| Subject: |
[novaroma] Re: Draco's Candidacy |
| From: |
"Nick Ford" <gens_moravia@--------> |
| Date: |
Fri, 5 Jan 2001 01:56:05 -0000 |
|
Nicolaus Moravius Marco Minucio et Sexto Apollonio salutem
Proconsul Audens reverendissime:
I do not wish to make a battle of this any more than you do, and while I
too wish I could be half as certain of anything as Marcus Apollonius
Formosanus seems to be sure of everything, I am fairly sure that I can offer
one or two half certainties of my own to
counterbalance some of the certainties you expressed here...
You replied to Formosanus:
> You wanted to know the results of the Senate Vote, and insisted on the
> reasoning behind the vote, and you now have them. So the first action
> that you take with this new information is to attack the Senators with
> whom you disagree on this list with a very individual and singular
> attitude.
For myself, I would not call Germanicus', Palladius', Maximus' or Sulla's
comments on their refusal to ratify the electoral vote for Draco,
'reasoning' : their
comments look to me much more like one single justification, rather than
actual reasons. I confess I'm surprised that they found Draco's spirited
defence of his pater something akin to maiestas. I would have been far less
surprised
if they had said instead that:
i) Draco is far too damn clever than anyone has a right to be at that age;
ii) Draco is a foreigner;
iii) Draco is a member of gens Apollonia;
iv) Draco is Formosanus' son;
v) Draco talks Greek. You can't trust anybody who talks Greek.
Palladius' statement that Draco did not previously apply to the Senate for
an age exemption is, as you know, patently untrue. It is of course perfectly
possible that Palladius suffered a memory failure and was so (erroneously)
sure of his facts that he didn't bother to check them. Since this is a
possibility, it was wrong of Draco to call Palladius a liar, and he does owe
Palladius an apology for that. But Palladius, by making that untrue
statement, may have influenced many of his colleagues in the Senate to vote
'NEGAT' on Draco's election as well, on the basis of incorrect information.
That, I believe, is worth an apology by Palladius to Draco, and to the
Senate, and, by extension, to the electorate.
However it was meant, the damage is done, and we all have to live with it,of
course. The Lex Iunia de Magistratum Aetate is unclear as to whether an
underage candidate should seek exemption before (or after) declaring his or
her candidacy, or before (or after) being elected:
"VI. An exemption to this law may be granted to a person by the approval of
both censors and a senatus consultum approved by a two thirds majority
vote."
Now in my view, anyone responsible for designing such an unworkably-worded
lex as that, is hardly the most credible authority about what it ought, in
retrospect, to mean. The senate couldn't agree on what it meant, or how it
should be applied, if you recall. Should we have approved an exemption
before, or after, or both? It is a chocolate teapot of a law (looks OK at
first sight, but turns out to be demonstrably deficient at first use). In my
view, this is what may now happen as a result:
Since the necessary two-thirds majority (subject to veto by one censor if he
doesn't like the candidate's face) was not found in Draco's favour, since
one censor or a dozen or so senators can overturn the vote of the comitia
centuriata, there will have to be another election for Aedilis Plebis. Draco
may decide to stand again. Or another candidate who has not yet reached the
magic age. If either censor or a handful of senators do not disallow this,
the people may decide to elect him again, or another underage candidate.
Then the senate will be called yet again to ratify the election, et iterum
etiam usque ad nauseam (and so on, again, until we are all sick of it).
But, as you say, we now all must abide by what has been done and decided,
for whatever reasons, like it or not, because it's legal. Happily, though,
it's a free country and Formosanus, I or anybody else can venture to express
the opinion that the present law (whatever it means) is less than
satisfactory.
Proconsul Audens, I have not the slightest doubt that your kindly words of
encouragement to Draco were given with the very best of intentions (viz.
that Draco will accept the situation, and retire quietly to his provincia to
do NR credit there as he has not been allowed to in the central government,
whilst giving up all idea of challenging the status quo and thereby making
things
more rancourous than they are already). It was decent of you, and you made
more palatable the bitter pill Draco had to swallow, a deed no-one else who
voted 'NEGAT' cared enough to do - at least, not publicly here. I surmise
that this is the difference between being convinced of a principle on your
part, and
something perhaps more personally inimical on theirs.
Like you, I am one of Nova Roma's greybeards (the difference being that I
shave mine away daily out of vanity); like you, I often reflect on how much
I have learned since I was 17, and on how much more sense my elders seem to
have gotten since then (!): but would you not also, like me, admit that in
our increasing senectude it is also a source of some amazement that others
do not seem to have increased their wisdom, or mellowed their brash
behaviour, to a degree commensurate with their years? Was Draco unprovoked?
I learned in the same school as you to respect the office of a superior,
even when the individual beneath the badge of rank seemed unworthy. I admit
that I learned with a very bad grace, and not at all as well as you,
certainly not for half as long, either. Perhaps that is why I do not
advocate it as necessarily the best response in civilian life to superiors
who order one to do as they say, not do as they do (nor say as they say).
Et mi care Draco:
I offer you this crumb of comfort, gleaned from that same
school of deference to positional authority regardless of inner authority:
I once had a Warrant Officer instructor who would call me a silly bastard
(and worse) when I made a mistake. But he would call a senior officer in the
same class, who made the same mistake, "Sir". Let me tell you, I would
rather be called a silly bastard by a Warrant Officer with a smile on his
face, who is saying what he means, than be called "Sir" by the same man,
coldly, without the smile, without the sincerity but with formal respect
only.
It's a shame that we can't accent the meanings of our words here with
intonations. Believe me, I've heard officers called "Sir" in such tones as
would make you (as it did them) cringe inwardly. Salute the gold on the cap,
Draco.
Sufficet, aut non satis.
Vado.
> Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2001 10:39:13 -0500 (EST)
> From: jmath669642reng@--------
> Subject: Draco's Candidacy
>
> Salve, Marcus Appolonius Formosanus;
>
> Once more you come before the Citizens of Nova Roma with your personal
> sureity that what you think is right is right for all:
>
> "I thank the majority voting in the Senate who CORRECTLY assessed my
> gentilis---" (The capitalization is mine)
>
> I am consistantly surprised by your continued insistance that whatever
> your opinions, beliefs, ideas or considerations may be, that they are
> what is absolutely right for this micronation and any disagreement with
> your view is to immediately to be attacked, regardless of the laws or
> rules under which this micronation operates.
>
> You wanted to know the results of the Senate Vote, and insisted on the
> reasoning behind the vote, and you now have them. So the first action
> that you take with this new information is to attack the Senators with
> whom you disagree on this list with a very individual and singular
> attitude.
>
> Young Draco and I have discussed a few items and he seems to me to be an
> alert young man. His efforts in organization are much applauded, and
> his abilities seem to me to be above the average 17 1/2 year old young
> man. I have dealt with many such during my years with the BSA and they
> brought much honor to themselves and to the organization. However in my
> view, young Draco needs exactly the kind of encouragement and guidance
> that he is getting here in Nova Roma.
>
> He has a group of friends which support him, and give him opportunities
> to further show him how to organize his abilities for both himself and
> this mironation. He has tasted the disappointment of not being able to
> do as he wishes simply because of his age, which all of us have tasted.
> He will, if he is the person I think he is, swallow his disappointment,
> learn from it and come back even a better person in all respects than
> before.
>
> He does not need someone constantly declaring how wrong those who voted
> against his Candidacy were, and how his paterfamilius is always right
> and everyone else is wrong.
>
> As my young son used to say to me, "Dad, how come Johnny across the
> street can play after dark and I can't." My response being--
>
> "I can't do much about Johnny across the street, but you are going to
> bed."
>
> In the same venue, I have nothing to say in regard to my Senatorial
> Colleagues and thier decisions. However, my decisions are my own, and I
> believe there may be just the slightest possibility than as talented,
> active, interesting, and eager as young Draco is--there may just be a
> few minor things that this 17 1/2 year old young man has to learn. Of
> course there is a Lex in force which the Senate has placed there for a
> very good reason, but of course, you will in all probabiity not be
> interested in that fact since it does not figure into what you are sure
> is right for this micronation, in this particular case.
>
> Frankly, in my view, you would do better for your son to encourage him
> to do here as he is able, to contribute without consideration for the
> limitations of his age, and to accept the decisions of those elected as
> the arbiters of this micronation---the rest of us have to, why not young
> Draco?
>
> I see no reason why young Draco should give the lie to a Senator of our
> micro-nation, without determining politely whether or not is was a
> mistake. I do not care for that kind of response to a Senator.
> However, all in all, I think Draco is behaving in this situation better
> than his paterfamilius. I am sure that you will bring the comments of
> others into this, but as I have said before, I do not speak for them, as
> they are mature individuals and have their own minds under our laws, and
> young Draco does not. I have chastised those whom I disapprove of in
> private, on many occasions, and those who have recieved my criticism
> certainly are aware of it.
>
> ____________________________________
> Draco:
>
> You have just been delivered a disappointment. You will probably not
> see it in the way that I do, but it will do more for your growth than 10
> victories. If you are the young man I think you are, you will consider
> this a challenge. You will continue your work in Nova Roma, and you
> will learn in detail those things that you well know that you need to
> have at your fingertips. You will modify your speech, and remember that
> today's enemy is tomorrow's needed colleague.
>
> You will listen to all those appointed above you, keep your counsel,
> until you may speak upon your own, and not with the permission of
> others. You will spend this time learning and practising those words,
> activities and natures that will stand you in good stead when your age
> will no longer be a hinderence to your desired activities. You will
> spend this tie wisely and learn the values of the Roman Virtues and
> attempt to apply them to every facet of your involvement both here and
> elsewhere. In doing that you will see that all have a view, and that
> very, very seldom will you find anyone who is ALL wrong or for that
> matter, right in every situation.
>
> My young friend, I am one who has handed you your disappointment. I
> have an admiration for you and what you have done. I do not however
> think you are ready for what you desire. I have stood several times
> where you stand now, and in later life realized that those who made the
> decisions which at the time disappointed me, had my best interests at
> heart. It is my hope that you will come to such a realization as well.
> In any event, I wish you well, I hope that you are the person that I
> believe you to be, and I hope further, that you will continue to work
> within our micronation.
>
> Vale, Respectfully;
> Marcus Audens
> ProConsul et Senator
>
> Fair Winds and Following Seas!!!
>
>
> http://community.webtv.net/jmath669642reng/NovaRomaMilitary
>
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] Views and Opinions |
| From: |
jmath669642reng@-------- |
| Date: |
Thu, 4 Jan 2001 23:19:16 -0500 (EST) |
|
Salvete, Senator Vado and Citizen Formosanus;
I have read both of your posts carefully, as there were some elements in
both critical to me and my views. Since I respect both of you, for your
support of Nova Roma in your special venues and for your very apparent
realization of self-worth. I know Senator Vado a little better than I
know Citizen Formosanus and therefore I have spent more attention to
what he had to say.
I think I understand a little better as a resut of that effort, your
responses. Let me say at this point that the right of any citizen to
express his or her opinion or view of any given situation is the right
of any citizen as long as it is done politely and without injury either
deliberate or accidental to others. In reviewing your post, Citizen
Formosanus I find that you have a very different way of presenting your
views than I have, and I suspect that my first response did not take
that into account as I should have.
As I mentioned in my previous post, I have nothing to say in regard to
the words or phrases of my Magisterial Colleagues, as I have no
authority in that area. However, let me say this, were this a different
venue, and I did have such authority--comments such as you refer to
would "Never" be aired again on the pain of diciplinary action. I
reiterate, however, that I have no such authority, nor do I aspire to
such in this institution. I hope that Citizen Formosaus understands my
meaning, as I am sure Senator Vado does.
In regard to young Draco, I have said that I admire his skills, and his
industry. I hope the best for him in the future, However, as a Senator
I am the keeper of the Laws, and must follow my dictates as to what is
proper. I do not object to comment, but I do object to the assumption
that those who do thier job as they see fit, do not know what they are
doing. That in my view is insulting.
I have made my decision and will continue to do so, as a Senator, and I
will not be told what to do and how my decision shall go by anyone, as
my decisions do not swing in the wind with breezes of whim, that change
with the seasons.
My views, you will notice are almost always stated as just that, my
views, and not the views of others. I suppose that is a large part of
the basis for our difference of opinion.
I have no desire to fight with either of you, as it is not very logical,
and we three know that in many cases our views differ, therefore I
propose if not an agreement, a truce, realizing that we will be very
unlikely to agree, perhaps we may agree to disagree in the manner of
gentlemen, and continue on our way. It may be in the fullness of time
that I or you will, having carefully read each others posts, may well
agree on some future point, and there will be a beginnng common point on
which to build a better relationship.
Senator Vado and I are from a similar background, and I suspect we
understand each other in a little more depth. Do not be sure that I
learned my respect for the gold-striped hat in an easier manner than
you, Friend Vado. There is a retired Naval Captain somewhere in the
U.S. that still has a scar at the corner of his mouth, put there when he
was an Ensign, by his third-class torpedoman. No I didn't go to prison
or even to "Mast." But. my "point bag" was absolutely empty (with a
large hole in the bottom) for some time, and I spent many hours in the
Engine Room making fresh water from salt in the "lower flats."
If we may continue on a more even basis, I will pledge not to be so
quick with my words, if we can agree to disagree!!!
Vale, Respectfully;
Marcus Audens
Fair Winds and Following Seas!!!
http://community.webtv.net/jmath669642reng/NovaRomaMilitary
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Reconciliation |
| From: |
LSergAust@-------- |
| Date: |
Thu, 4 Jan 2001 23:33:02 EST |
|
Salve M. Apollonius,
Someday I will take the time to get the hang of this addressing thing.
My apology is of course applicable to you as well as to others, if you
feel that I "crossed the line" in debating with you during the campaign.
I still disagree drastically with the ideas you advanced as the basis for
your candidacy. However I would hope that in the future we might disagree
more amicably.
Vale,
L. Sergius Aust. Obst.
On 1/3/01 11:26 AM M. Apollonius Formosanus (bvm3@--------) wrote:
>M. Apollonius Formosanus L. Sergio Obstinato S.P.D.
>
> Seeing the noble example of Flamen Vado before me, I feel that I
>too should let the things you might have said in the (considerable) heat
>of campaigning be bygones, as it seems the generous wideness of your
>apology must be applicable to me too. I will not forget that you did in
>the year past make a try to use your tribunician powers in a manner
>favourable to a matter of concern to me, nor that you have recently most
>graciously posted on my defense of my filius. Therefore, I say with
>Vado, Sit inter nos pax! And you may visualise my virtual hand reaching
>out to yours...
>
>Bene vale, Senator!
certe, Toto, sentio nos in Kansate non iam adesse.
(You know, Toto, I have a feeling we're not in Kansas anymore.)
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] Webpage |
| From: |
"Gaius Iulius Germanicus" <caligula_germanicus@--------> |
| Date: |
Thu, 04 Jan 2001 15:04:52 -0000 |
|
Salvete omnes!
I´ve just found a webpage that is very interesting (although it is in german
). You can write in his guestbook ( Gästebuch )!
www.8ung.at/caligula
Valete,
Gaius Octavius Germanicus
Noricum
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] Local groups |
| From: |
"pjane@-------- " <pjane@--------> |
| Date: |
Fri, 05 Jan 2001 12:40:39 -0000 |
|
There's no reason we have to look to other organizations of any sort as
our models (though we may no doubt draw valuable lessons with our
experiences in other groups).
Rome itself was a very organized operation, and the facts of provincial
government are reasonably well understood to this day. Let us take Rome
as our model, and move toward some of the goals Flavius Vedius has
outlined.
P. Cassia
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] Uncontested elections |
| From: |
"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@--------> |
| Date: |
Fri, 5 Jan 2001 09:51:20 -0500 |
|
Salvete, omnes!
One of the weaknesses of our current election process which was pointed up
in our most recent elections, is the possibility that a candidate for office
who is running unopposed might still not win, because he or she fails to
gain a majority of a tribe or century. In our last elections, this happened
to several candidates for Quaestor.
I would like to propose a new law to the effect that individuals who have
announced themseves as candidates for office, for which there is no contest
after a given period of time, may assume office without the necessity of
undergoing a formal election (assuming they pass all the other
qualifications). This only makes sense to me, as going through the election
process is somewhat arduous for the magistrates involved, and it seems
wasteful to go through it when the outcome is literally known at the outset.
If this does sound agreeable to the People, I have two questions that go
along with it. First, how long should the waiting period be after someone
stands for a vacant office, for someone else to contest that office (I would
suggest either thirty days or the passing of two market days)?
And second, should such a law be made retroactive to the last magisterial
election (which would, in effect, allow all of December's candidates for
Quaestor to assume office, even those who failed to win a tribe)?
If we reach a consensus, I could foresee calling this issue to a vote this
month (but naturally there is no rush; we should take all the time we need
to talk such things through).
Valete,
Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
Consul
email: germanicus@--------
AIM: Flavius Vedius
www: http://www.goldenfuture.net/mediatlantica
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] Oath of Office for Quaestorship |
| From: |
"Veronica Moeller" <VMoeller@--------> |
| Date: |
Fri, 05 Jan 2001 16:08:42 -0000 |
|
Salvete Quirites:
I apologize for the delay in the execution of this oath; I had
the opportunity to be in Dallas over New Year's, and just returned
home yesterday:
I, Secunda Cornelia Valeria (Veronica Moeller), before the gods
and goddesses of Rome, do hereby swear to protect and defend the
constition of Nova Roma, to uphold the honor and dignity of Nova
Roma, to act in the best interests of the people and the Senate, to
honor the Gods and Goddesses of Rome in my public dealings, to uphold
and defend the Religio Romana as the state religion of Nova Roma, and
to pursue the Roman Virtues in my public and private life. I pledge
to serve, and honor Nova Roma in the execution of those duties
assigned to me by the Government of Nova Roma to the utmost of my
abilities. I take this obligation as Quaestor, and this oath, on my
honor, before the Gods and Goddesses, the Senate, the Consuls, my
collegues, and the people of Nova Roma. I am, Secunda Cornelia
Valeria.
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] Consular Edictum: Appointment of Assensus |
| From: |
"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@--------> |
| Date: |
Fri, 5 Jan 2001 11:55:26 -0500 |
|
Appointment of Decius Iunius Palladius Invictus as Assensus
January 5th, 2001
It is with great pleasure that I hereby appoint Decius Iunius Palladius
Invictus as my assensus, to assist with various tasks in my role as Consul
during the coming year. Decius Iunius is well known to us all as a hard
worker and a dedicated servant of Nova Roma. I look forward to working with
him during my term in office.
Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
Consul
email: germanicus@--------
AIM: Flavius Vedius
www: http://www.goldenfuture.net/mediatlantica
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] Amend the age limit law (was Re: Draco's Candidacy) |
| From: |
"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@--------> |
| Date: |
Fri, 5 Jan 2001 12:47:12 -0500 |
|
Salvete;
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nick Ford [mailto:gens_moravia@--------]
> Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2001 20:56
> The Lex Iunia de Magistratum Aetate is unclear as to whether an
> underage candidate should seek exemption before (or after) declaring his
or
> her candidacy, or before (or after) being elected:
Indeed it is. Now, rather than spewing forth insults, innuendo, and other
divisive hyperbole, let's try to turn this into a profitable discussion.
A simple solution presents itself; let us simply amend the Lex Iunia de
Magistratum Aetate to specify when the exemption to that law must be
obtained. There are plusses and minuses to both possible solutions:
If the potential candidate must gain his or her exemption to the age limit
law before running for office, it can legitimately be said that the choices
of the people are being limited. On the other hand, if the exemption to the
law must be obtained after the results of the election are known, then it
can legitimately be said that the will of the people is not being followed.
Either way, a tough choice, but I personally believe that if an allowance
for an exemption is to be made, it should be made before the election
process begins. Not only does this save us all from having to re-run the
election should the vote go against the would-be exemptee's favor, but it
also prevents the Senate and Censors from being placed in the awkward
position of possibly going against the will of the people (and to be fair,
to expect such exemptions to be for all intents and purposes automatic is to
defeat the entire purpose of the law, which I think is a good and fair one
overall).
The other choice would be to remove the possibility of exemption altogether.
Perhaps this would indeed be the best course of action, but I do think some
flexibility, to be used in extraordinary circumstances, is warranted.
Valete,
Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
Consul
email: germanicus@--------
AIM: Flavius Vedius
www: http://www.goldenfuture.net/mediatlantica
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Amend the age limit law (was Re: Draco's Candidacy) |
| From: |
"S. Apollonius Draco" <hendrik.meuleman@--------> |
| Date: |
Fri, 5 Jan 2001 19:24:04 +0100 |
|
Salve Consul,
> > The Lex Iunia de Magistratum Aetate is unclear as to whether an
> > underage candidate should seek exemption before (or after) declaring his
> or
> > her candidacy, or before (or after) being elected:
>
> Indeed it is. Now, rather than spewing forth insults, innuendo, and other
> divisive hyperbole, let's try to turn this into a profitable discussion.
>
> A simple solution presents itself; let us simply amend the Lex Iunia de
> Magistratum Aetate to specify when the exemption to that law must be
> obtained. There are plusses and minuses to both possible solutions:
>
> If the potential candidate must gain his or her exemption to the age limit
> law before running for office, it can legitimately be said that the
choices
> of the people are being limited. On the other hand, if the exemption to
the
> law must be obtained after the results of the election are known, then it
> can legitimately be said that the will of the people is not being
followed.
>
> Either way, a tough choice, but I personally believe that if an allowance
> for an exemption is to be made, it should be made before the election
> process begins. Not only does this save us all from having to re-run the
> election should the vote go against the would-be exemptee's favor, but it
> also prevents the Senate and Censors from being placed in the awkward
> position of possibly going against the will of the people (and to be fair,
> to expect such exemptions to be for all intents and purposes automatic is
to
> defeat the entire purpose of the law, which I think is a good and fair one
> overall).
>
> The other choice would be to remove the possibility of exemption
altogether.
> Perhaps this would indeed be the best course of action, but I do think
some
> flexibility, to be used in extraordinary circumstances, is warranted.
Allow me to jump in on this. I totally agree with these ideas. A few months
ago I already thought of such an amendment. It would be a small one, though,
that would make it able for young enthusiasts to climb up the ladder in a
natural way... A small oversight
1. There would be no age limits on scribae, legati and so on, just as it is
now, which is very good. Young cives can learn something from senior
magistrates this way, and do something useful.
2. As there is currently a strange situation of a three year gap between
being able to vote and being able to stand for office, I would say that we
lower the age limit for any office of the Vigintisexviri and Aedilis (both
Plebis and Curulis) to 18.
A more detailed description of my ideas is in the hands of some Senatores.
Vale bene,
Sextus Apollonius Draco, civis Novae Romae
Legatus Galliae Borealis,
Procurator Galliae,
Scriba Aedilis Plebis
Vainqueur, ICQ# 32924725
--**--
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
Novaroman? Interested in politics? Click here!:
http://www.egroups.com/group/NR_DignitasForum
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Amend the age limit law (was Re: Draco's Candidacy) |
| From: |
Caius Flavius Diocletianus <3s@--------> |
| Date: |
Fri, 05 Jan 2001 19:50:26 +0100 |
|
Salvete Omnes.
Senator N. Moravius Vado metioned the real problem in this matter. I second
Consul Fl. Vedius Germanicus in his suggested possible solution. My remarks are
below:
Flavius Vedius Germanicus wrote:
> Salvete;
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Nick Ford [mailto:gens_moravia@--------]
> > Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2001 20:56
>
> > The Lex Iunia de Magistratum Aetate is unclear as to whether an
> > underage candidate should seek exemption before (or after) declaring his
> or
> > her candidacy, or before (or after) being elected:
>
(snip)
> A simple solution presents itself; let us simply amend the Lex Iunia de
> Magistratum Aetate to specify when the exemption to that law must be
> obtained. There are plusses and minuses to both possible solutions:
>
> If the potential candidate must gain his or her exemption to the age limit
> law before running for office, it can legitimately be said that the choices
> of the people are being limited. On the other hand, if the exemption to the
> law must be obtained after the results of the election are known, then it
> can legitimately be said that the will of the people is not being followed.
>
The first alternative is the better one, imho. Of course, the choices of the
voters are being limited. But that is the better way. The crux of the situation
after the last elections was indeed the refusal of the exemption to S.
Apollonius Draco. He was elected. No we have a situation that disappoints both
the elected candidate and the people who voted for him.
So, the frist alternative is indeed not only a practical solution, but also a
question of fairness against both the possible candidate and the voters.
> Either way, a tough choice, but I personally believe that if an allowance
> for an exemption is to be made, it should be made before the election
> process begins. Not only does this save us all from having to re-run the
> election should the vote go against the would-be exemptee's favor, but it
> also prevents the Senate and Censors from being placed in the awkward
> position of possibly going against the will of the people (and to be fair,
> to expect such exemptions to be for all intents and purposes automatic is to
> defeat the entire purpose of the law, which I think is a good and fair one
> overall).
>
> The other choice would be to remove the possibility of exemption altogether.
> Perhaps this would indeed be the best course of action, but I do think some
> flexibility, to be used in extraordinary circumstances, is warranted.
No rule without exemption. That´s always the better, more practical solution.
We should think about fixed terms for future candidates to apply for their
exemption. Also, we must consider the time the Censors and the Senate needs
for discussion and decision.
Perhaps the Consuls can publish, around November 1st, an information that the
elections will take place in december. Together with this, they can publish the
age limits for the respective magistracies with the request to all interested,
but underaged, citizens to apply for exemption. The deciders have time to
decide, before the election procedure starts at the beginning of December with
the official call for candidates.
Perhaps we should reconstruct the Lex Iunia de Magistratum Aetate into a Lex
about election procedures in the future.
Comments are welcome.
Valete
Caius Flavius Diocletianus
Praetor, Senator
|
| Subject: |
RE: [novaroma] Amend the age limit law (was Re: Draco's Candidacy) |
| From: |
"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@--------> |
| Date: |
Fri, 5 Jan 2001 13:56:15 -0500 |
|
Salvete;
> -----Original Message-----
> From: S. Apollonius Draco [mailto:hendrik.meuleman@--------]
> Sent: Friday, January 05, 2001 13:24
>
> A more detailed description of my ideas is in the hands of some Senatores.
Do post your ideas here on the main list, Draco! This is the time for ideas
on this subject to be heard and discussed by all, and not shared among only
a few...
Valete,
Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
Consul
email: germanicus@--------
AIM: Flavius Vedius
www: http://www.goldenfuture.net/mediatlantica
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Amend the age limit law (was Re: Draco's Candidacy) |
| From: |
"S. Apollonius Draco" <hendrik.meuleman@--------> |
| Date: |
Fri, 5 Jan 2001 20:59:33 +0100 |
|
Sale Consul!
As requested, here are the full details... The old lex as well as my new
amended model.
Lex Antiqua (present lex):
-------------------------------
This law shall regulate the minimum age a person may hold specific
magistracies.
I. No person may assume the office of Censor or Consul until he or she has
reached the age of 27.
II. No person may assume the office of Praetor or Tribunus Plebis until he
or she has reached the age of 25.
III. No person may assume the office of quaestor, aedile, or be appointed to
the position of provincial governor, until he or she has reached the age of
21.
IV. No person shall assume any office of the Vigintisexviri until he or she
has reached the age of 21.
V. This law shall regulate only those people who assume any of the
aforementioned offices after January 2, 2000 C.E. Any person holding one of
the aforementioned positions at the time of the passage of this law or
currently running for one of the regulated positions shall be exempt from
its provisions for the remainder of his or her current term.
VI. An exemption to this law may be granted to a person by the approval of
both censors and a senatus consultum approved by a two thirds majority vote.
Lex Nova (new amendment):
----------------------------------
This law shall regulate the minimum age a person may hold specific
magistracies and other public offices.
I. No person may stand for the office of Censor or Consul until he or she
has reached the age of 27.
II. No person may stand for the office of Quaestor, Praetor, Tribunus Plebis
until he or she has reached the age of 21
III. No person may be appointed as a provincial governor before he or she
has reached the age of 21, and his application has been approved by a
majority of the citizens in that province.
IV. No person may stand for the office of Aedilis or any office of the
Vigintisexviri until he or she has reached the age of 18.
V. There is no age limit on the offices of scriba, accensus or provincial
legatus; they may be appointed freely by their superior as specified by the
Vedian Constitution.
VI. There is no age limit set on offices within a Sodalitas approved by the
Senate unless specified otherwise in its regula.
VII. This law shall regulate only those people who assume any of the
aforementioned offices after January 2, 2000 C.E. Any person holding one of
the aforementioned positions at the time of the passage of this law or
currently running for one of the regulated positions shall be exempt from
its provisions for the remainder of his or her current term.
VIII. An exemption to this law may be granted to a person by the approval of
both Censores or both Tribuni Plebis, and a senatus consultum approved by a
two thirds majority vote.
Cur haec mutatio?
---------------------
Nova Roma counts many citizens, of which many are not 21 yet, but are very
interested in participating in all aspects of the Nova Roman life. These
rights should not be denied to them, as consequent denial for these cives to
do anything official within our macronation may lead to frustration and the
dismissal of their own ambition. Although we do believe that a citizen has
to reach a certain level of maturity before he or she can enter the
political life of Nova Roma, this is not always determined by age - there
are senior cives who are not interested in politics, and even some cives
that are downright not apt to fulfill their office properly even though they
have reached the required age.
We see that, in the current situation, the learning curve is too steep. The
new system provides a more natural stairway to climb in the ranks of Nova
Roma. A young citizen could start out as a scriba or accensus to learn some
things of his superior, and to see how the political life of Nova Roma
works. They can also start out with a minor office such as Aedilis or
Rogator, offices with very few powers and prestige (and impopular ones,
too). Later on, when they have learnt more, they can go further and enter
the offices of quaestor or praetor with more experience and hopefully more
maturity.
This new system will also stimulate more activity among the younger cives;
they will have the feeling they can actually do something for Nova Roma
without having to wait and see everything being arranged above their heads.
Nevertheless, this does not mean that senior magistrates and senatores won't
be respected - they will be even more respected, as these young new
officials will learn everything from them!
Vale optime,
Sextus Apollonius Draco, civis Novae Romae
Legatus Galliae Borealis,
Procurator Galliae,
Scriba Aedilis Plebis
Vainqueur, ICQ# 32924725
--**--
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
Novaroman? Interested in politics? Click here!:
http://www.egroups.com/group/NR_DignitasForum
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Rogatorship |
| From: |
IuliusCamillus@-------- |
| Date: |
Fri, 5 Jan 2001 16:03:26 EST |
|
Salve Livia ~
I am finally able to breathe and break away from work for awhile. Being a
newer cive, I do need some help negotiating and learning about being a
Rogator. I would appreciate all the help you can provide (and will probably
be a pain since I do not want to lower the dignatus of my familia and to
myself).
Teach me.
Thank you
Vale
Q. Iulius Camillus Caesar
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
|
| Subject: |
RE: [novaroma] Amend the age limit law (was Re: Draco's Candidacy) |
| From: |
"Oppius Flaccus" <oppiusflaccus@--------> |
| Date: |
Fri, 5 Jan 2001 13:08:29 -0800 |
|
Salve Omnes!
As a citizen of a seriously decayed and rotting province (more on this in
a separate message) I can't agree strongly enough with the
sensible lowering of age limits for Quaestor, Praetor, Tribunus Plebis,
Aedilis, Vigintisexviri, scriba, accensus or provincial legatus.
I am told by one member of my province of America Boreoccidentalis
that the majority of its current cives are under the current legal age
minimums for office. Further, it has been stated that there are
many willing and able to serve NR in some capacity, but are prevented
from doing so. While this may be less of an issue for those cives
residing in provinces with different demographics, America Boreoccidentalis
could easily be considered a political wasteland needing any
and all the help it can get.
Any sensible amendments that would allow more active participation
and the fusion of young talent and enthusiasm are most welcome and
beneficial to NR as a whole. I for one applaud Senator Draco's statements
and proposed changes to the Lex.
Vale bene,
-Oppius Flaccus Severus
-----Original Message-----
From: S. Apollonius Draco [mailto:hendrik.meuleman@--------]
Sent: Friday, January 05, 2001 12:00 PM
To: novaroma@--------
Subject: Re: [novaroma] Amend the age limit law (was Re: Draco's Candidacy)
Sale Consul!
As requested, here are the full details... The old lex as well as my new
amended model.
Lex Antiqua (present lex):
-------------------------------
This law shall regulate the minimum age a person may hold specific
magistracies.
I. No person may assume the office of Censor or Consul until he or she has
reached the age of 27.
II. No person may assume the office of Praetor or Tribunus Plebis until he
or she has reached the age of 25.
III. No person may assume the office of quaestor, aedile, or be appointed to
the position of provincial governor, until he or she has reached the age of
21.
IV. No person shall assume any office of the Vigintisexviri until he or she
has reached the age of 21.
V. This law shall regulate only those people who assume any of the
aforementioned offices after January 2, 2000 C.E. Any person holding one of
the aforementioned positions at the time of the passage of this law or
currently running for one of the regulated positions shall be exempt from
its provisions for the remainder of his or her current term.
VI. An exemption to this law may be granted to a person by the approval of
both censors and a senatus consultum approved by a two thirds majority vote.
Lex Nova (new amendment):
----------------------------------
This law shall regulate the minimum age a person may hold specific
magistracies and other public offices.
I. No person may stand for the office of Censor or Consul until he or she
has reached the age of 27.
II. No person may stand for the office of Quaestor, Praetor, Tribunus Plebis
until he or she has reached the age of 21
III. No person may be appointed as a provincial governor before he or she
has reached the age of 21, and his application has been approved by a
majority of the citizens in that province.
IV. No person may stand for the office of Aedilis or any office of the
Vigintisexviri until he or she has reached the age of 18.
V. There is no age limit on the offices of scriba, accensus or provincial
legatus; they may be appointed freely by their superior as specified by the
Vedian Constitution.
VI. There is no age limit set on offices within a Sodalitas approved by the
Senate unless specified otherwise in its regula.
VII. This law shall regulate only those people who assume any of the
aforementioned offices after January 2, 2000 C.E. Any person holding one of
the aforementioned positions at the time of the passage of this law or
currently running for one of the regulated positions shall be exempt from
its provisions for the remainder of his or her current term.
VIII. An exemption to this law may be granted to a person by the approval of
both Censores or both Tribuni Plebis, and a senatus consultum approved by a
two thirds majority vote.
Cur haec mutatio?
---------------------
Nova Roma counts many citizens, of which many are not 21 yet, but are very
interested in participating in all aspects of the Nova Roman life. These
rights should not be denied to them, as consequent denial for these cives to
do anything official within our macronation may lead to frustration and the
dismissal of their own ambition. Although we do believe that a citizen has
to reach a certain level of maturity before he or she can enter the
political life of Nova Roma, this is not always determined by age - there
are senior cives who are not interested in politics, and even some cives
that are downright not apt to fulfill their office properly even though they
have reached the required age.
We see that, in the current situation, the learning curve is too steep. The
new system provides a more natural stairway to climb in the ranks of Nova
Roma. A young citizen could start out as a scriba or accensus to learn some
things of his superior, and to see how the political life of Nova Roma
works. They can also start out with a minor office such as Aedilis or
Rogator, offices with very few powers and prestige (and impopular ones,
too). Later on, when they have learnt more, they can go further and enter
the offices of quaestor or praetor with more experience and hopefully more
maturity.
This new system will also stimulate more activity among the younger cives;
they will have the feeling they can actually do something for Nova Roma
without having to wait and see everything being arranged above their heads.
Nevertheless, this does not mean that senior magistrates and senatores won't
be respected - they will be even more respected, as these young new
officials will learn everything from them!
Vale optime,
Sextus Apollonius Draco, civis Novae Romae
Legatus Galliae Borealis,
Procurator Galliae,
Scriba Aedilis Plebis
Vainqueur, ICQ# 32924725
--**--
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
Novaroman? Interested in politics? Click here!:
http://www.egroups.com/group/NR_DignitasForum
eGroups Sponsor
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Amend the age limit law (was Re: Draco's Candidacy) |
| From: |
Lucius Cornelius Sulla <alexious@--------> |
| Date: |
Fri, 05 Jan 2001 12:05:09 -0800 |
|
My comments below.
SF
"S. Apollonius Draco" wrote:
> Sale Consul!
>
> As requested, here are the full details... The old lex as well as my new
> amended model.
>
> Lex Antiqua (present lex):
> -------------------------------
>
> This law shall regulate the minimum age a person may hold specific
> magistracies.
>
> I. No person may assume the office of Censor or Consul until he or she has
> reached the age of 27.
>
> II. No person may assume the office of Praetor or Tribunus Plebis until he
> or she has reached the age of 25.
>
> III. No person may assume the office of quaestor, aedile, or be appointed to
> the position of provincial governor, until he or she has reached the age of
> 21.
>
> IV. No person shall assume any office of the Vigintisexviri until he or she
> has reached the age of 21.
>
> V. This law shall regulate only those people who assume any of the
> aforementioned offices after January 2, 2000 C.E. Any person holding one of
> the aforementioned positions at the time of the passage of this law or
> currently running for one of the regulated positions shall be exempt from
> its provisions for the remainder of his or her current term.
>
> VI. An exemption to this law may be granted to a person by the approval of
> both censors and a senatus consultum approved by a two thirds majority vote.
>
> Lex Nova (new amendment):
> ----------------------------------
>
> This law shall regulate the minimum age a person may hold specific
> magistracies and other public offices.
>
> I. No person may stand for the office of Censor or Consul until he or she
> has reached the age of 27.
>
> II. No person may stand for the office of Quaestor, Praetor, Tribunus Plebis
> until he or she has reached the age of 21
>
Praetor should still be 25. Given that it is higher in the Cursus Honorum than
Tribune of the Plebs and Quaestor.
>
> III. No person may be appointed as a provincial governor before he or she
> has reached the age of 21, and his application has been approved by a
> majority of the citizens in that province.
>
> IV. No person may stand for the office of Aedilis or any office of the
> Vigintisexviri until he or she has reached the age of 18.
>
> V. There is no age limit on the offices of scriba, accensus or provincial
> legatus; they may be appointed freely by their superior as specified by the
> Vedian Constitution.
>
There isn't an age limit on Scribes and other positions similar to this. Drusus
Cornelius Claudius is my scribe in California and he is 18. C. Sentius is my
Censorial Scribe and he is 18.
>
> VI. There is no age limit set on offices within a Sodalitas approved by the
> Senate unless specified otherwise in its regula.
>
> VII. This law shall regulate only those people who assume any of the
> aforementioned offices after January 2, 2000 C.E. Any person holding one of
> the aforementioned positions at the time of the passage of this law or
> currently running for one of the regulated positions shall be exempt from
> its provisions for the remainder of his or her current term.
>
> VIII. An exemption to this law may be granted to a person by the approval of
> both Censores or both Tribuni Plebis, and a senatus consultum approved by a
> two thirds majority vote.
>
Take out the Tribune of the Plebs in this paragraph. There is no precedent for
it, nor do they have the information the Censors possess.
Otherwise, good job Sextus on the rewrite.
Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
>
> Cur haec mutatio?
> ---------------------
>
> Nova Roma counts many citizens, of which many are not 21 yet, but are very
> interested in participating in all aspects of the Nova Roman life. These
> rights should not be denied to them, as consequent denial for these cives to
> do anything official within our macronation may lead to frustration and the
> dismissal of their own ambition. Although we do believe that a citizen has
> to reach a certain level of maturity before he or she can enter the
> political life of Nova Roma, this is not always determined by age - there
> are senior cives who are not interested in politics, and even some cives
> that are downright not apt to fulfill their office properly even though they
> have reached the required age.
> We see that, in the current situation, the learning curve is too steep. The
> new system provides a more natural stairway to climb in the ranks of Nova
> Roma. A young citizen could start out as a scriba or accensus to learn some
> things of his superior, and to see how the political life of Nova Roma
> works. They can also start out with a minor office such as Aedilis or
> Rogator, offices with very few powers and prestige (and impopular ones,
> too). Later on, when they have learnt more, they can go further and enter
> the offices of quaestor or praetor with more experience and hopefully more
> maturity.
> This new system will also stimulate more activity among the younger cives;
> they will have the feeling they can actually do something for Nova Roma
> without having to wait and see everything being arranged above their heads.
> Nevertheless, this does not mean that senior magistrates and senatores won't
> be respected - they will be even more respected, as these young new
> officials will learn everything from them!
>
> Vale optime,
> Sextus Apollonius Draco, civis Novae Romae
> Legatus Galliae Borealis,
> Procurator Galliae,
> Scriba Aedilis Plebis
> Vainqueur, ICQ# 32924725
> --**--
> 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
> Novaroman? Interested in politics? Click here!:
> http://www.egroups.com/group/NR_DignitasForum
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Amend the age limit law (was Re: Draco's Candidacy) |
| From: |
Marcus Octavius Germanicus <haase@--------> |
| Date: |
Fri, 5 Jan 2001 16:06:35 -0600 (CST) |
|
Salve Sexte Apolloni,
> II. No person may stand for the office of Quaestor, Praetor, Tribunus Plebis
> until he or she has reached the age of 21
I think we should keep the current limits for Praetor and Tribunus
Plebis - these are both very powerful positions, with a Tribune's
veto being one of the most powerful tools of any magistrate.
Vale, O.
--
M. Octavius Germanicus
Propraetor, Lacus Magni
Curator Araneae et Senator
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Amend the age limit law (was Re: Draco's Candidacy) |
| From: |
"S. Apollonius Draco" <hendrik.meuleman@--------> |
| Date: |
Fri, 5 Jan 2001 23:43:05 +0100 |
|
S. Apollonius Draco L. Cornelio Sullae Felici Censori et Marco Octavio
Germanico SPD
> > Lex Nova (new amendment):
> > ----------------------------------
> >
> > This law shall regulate the minimum age a person may hold specific
> > magistracies and other public offices.
> >
> > I. No person may stand for the office of Censor or Consul until he or
she
> > has reached the age of 27.
> >
> > II. No person may stand for the office of Quaestor, Praetor, Tribunus
Plebis
> > until he or she has reached the age of 21
> >
>
> Praetor should still be 25. Given that it is higher in the Cursus Honorum
than
> Tribune of the Plebs and Quaestor.
Yes, I could find myself in agreement on this topic with both you and
Octavius.
> > III. No person may be appointed as a provincial governor before he or
she
> > has reached the age of 21, and his application has been approved by a
> > majority of the citizens in that province.
> >
> > IV. No person may stand for the office of Aedilis or any office of the
> > Vigintisexviri until he or she has reached the age of 18.
> >
> > V. There is no age limit on the offices of scriba, accensus or
provincial
> > legatus; they may be appointed freely by their superior as specified by
the
> > Vedian Constitution.
> >
>
> There isn't an age limit on Scribes and other positions similar to this.
Drusus
> Cornelius Claudius is my scribe in California and he is 18. C. Sentius is
my
> Censorial Scribe and he is 18.
I know this age limit doesn't exist already, but I just included it in that
model to avoid all confusion (being a legate myself :)).
> > VI. There is no age limit set on offices within a Sodalitas approved by
the
> > Senate unless specified otherwise in its regula.
> >
> > VII. This law shall regulate only those people who assume any of the
> > aforementioned offices after January 2, 2000 C.E. Any person holding one
of
> > the aforementioned positions at the time of the passage of this law or
> > currently running for one of the regulated positions shall be exempt
from
> > its provisions for the remainder of his or her current term.
> >
> > VIII. An exemption to this law may be granted to a person by the
approval of
> > both Censores or both Tribuni Plebis, and a senatus consultum approved
by a
> > two thirds majority vote.
> >
>
> Take out the Tribune of the Plebs in this paragraph. There is no
precedent for
> it, nor do they have the information the Censors possess.
Is there a Censorial precedent on this in ancient history? I wasn't sure
about this. Having an exemption from this law would be not just a formality,
of course, but shouldn't just a 2/3 Senate vote do? That would be already
hard to obtain, I think, and leave the Tribunes and the Censors out
alltogether?
> Otherwise, good job Sextus on the rewrite.
Thank you very much!
> > Vale optime,
> > Sextus Apollonius Draco, civis Novae Romae
> > Legatus Galliae Borealis,
> > Procurator Galliae,
> > Scriba Aedilis Plebis
> > Vainqueur, ICQ# 32924725
> > --**--
> > 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
> > Novaroman? Interested in politics? Click here!:
> > http://www.egroups.com/group/NR_DignitasForum
>
>
>
>
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] Reconciliations |
| From: |
"M. Apollonius Formosanus" <bvm3@--------> |
| Date: |
Sat, 6 Jan 2001 00:19:55 +0100 |
|
M. Apollonius Formosanus
M. Minucio Audenti et L. Sergio Australico Obstinato S.P.D.
It is with the greatest pleasure that I read the reconciliatory
words of both of you gentlemen. I think as you do that it would be a
very good thing if the tone of our debates became a little bit less
acrimonious and a little bit more civilised. Indeed this has always
been my opinion, and I, for example, never swear at my opponents (who
have done so at me more than on NR-an lists other than this one) or
say things to them just for the purpose of causing pain. Nor do I
hate anybody in Nova Roma.
It would be ludicrous for me tho have to say all that in the
non-internet world, as my face-to-face acquaintances know me to be a
mild-mannered person, albeit one with strong moral convictions. I
have found that working through the internet it is very easy to be
completely misperceived, and it probably happens to all of us here,
not just to me. I have no easy solution to that problem, but I just
remind everyone of the reality of that. If we are all very careful
about perceptions here, perhaps it will help. And Germanicus' ideas
for more face-to-face contacts among us might also help.
I think that the discussion of Vado has made very clear how
unacceptible it is to try to impose military-style thinking on a
civil society. It is a strain for all involved for those in the
military, where it indeed has some real justification, and it is the
very opposite of what we here as civilians in a free micronation
expect. The right of conscience to stand up and speak out against
evils without fear or favour, whether among the high or among the
low, is the most precious of rights and most sacred of duties.
In the past year of my citizenship here I have had occasion to stand
up to denounce things I thought and think to be morally wrong in any
society. I hope that by so doing, helping to organise the Amici
Dignitatis, and indeed by running for office as well, I made some
positive contribution to the sense of public perception as to what is
an acceptable range of policy in the civilised sectors of the modern
world, and what not. I have the desire to see no further need to wage
campaigns of denunciation, but rather opportunities to participate a
bit more tranquilly in constructive debate - for the simple reason
that I now hope there is some hope of these problems being solved in
the decent, matter-of-fact way that they deserve, so that I will not
have to be a voice calling out in the wilderness to see fundamental
justice done.
It is probably unrealistic to suppose that we can eliminate people
being enemies of one another, because we have people of fundamentally
different character in a population as large as ours, and certainly
we will disagree sometimes even if we are friends, just because we
are different people. But let us begin this new year, with a new team
of magistrates and a modified group of senators, with as much mutual
forgiveness and good will as possible. I have called it the Year of
Rights, because so many of us, including our consuls, praetors and
tribunes, want to see institutional guarantees of our rights under
law and to see the Populus carrying out its ruling rôle in the
comitia. There is cause for hope.
Valete!
Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2001 23:19:16 -0500 (EST)
From: jmath669642reng@--------
Subject: Views and Opinions
Salvete, Senator Vado and Citizen Formosanus;
I have read both of your posts carefully, as there were some elements
in
both critical to me and my views. Since I respect both of you, for
your
support of Nova Roma in your special venues and for your very
apparent
realization of self-worth. I know Senator Vado a little better than
I
know Citizen Formosanus and therefore I have spent more attention to
what he had to say.
I think I understand a little better as a resut of that effort, your
responses. Let me say at this point that the right of any citizen to
express his or her opinion or view of any given situation is the
right
of any citizen as long as it is done politely and without injury
either
deliberate or accidental to others. In reviewing your post, Citizen
Formosanus I find that you have a very different way of presenting
your
views than I have, and I suspect that my first response did not take
that into account as I should have.
As I mentioned in my previous post, I have nothing to say in regard
to
the words or phrases of my Magisterial Colleagues, as I have no
authority in that area. However, let me say this, were this a
different
venue, and I did have such authority--comments such as you refer to
would "Never" be aired again on the pain of diciplinary action. I
reiterate, however, that I have no such authority, nor do I aspire to
such in this institution. I hope that Citizen Formosaus understands
my
meaning, as I am sure Senator Vado does.
In regard to young Draco, I have said that I admire his skills, and
his
industry. I hope the best for him in the future, However, as a
Senator
I am the keeper of the Laws, and must follow my dictates as to what
is
proper. I do not object to comment, but I do object to the
assumption
that those who do thier job as they see fit, do not know what they
are
doing. That in my view is insulting.
I have made my decision and will continue to do so, as a Senator, and
I
will not be told what to do and how my decision shall go by anyone,
as
my decisions do not swing in the wind with breezes of whim, that
change
with the seasons.
My views, you will notice are almost always stated as just that, my
views, and not the views of others. I suppose that is a large part
of
the basis for our difference of opinion.
I have no desire to fight with either of you, as it is not very
logical,
and we three know that in many cases our views differ, therefore I
propose if not an agreement, a truce, realizing that we will be very
unlikely to agree, perhaps we may agree to disagree in the manner of
gentlemen, and continue on our way. It may be in the fullness of
time
that I or you will, having carefully read each others posts, may well
agree on some future point, and there will be a beginnng common point
on
which to build a better relationship.
Senator Vado and I are from a similar background, and I suspect we
understand each other in a little more depth. Do not be sure that I
learned my respect for the gold-striped hat in an easier manner than
you, Friend Vado. There is a retired Naval Captain somewhere in the
U.S. that still has a scar at the corner of his mouth, put there when
he
was an Ensign, by his third-class torpedoman. No I didn't go to
prison
or even to "Mast." But. my "point bag" was absolutely empty (with a
large hole in the bottom) for some time, and I spent many hours in
the
Engine Room making fresh water from salt in the "lower flats."
If we may continue on a more even basis, I will pledge not to be so
quick with my words, if we can agree to disagree!!!
Vale, Respectfully;
Marcus Audens
Fair Winds and Following Seas!!!
Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2001 23:33:02 EST
From: LSergAust@--------
Subject: Re: Reconciliation
Salve M. Apollonius,
Someday I will take the time to get the hang of this addressing
thing.
My apology is of course applicable to you as well as to others, if
you feel that I "crossed the line" in debating with you during the
campaign. I still disagree drastically with the ideas you advanced as
the basis for your candidacy. However I would hope that in the future
we might disagree more amicably.
Vale,
L. Sergius Aust. Obst.
Marcus Apollonius Formosanus
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)
________________________________________
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] Test |
| From: |
"Herr Schäfer" <schaefer.paxromana@--------> |
| Date: |
Sat, 6 Jan 2001 00:55:25 +0100 (CET) |
|
test
--
Spitzenhandy ein Jahr ohne Grundgebühr! Zahlen Sie zwölf Monate
keine und danach 9,95 DM für das Ericsson T10s inkl. Ledertasche
und portabler Freisprecheinrichtung.
Alles zum Weihnachtspreis von DM 0.- http://handy.freenet.de
|
