000 10:25:47 EST

Salvete omnes!

My dear Gaie Flavie, forgive me for copying you, but I share your expressed views on the Amici Dignitatis 100%.

Ave et Vale

Marcus Marcius Rex
Candidate for Censor
Amicus Dignitatis

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/975943601/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Question
From:	"Quintus Sertorius" <quintus-sertorius@-------->
Date:	Mon, 4 Dec 2000 10:22:34 -0600

4 Dec 2000

Salve

> I am searching examples of Tribunes that already were senators, didn t
> find for now.

Did not Marcus Livius Drusus, as Senator, run for office of Tribune of the
Plebs, and win?

Vale Quintus Sertorius



-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/975947678/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: Cursus Honorum
From:	"S. Apollonius Draco" <hendrik.meuleman@-------->
Date:	Mon, 4 Dec 2000 18:15:22 +0100

Salve,

>
> No of course it wasnt mandatory, but to prevent the issues that Sextus has
raised,
> the deranged Censor et al, the best check would be to test our office
holders in
> lower offices and as they build up experience, they move up the Cursus
Honorum.
> To me, it seems more likely, that a "deranged magistrate" as cited from
Sextus,
> would be one to bypass the Cursus Honorum, and probably be an untried
magistrate.
>
> So my post regading implmenting the Cursus Honorum would solve the issue
that
> Sextus raised.

Regarding the office of Censor that might not be a bad idea. Although I'm
against codifying a Cursus Honorum, the office of Censor should require
former experience in Nova Roma's workings as for example praetor, consul or
provincial governor. Good idea.

Vale,
Sextus Apollonius Draco, civis Novae Romae
<< PETITOR AEDILIS PLEBIS >>
Legatus Galliae Borealis,
Procurator Galliae,
Vainqueur, ICQ# 32924725
--**--
There are no bad guys. Just disturbed guys.
--**--
Novaromain? Parlez-vous français? Cliquez ici!:
http://www.egroups.com/group/NRGallia_GalliaBelgicaF
Nieuwromein? Spreekt u Nederlands? Klik hier!:
http://www.egroups.com/group/NRGallia_BelgicaBataviaD
Novaroman? Interested in philosophy? Click here!:
http://www.egroups.com/group/NR_Philosophy
--**--



-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/975950314/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Question
From:	"Quintus Sertorius" <quintus-sertorius@-------->
Date:	Mon, 4 Dec 2000 11:55:32 -0600

4 Dec 2000

Salve

Which one ? Son or father?

QS
The son was a Senator and was on his way up the ladder, but, he decided to
take an apparent move down to Tribune. He did this in order to pass laws
that would give all Italians citizenship. But he was assassinated before
this came to pass, and had his measures passed, the war between the Romans
and the Italians may not have happened.

Vale

Quintus Sertorius

The father (opponent of C. Grachuus) was not a senator in 122BC (yet) when
he was tribune. He was a member of the Senatorial Party but not a senator.
His Father C. Livius Drusus was Consul in 147BC
He integrated formally the senate after being Consul (in 112BC) which was
his first Magistrature (other then Tribune).

The son was tribune in 91BC and this was his only magistrature since he
was murdered while tribune.

Both were member of senatorial families and of the senatorial order but it
does not seem they were already members of the senate when they
run for tribune.


M' Verus Limitanus




-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/975953179/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Question
From:	Michel Loos <loos@-------->
Date:	Mon, 4 Dec 2000 14:03:50 -0200 (BRST)

On Mon, 4 Dec 2000, Quintus Sertorius wrote:

> 4 Dec 2000
>
> Salve
>
> Which one ? Son or father?
>
> QS
> The son was a Senator and was on his way up the ladder, but, he decided to
> take an apparent move down to Tribune. He did this in order to pass laws
> that would give all Italians citizenship. But he was assassinated before
> this came to pass, and had his measures passed, the war between the Romans
> and the Italians may not have happened.

Have you the dates for quaestor/ praetor ? I didn t find them.
For him being senator nominated by a censor, this could be.


Michel.


>
> Vale
>
> Quintus Sertorius
>
> The father (opponent of C. Grachuus) was not a senator in 122BC (yet) when
> he was tribune. He was a member of the Senatorial Party but not a senator.
> His Father C. Livius Drusus was Consul in 147BC
> He integrated formally the senate after being Consul (in 112BC) which was
> his first Magistrature (other then Tribune).
>
> The son was tribune in 91BC and this was his only magistrature since he
> was murdered while tribune.
>
> Both were member of senatorial families and of the senatorial order but it
> does not seem they were already members of the senate when they
> run for tribune.
>
>
> M' Verus Limitanus
>
>
>
>

Pr. Michel Loos | Phone: 55 11 818 3810 p. 216
Inst. de Quimica USP | Fax: 55 11 815 5579
PO Box 26077 05599-970 São Paulo, S SP
Brazil



-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/975953677/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Question
From:	"Quintus Sertorius" <quintus-sertorius@-------->
Date:	Mon, 4 Dec 2000 12:29:03 -0600

4 Dec 2000

Salve

Here is a quote and the link to it concerning Drusus

"....A Roman senator and tribune, Marcus Livius Drusus II, supported the
Italians, but his effort was frustrated by opposition among Romans in
general and by most senators, who looked with scorn upon anyone not
originally from Rome and not of a Roman noble family. For his trouble,
Drusus was assassinated, and when word of his assassination spread through
Italy it was a signal to Italians that relief from Rome would not be
forthcoming. Various Italian cities increased communications with each other
and took steps that to Rome suggested conspiratorial alliances...."

http://www.fsmitha.com/h1/ch16.htm

This is just one source there are others.

Vale

Quintus Sertorius

M' Verus Limitanus Wrote;
"Have you the dates for quaestor/ praetor ? I didn t find them.
For him being senator nominated by a censor, this could be."





-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/975955241/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	[novaroma] CANDIDATES FORUM chat
From:	"Rita Reali" <ritasax@-------->
Date:	Mon, 4 Dec 2000 13:56:31 -0800

A CANDIDATES FORUM

will be held in the Forum Romanorum

http://pluto.beseen.com/w/10275



Wednesday 6 December GMT 21.00 to GMT 23.00



Victoria, Australia 8:00 AM Thurs.=Roma, Italia 10:00 PM
mercoledi =New York 4:00 PM Weds.



Our Hostess and Moderator



Pompeia Cornelia Strabo.



Invited to speak at the
Candidates Forum chat are:



For Censor:



Lucius Equitius Cincinnatus

Marcus Marcius Rex



For Consul:



Cassius Julianus

Vedius Germanicus

Moravius Vado



For Praetor



Fabius Maximus

Sergius Australicus

Flavius Diocletianus

Apollonius Formosanus

Marius Cornelius Scipio



Not all of our candidates have as yet confirmed they shall be
in attendance. All cives Novae Romae are invited to watch the chat of our
Candidates for the higher magistracies. We ask that you allow our Hostess
Pompeia and the Candidates alone to conduct their chat in this two hour
period. Afterward all citizens will have an opportunity to directly chat
with candidates that are available.



Valete Quirites

Gn. Moravius Piscinus



--- ritasax@--------

--- EarthLink: It's your Internet.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/975955765/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	RE: [novaroma] CANDIDATES FORUM chat
From:	"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@-------->
Date:	Mon, 4 Dec 2000 14:16:05 -0500

Salvete;

As I have already informed the people putting this together, I will be
unable to attend because I work until 5 PM eastern time. Hopefully another
will be scheduled which allows people with regular 8-5/M-F jobs in the US to
participate.

Valete,

Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
Candidate for Consul

http://www.goldenfuture.net/germanicus


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/975957374/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	[novaroma] Re: CANDIDATES FORUM chat
From:	cassius622@--------
Date:	Mon, 04 Dec 2000 20:34:20 -0000

Salvete,

I am afraid that I must echo the words of Germanicus. My work hours
are also from 8 AM to 5 PM EST, so a forum discussion held at 4 PM is
not possible for me.

I will be happy to attend any discussion held during a weekend, or
later in the evening.

Valete,

Marcus Cassius Julianus
Candidate for Consul


--- In novaroma@--------, "Flavius Vedius Germanicus"
<germa--------s@--------> wrote:
> Salvete;
>
> As I have already informed the people putting this together, I will
be
> unable to attend because I work until 5 PM eastern time. Hopefully
another
> will be scheduled which allows people with regular 8-5/M-F jobs in
the US to
> participate.
>
> Valete,
>
> Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
> Candidate for Consul
>
> http://www.goldenfuture.net/germanicus


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/975962123/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	[novaroma] Re: CANDIDATES FORUM chat
From:	marcusaemiliusscaurus@--------
Date:	Mon, 04 Dec 2000 20:46:34 -0000

Salve Vedius Germanicus and Cassius Julianus,

but the chat finishes at 6:00 your time, so it finishes an hour after
you finish!

Valete,
Marcus Scribonius Curio Britannicus.


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/975962797/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Digest Number 1106
From:	jmath669642reng@--------
Date:	Mon, 4 Dec 2000 15:53:07 -0500 (EST)

Salve, Citizens of Nova Roma;

I have carefully listened to the discussions on this list by and about
the Amici Dignitatus (AD). While I do not disagree that every person
has the right to his opinion, and I have hued, through my service to
Nova Roma, to the following attributes:

"Defend the Right of the Minority to be Heard, and the Right of the
Majority to Decide,"

I further believe that once a decision has been made by the Majority,
that the Minority, having had thier opportunity to speak, everyone
should then move on to other business, rather than disrupt the
micronation with continuous diatribe, insulting namecalling and
inaccurate insinuations. Somehow, I do not believe that is exactly what
Marcus Aurelius had in mind!!

Even further I believe that if in the fullness of time a new idea
emerges, to better the methodology, within the paradighm of the
organization associated, then it should be put forward in a firm and
quiet manner in accordance with the rules of the organization, to be
considered and voted on by those who are authorized and available to do
so, with due consideration to the current problems, lack of personnel,
statutes, and procedures. None of these things will be done by a
continuous diatribe of complaint, and verbal abuse.

Although the question was not posed to me, I answer such, since I am in
the Office being challenged. If I had the slightest inkling that
citizens had been shifted in tribes for deliberate political advantage,
together with solid evidence to support such an accustaion I would
immediately begin a Consular investigation, encourage my Consular
Colleague to join me, (which I guarantee to you that he would) and set
in motion Impeachment Proceedings immediately for any Magistrate found
to be involved in such manuvering. I would pursue this venue, even
though out of office, until the proper authoritative body rendered a
verdict, and then I would go with the findings, and keep my mouth shut
about it, until I either had further evidence or an idea for
improvement, whereupon I would begin again as above.

I think that one of the Candidates flatters himself, that the present
Senior Consul is running for the same office to keep the other gentleman
out of it. As a matter of fact, the Senior Consul had discussed this
possibility with me, and asked me if I would be interested in assisting
him continue in his efforts to Codify Civil Law within NR. Since I have
been active in that area, in the past, I am honored to accept his offer
and for that partial reason have announced my Candidacy for Quaestor. I
do not believe the other Candidate (Citizen Formosanus) even entered
into the consideration, at least in my case, and the gentleman
approaches offending me again, by intimating that my purpose of
continueing in my work for Nova Roma is simply to keep him out of
office. Nothing could be further from the truth. The Citizens of Nova
Roma do not need my "behind the back manuvering" to decide who they want
in office.

There are certainly some members of the AD that I value and trust, from
past associations and from working closely together with them. There
are others in the AD with whom I am enjoying some very interesting
discussions, and hope to get to know them better. For that reason I
will honor the indvidual statements of those ladies and gentlemen, and
continue my association with the hope that we will become better
acquainted and be able again, in the fullness of time to accomplish
something meaningful and advantageous for NR.

However, there are also those in the AD who are prone to using
namecalling, insinuations, and wrong assumptions as a way of combatting
the failure of thier wishes. This I do not condone. I do not see
myself as an "evil" man, or as a "NAZI, nor am I "ashamed" in regard to
my decisions. While I have not always been right in my life, I think
that I have been right more than wrong, my actions sincere, and my
efforts have been blessed by the support of the Majortity of the
Citizens of NR, which to me is very important. I object to the
intemperate language resorted to on this list, and to the suggestion
that those with whom we disagree politically should be "hounded out of
office." I object to short term accusations of deliberate wrongdoing
which are followed by long-term explanations of the impossibility to
carry out such activities, and I certainly object to the determination
and flat statements on this list that an individual's opinion is in
thier view a reality. Many of the statements here should be prefaced by
the assurance that they are in the view of the expounder, rather than
the assumption that they are natural law.

I wonder how many of you who have never been in NR Office know the
frustration of not being able to call the Senate into session because of
laws enacted over 2000 years ago, or not being able to take action
because a chicken did not react properly when fed in the wee hours of
the morning!!! Why do I deal with these frustrations? Because it is
part and parcel of the Republic that we are putting together, and my
Oath to respect the Gods and the Religio. We could kill the chicken and
make it much easier, but then it wouldn't be the same would it?? We
could throw out the rules about the fasti and difasti days, the ancient
festival days, and the rules for selection of Pontiffs and make it much
easier, but then it would not be a Nova Roma (New Rome) and I would no
longer be interested. In that same venue, I would wonder at the
response of the Gods, in view of the outragious tactics and language
used here in the supposed furthering of the activities of the Nova Roma
micronation.

We speak of the Cursus Honorum, and it's not being mandatory. That is
certainly right, but then to me it seems strange that one who wishes to
make serious changes to the Vedian Constitution (or at least in my view
he wishes to do so) chooses the first rung in the Cursus Honorium that
will grant him automatic entrance to the very August Body he has so
severely criticized. Perhaps that is just coincidence, but it just
looks a little strange. Our recent additions to that August Body being
long term Nova Romans who have made significant advances to Nova Roma's
growing personification. The Honorium was there for a purpose, and when
someone thinks him / herself too good, too educated, or too experienced
for the whole Cursus Honorium particularly in the situation of
recreating a new culture and new virtual country, then I wonder.

I think I have heard enough to safely determine, as it is in most cases,
that this AD discussion has resolved itself into personalities, so I
will continue to work with those whom I respect, cultivate those whom I
think I wish to be associated with, and will shun those who insult me,
villify me, and call my actions false simply because they do not agree
with me. However, I do not close the door completely, for it is
possible for others to see thier lack of wisdom in some venues, and it
is not impossible to forgive those who have cursed, reviled, and named
me ill in the long term.

I do not belong to the AD, simply because as an apparent percieved enemy
of at least one of the number, I have never been asked to join with
them. I do not subscribe to the E-Mail discussion group, simply because
the other thirteen or so I currently belong to concerning my Sodalitas
and my Reenactments do not allow time for those kind of luxeries in my
present situation.

I hope the best for those of the AD, and I hope that thier aspirations
live up to all of the many, many excellent points and utterances of
Marcus Aurelius and not just one--likewise to all the Roman Virtues, not
just one or two.

Valete, Very Respectfully;
Marcus Minucius Audens

Fair Winds and Following Seas!!!


http://community.webtv.net/jmath669642reng/NovaRomaMilitary


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/975963198/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	[novaroma] Re: CANDIDATES FORUM chat
From:	cassius622@--------
Date:	Mon, 04 Dec 2000 20:56:39 -0000

Salvete,

Technically, you're quite correct. However, the chances of my
actually getting home before 5:20 or even 5:30 are fairly slim. I'll
surely try to get in at the very tail end of the debate as it's
possible for me to do so.

Valete,

Marcus Cassius Julianus
Candidate for Consul


--- In novaroma@--------, marcusaemiliusscaurus@h... wrote:
> Salve Vedius Germanicus and Cassius Julianus,
>
> but the chat finishes at 6:00 your time, so it finishes an hour
after
> you finish!
>
> Valete,
> Marcus Scribonius Curio Britannicus.


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/975963440/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: CANDIDATES FORUM chat
From:	Lucius Cornelius Sulla <alexious@-------->
Date:	Mon, 04 Dec 2000 12:52:40 -0800

But you fail to take into account commuting to get back home from work! :)

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
Censor

marcusaemiliusscaurus@-------- wrote:

> Salve Vedius Germanicus and Cassius Julianus,
>
> but the chat finishes at 6:00 your time, so it finishes an hour after
> you finish!
>
> Valete,
> Marcus Scribonius Curio Britannicus.
>


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/975964409/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Question
From:	Michel Loos <loos@-------->
Date:	Mon, 04 Dec 2000 19:27:30 -0200

Quintus Sertorius wrote:
>
> 4 Dec 2000
>
> Salve
>
> Here is a quote and the link to it concerning Drusus
>
> "....A Roman senator and tribune, Marcus Livius Drusus II, supported the
> Italians, but his effort was frustrated by opposition among Romans in
> general and by most senators, who looked with scorn upon anyone not
> originally from Rome and not of a Roman noble family. For his trouble,
> Drusus was assassinated, and when word of his assassination spread through
> Italy it was a signal to Italians that relief from Rome would not be
> forthcoming. Various Italian cities increased communications with each other
> and took steps that to Rome suggested conspiratorial alliances...."
>
> http://www.fsmitha.com/h1/ch16.htm
>
> This is just one source there are others.

This is at best a fragment of a tertiary source.

Marcus Livius Drusus II can not be found on the lists of magistrates in
any other magistrature as Tribune.
This does not mean that he was not a senator, he could have been
nominated by a censor since his father was probably dead (he served only
1 year
as censor and was replaced by another one). But he surely did not take a
step
backwards in the cursus honorum.

The fact is he was a member of the senatorial order (being son and
grandson of
consuls), this makes him a "senator" in opposition to the "knights" and
"people"
in a lot of modern texts, but does not make him necessarely a member of
the senate.
It is most common to designate all but he "new men" as senators long
before they
effectively entered the senate.

I don t know if he was already member of the senate (in replacement of
his dead
father) or not, we have to read with attention the primary sources in
order to find
out and my latin isn t anymore good enough for finding this out fast.

M' Verus Limitanus

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/975965270/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Question
From:	"Quintus Sertorius" <quintus-sertorius@-------->
Date:	Mon, 4 Dec 2000 15:31:51 -0600

4 Dec 2000

Salve M' Verus Limitanus

I shall have to search deeper in some source documents, I have searched some
already but I am having some trouble finding primary reference. I will
continue my search. If do do not mind my asking, why is this so interesting
to you? More later.

Vale

Quintus Sertorius




-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/975966142/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] CANDIDATES FORUM chat
From:	Caius Flavius Diocletianus <3s@-------->
Date:	Mon, 04 Dec 2000 22:50:14 +0100

Salvete Quirites,

I´ll take part in the candidates forum wednesday, 10:00pm roman time. I´ll
stay ca. 2 hours.

Valete
Caius Flavius Diocletianus
Candidate for Praetor Urbanus


> A CANDIDATES FORUM
>
> will be held in the Forum Romanorum
>
> http://pluto.beseen.com/w/10275
>
>
>
> Wednesday 6 December GMT 21.00 to GMT 23.00
>
>
>
> Victoria, Australia 8:00 AM Thurs.=Roma, Italia 10:00 PM
> mercoledi =New York 4:00 PM Weds.
>
>
>
> Our Hostess and Moderator
>
>
>
> Pompeia Cornelia Strabo.
>
>
>
> Invited to speak at the
> Candidates Forum chat are:
>
>
>
> For Censor:
>
>
>
> Lucius Equitius Cincinnatus
>
> Marcus Marcius Rex
>
>
>
> For Consul:
>
>
>
> Cassius Julianus
>
> Vedius Germanicus
>
> Moravius Vado
>
>
>
> For Praetor
>
>
>
> Fabius Maximus
>
> Sergius Australicus
>
> Flavius Diocletianus
>
> Apollonius Formosanus
>
> Marius Cornelius Scipio
>
>
>
> Not all of our candidates have as yet confirmed they shall be
> in attendance. All cives Novae Romae are invited to watch the chat of our
> Candidates for the higher magistracies. We ask that you allow our Hostess
> Pompeia and the Candidates alone to conduct their chat in this two hour
> period. Afterward all citizens will have an opportunity to directly chat
> with candidates that are available.
>
>
>
> Valete Quirites
>
> Gn. Moravius Piscinus
>
>
>
> --- ritasax@--------
>
> --- EarthLink: It's your Internet.
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>



-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/975967093/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] A candidacy for Tribunus Plebis
From:	SyanneRose@--------
Date:	Mon, 4 Dec 2000 17:32:42 EST

Ave Omnes,

Alexander!!! Wonderful news!!! I wish you the best of luck in the upcoming
election,
and no matter what the outcome in the end, the house of Iulia Caesaria will
be celebrating. Best wishes sent dear Frater.

Vale
Aeternia


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/975969219/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Polly Ticks, or Who threw the first bomb?
From:	Mike Macnair <MikeMacnair@-------->
Date:	Mon, 4 Dec 2000 17:41:17 -0500

Salvete!

The passages from Formosanus' proposed manifesto for Amici Dignitatis which
have been quoted are provocative and OTT. Nonetheless, I would ask
Citizens, Senators and Magistrates to remember what they are a response to,
in the events of the past year:

(1) The original Edict of Sulla on gender and names was clearly illiberal
in its politics, and was defended by arguments of a far-rightist character.
It was manifestly unnnecessary legislation directed against an individual
and to make a political point. Though the amended version contains some
valuable other matter, it still contains unncessary gender material.

(2) The tribunician veto offered by Australicus was blocked by his
colleague. The effect of this blocking action has been to deny the people
the opportunity to vote on this matter, since the author and his supporters
have to this day not seen fit to put legislation before the Comitia.

(3) Several senior magistrates have defended this course of action, which
excludes the democratic element in the Constitution - all the more since
Sulla is not offering himself for election this year - on the grounds that
NR is a "Republic, not a Democracy". Defence of the mixed constitution
against ultra-democracy from these magistrates now sounds hollow in the
extreme, since they have not permitted the democratic ELEMENT in the
Constitution to operate in this matter.

(4) Festus carried on an agitation against the Religio, and Sulla in
response to criticisms of this conduct of Festus' acted as Festus'
character witness. Festus subsequently introduced on the main list
propaganda for a far-right nut group.

(5) The Senate has,in the matter of the "reprimand" to Fimbria, improperly
usurped a judicial power, and has conducted itself in this matter without
regard to the elementary principles of due process and natural justice.

I put it to you as a background to these matters that (a) both Asatru, and
Hellenic pagan reconstructionism in Greece, are divided between neo-fascist
groups and their opponents; and (b) "republican, not democratic" has a
specific and specifically American modern political meaning.

In other words, IMO Sulla and his supporters threw the first bombs in this
discussion, and have conducted themselves in a manner which gives those who
disagree reasonable grounds to suppose that NR might be evolving into a
far-right group or front. I think, therefore that while "Dignitas" is an
over-reaction, the sitting magistrates have got a good deal of explaining
to do if they are to dispel that suspicion.

Valete,

M. Mucius Scaevola Magister

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/975969731/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Polly Ticks, or Who threw the first bomb?
From:	StarVVreck@--------
Date:	Mon, 4 Dec 2000 18:15:58 EST

Salve!
<< Festus carried on an agitation against the Religio, and Sulla in
response to criticisms of this conduct of Festus' acted as Festus'
character witness. Festus subsequently introduced on the main list
propaganda for a far-right nut group. >>

Speaking of Festus, I don't recall receiving any emails from Festus via the
mainlist for quite some time. I would have expected one of his famous
satirical emails about the upcomming elections and the amici dignitas debate
long ago. Is he on leave? Is he still subscribed to the mainlist? Is he
still a citizen of Nova Roma?

Vale,

Iulius Titinius Antonius

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/975971776/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Polly Ticks, or Who threw the first bomb?
From:	"L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@-------->
Date:	Mon, 04 Dec 2000 15:42:27 -0800

Mike Macnair wrote:

> Salvete!
>
> The passages from Formosanus' proposed manifesto for Amici Dignitatis which
> have been quoted are provocative and OTT. Nonetheless, I would ask
> Citizens, Senators and Magistrates to remember what they are a response to,
> in the events of the past year:
>
> (1) The original Edict of Sulla on gender and names was clearly illiberal
> in its politics, and was defended by arguments of a far-rightist character.
> It was manifestly unnnecessary legislation directed against an individual
> and to make a political point. Though the amended version contains some
> valuable other matter, it still contains unncessary gender material.
>

Sulla: The orginal Edict was revised and co-written by C. Marius Merullus, T.
Labienus and myself. It included the reservations that M. Apollonius himself
wanted. The Poll on the NR main site voice approval for the new Edict.

<Snip>

> (3) Several senior magistrates have defended this course of action, which
> excludes the democratic element in the Constitution - all the more since
> Sulla is not offering himself for election this year - on the grounds that
> NR is a "Republic, not a Democracy". Defence of the mixed constitution
> against ultra-democracy from these magistrates now sounds hollow in the
> extreme, since they have not permitted the democratic ELEMENT in the
> Constitution to operate in this matter.
>

Sulla: Of course I am not running for office, I am still Censor. Do you
honestly expect me to spread my resources even thinner now?

>
> (4) Festus carried on an agitation against the Religio, and Sulla in
> response to criticisms of this conduct of Festus' acted as Festus'
> character witness. Festus subsequently introduced on the main list
> propaganda for a far-right nut group.
>

Sulla: Festus is no longer a citizen of Nova Roma. And what are you referring
too about a character witness, was Festus ever on trial?

>
> (5) The Senate has,in the matter of the "reprimand" to Fimbria, improperly
> usurped a judicial power, and has conducted itself in this matter without
> regard to the elementary principles of due process and natural justice.
>

Sulla: However there was precedent for this action. Was there not?

<Snip>

>
> In other words, IMO Sulla and his supporters threw the first bombs in this
> discussion, and have conducted themselves in a manner which gives those who
> disagree reasonable grounds to suppose that NR might be evolving into a
> far-right group or front. I think, therefore that while "Dignitas" is an
> over-reaction, the sitting magistrates have got a good deal of explaining
> to do if they are to dispel that suspicion.

How interesting a conclusion. Given that the response to the original edicta
was hostile, I immediately begin the process of rewriting it. Is that the
sound of an ultra-conservative group? I dont think so. Politics is part art
of compromise. I have striven to maintain that in my term of office. I even
went so far as to implement the reservations that Formosanus has mentioned in
his letter to the Senate and People. But is he satisfed that his reservations
was adopted into the Edict? Who is being unflexible? Who is trying to disrupt
the government of Nova Roma? It certainly is not me or my supporters.

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
Censor of Nova Roma


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/975973367/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Polly Ticks, or Who threw the first bomb?
From:	"L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@-------->
Date:	Mon, 04 Dec 2000 15:43:02 -0800

StarVVreck@-------- wrote:

> Salve!
> << Festus carried on an agitation against the Religio, and Sulla in
> response to criticisms of this conduct of Festus' acted as Festus'
> character witness. Festus subsequently introduced on the main list
> propaganda for a far-right nut group. >>
>
> Speaking of Festus, I don't recall receiving any emails from Festus via the
> mainlist for quite some time. I would have expected one of his famous
> satirical emails about the upcomming elections and the amici dignitas debate
> long ago. Is he on leave? Is he still subscribed to the mainlist? Is he
> still a citizen of Nova Roma?

No Festus is no longer a citizen of Nova Roma.

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
Censor


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/975973406/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->