Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Question Regarding Rivial of the Religio Romano
From:	"J. T. Sibley" <jrsibley@-------->
Date:	Mon, 05 Feb 2001 19:48:25 -0500

Salve Oppius Flaccus Severus!

Oppius Flaccus Severus wrote:

> I have a question regarding current practices of the Religio Romano.
> To my understanding, animal sacrifice was an vital part of the Roman
> State Religion. Obviously such practices hardly fit in well with
> modern sensibilities. Has an acceptable 'substitute' been found?

Actually, if one follows the Laws of Magic, the name of the thing equals the
thing. Identifying something as, say, a sheep, would confer "sheep-ness"
upon that item. So if one drew a picture of a sheep on a piece of paper and
then said "This is my sheep which I shall sacrifice to the gods!" and then
that person slit the "sheep's" throat with a dagger after first knocking it
ceremonially on the head with a double=peened ("pulley") stone hammer, (or
in the Modern Imperium, a ball peen hammer would do!) that should count.

> I know that the Romans were somewhat obsessive about ensuring that
> traditional rituals were followed exactly, and that they believed the
> slightest deviation would invalidate the prayer/ritual/etc.

True...but if one did follow the Laws of Magic, one could get by. Similar
artifices were used in defixiones at the time.

Vale,

S. Ambrosia Fulvia
Itinerant augur

Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Question Regarding Rivial of the Religio Romano
From:	"Oppius Flaccus Severus" <oppiusflaccus@-------->
Date:	Mon, 5 Feb 2001 18:10:52 -0800

Salve S. Ambrosia Fulvia;

Gratias multas! Actually, it was Amulius Equitius Germanicus
who asked the questions to which you reply :-), but thanks for
the response. I've cc'd your reply to the Religio list so the
discussion can proceed further.

Bene vale,
-Oppius
-----Original Message-----
From: J. T. Sibley [mailto:jrsibley@--------]
Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 4:48 PM
To: novaroma@--------
Subject: Re: [novaroma] Question Regarding Rivial of the Religio Romano


Salve Oppius Flaccus Severus!

Oppius Flaccus Severus wrote:

> I have a question regarding current practices of the Religio Romano.
> To my understanding, animal sacrifice was an vital part of the Roman
> State Religion. Obviously such practices hardly fit in well with
> modern sensibilities. Has an acceptable 'substitute' been found?

Actually, if one follows the Laws of Magic, the name of the thing equals the
thing. Identifying something as, say, a sheep, would confer "sheep-ness"
upon that item. So if one drew a picture of a sheep on a piece of paper and
then said "This is my sheep which I shall sacrifice to the gods!" and then
that person slit the "sheep's" throat with a dagger after first knocking it
ceremonially on the head with a double=peened ("pulley") stone hammer, (or
in the Modern Imperium, a ball peen hammer would do!) that should count.

> I know that the Romans were somewhat obsessive about ensuring that
> traditional rituals were followed exactly, and that they believed the
> slightest deviation would invalidate the prayer/ritual/etc.

True...but if one did follow the Laws of Magic, one could get by. Similar
artifices were used in defixiones at the time.

Vale,

S. Ambrosia Fulvia
Itinerant augur

Subject:	[novaroma] Freedom of Lingusitic Expression
From:	"M. Apollonius Formosanus" <bvm3@-------->
Date:	Tue, 6 Feb 2001 03:04:18 +0100

M. Apollonius Formosanus omnibus Quiritibus S.P.D.

F. Vedius Germanicus scripsit:

Salvete;

> -----Original Message-----
> From: M. Apollonius Formosanus [mailto:bvm3@--------]
> Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2001 13:34
>
> But this, the Main List, has a special place, and I think that
> making unnecessary rules to limit the use of the other 6000+
languages
> in the world and give a special place to English would be a serious
> mistake. This is the true Forum Romanum where the whole world joins
> together. English speakers who have almost monopolised this forum
> hitherto should be willing to give an equally free chance to those
who
> use other languages by preference. The result should be a
delightful
> babble that expresses our Nova Roman universality, tolerance and
> colourful abundance of life!

Do you _really_ want the main list to degenerate into an
unintelligible babble, with people posting in 6,000 different
languages, no one able to understand anyone else?

MAF: I would expect not more than a dozen languages to be at all
frequent, and mostly French, German, Italian, Spanish, and
Portuguese. And obviously it is not the case that "no one" would
understand anyone else: quite a number of speakers of that language
would understand and prefer that language, and many other cives would
understand due to their foreign language skills, even if only
passive.

This is not a question of English speakers "monopolizing" anything,
or of anyone "oppressing" anyone else. It's a question of
practicality, not ideology. Like it or not, the vast majority of
Citizens speaks English, and if posters on the main list want to be
understood (and understand others) they need to post in English to do
so.

MAF: Some might be content with being understood by those who can
undestand their chosen language of expression rather than by
everyone.

I doubt that many folks would be pleased if I started presenting all
votes for the Comitia in Old Norse or Klingon, and few more would be
served if you started posting only in Esperanto or Interlingua. It's
simply a matter of being able to communicate.

MAF: Although I do not know Interlingua actively, I'll bet that most
of the list readership would understand most of it the first time
they saw it. (It is very well engineered that way.)

As far as announcing votes goes, that is an interesting point. I have
observed that some people on provincial lists have very hazy ideas of
things like votes due to the fact that they are presented only in
English, and a lot of people interested in Rome and Nova Roma are not
even passively good enough in English to really keep up with the
issues, which can be a bit complicated and fast-paced at times.
Although English is better known than Old Norse and Klingon, it does
not perform a truely 100% job of providing for effective
communication.

(Kaj fakte, mia Vedio, estas kelkaj Esperantistoj en Nova Romo...)


There are already places in Nova Roma where people are expected to
post in languages other than English, and more are being added all
the time (and will likely continue to, as we create provinciae in
non-English-speaking countries). Versions of the web site (or at
least portions of it) have either been or are in the process of being
translated into a variety of languages. I'm sure that local meetings
in Italy will all be done in Italian. Terrific! If it allows us to
reach more people, I'm all for it.

MAF: I completely agree! However, that does not mean the Main List
should be closed to communications between non-users or non-preferers
of English.

However, the vast majority of Citizens have at least a passable
understanding of English, and for purely practical reasons, English
is our Lingua Franca, like it or not.

MAF: Perhaps the Franks especially might prefer not to use it ;-) !
But Lingua Franca or no, we can use other languages *as well*, and
the Main List should be the most open place we can devise. We have
done perfectly well until now with no such rules, and the
multiplication of *unnecessary* rules is the bane of any state that
wants to keep free and unbureaucratised.

(And yes, the irony of that last bit didn't escape me *grin*) Until
such time as technology gives us truly reliable electronic
translation services, I'm afraid that we're stuck with serving
the interests of the vast majority.

MAF: Limiting the minority (in fact the majority of the world) is,
however, not necessary. Let us keep all languages welcome here on the
Main List,

It's just practical.

MAF: But not the most practical thing for everyone. Freedom of
language choice is.

Valete!

Marcus Apollonius Formosanus, Aedilis Plebeius Novae Romae
Paterfamilias Gentis Apolloniae (http://www.crosswinds.net/~bvm3/)
Moderator et Praeceptor Sodalitatis Latinitatis; Scriba Censorius;
Musaeus Collegii Polyhymniae Sodalitatis Musarum    
ICQ# 61698049 AIM: MAFormosanus MSN: Formosanus
Civis Novae Romae in Silesia, Polonia
Minervium Virtuale: http://www.crosswinds.net/~bvm3/Minervium.htm
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] Question Regarding Rivial of the Religio Romano<Apologies>
From:	"Oppius Flaccus Severus" <oppiusflaccus@-------->
Date:	Mon, 5 Feb 2001 18:21:33 -0800

Salvete;

My humble apologies to C. Minucius Hadrianus whom the
was supposed to be cited in my last reply! In trying
to redirect S. Ambrosia Fulvia's response, I too
addressed the mail to the wrong party. It was actually
C. Minucius Hadrianus and *not* Amulius Equitius Germanicus
to whom the mail should have been directed in my
response to S. Ambrosia. Oh what a long day :-)

Bene valete;
-Oppius

-----Original Message-----
From: Oppius Flaccus Severus [mailto:oppiusflaccus@--------]
Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 6:11 PM
To: novaroma@--------
Cc: ReligioRomana@yahoogroups. com
Subject: RE: [novaroma] Question Regarding Rivial of the Religio Romano


Salve S. Ambrosia Fulvia;

Gratias multas! Actually, it was Amulius Equitius Germanicus
who asked the questions to which you reply :-), but thanks for
the response. I've cc'd your reply to the Religio list so the
discussion can proceed further.

Bene vale,
-Oppius
-----Original Message-----
From: J. T. Sibley [mailto:jrsibley@--------]
Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 4:48 PM
To: novaroma@--------
Subject: Re: [novaroma] Question Regarding Rivial of the Religio Romano


Salve Oppius Flaccus Severus!

Oppius Flaccus Severus wrote:

> I have a question regarding current practices of the Religio Romano.
> To my understanding, animal sacrifice was an vital part of the Roman
> State Religion. Obviously such practices hardly fit in well with
> modern sensibilities. Has an acceptable 'substitute' been found?

Actually, if one follows the Laws of Magic, the name of the thing equals the
thing. Identifying something as, say, a sheep, would confer "sheep-ness"
upon that item. So if one drew a picture of a sheep on a piece of paper and
then said "This is my sheep which I shall sacrifice to the gods!" and then
that person slit the "sheep's" throat with a dagger after first knocking it
ceremonially on the head with a double=peened ("pulley") stone hammer, (or
in the Modern Imperium, a ball peen hammer would do!) that should count.

> I know that the Romans were somewhat obsessive about ensuring that
> traditional rituals were followed exactly, and that they believed the
> slightest deviation would invalidate the prayer/ritual/etc.

True...but if one did follow the Laws of Magic, one could get by. Similar
artifices were used in defixiones at the time.

Vale,

S. Ambrosia Fulvia
Itinerant augur

Subject:	[novaroma] Getting Involved, was Re: What role...
From:	Piparskegg UllRsson <catamount_grange@-------->
Date:	Mon, 05 Feb 2001 21:52:54 -0600

Ave Arria Rutilia

atheleas@-------- wrote:
>
> (excision) Also, I live in Illinois, is anyone here organizing real-world
> events in my state?
>
> Arria Rutilia Emapanda
>

We're trying!

Provincia Magna Lacus has a list, see my sig block.

I live in the Rockford, IL area and am legate for the Regio Occidentalis: Wisconsin, Illinois and
Indiana.


--
===========================================
In Amicus sub Fidelis, Benedicte Omnes!
- Piperbarbus Ullerius Venator
Cives, Paterfamilias Gens Ulleria
Quæstor, Legate, Dominus Sodalis
Nova Roma website
http://www.novaroma.org/main.html
The Lacus Magni Provincial list
http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/GreatLakesNovaRoma
Sodalis pro Coqueror et Coquus
http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/Sodalis_Coq_et_Coq
The Gens Ulleria webpage
http://homestead.deja.com/user.gens_ulleria/domus_ulleria.html
My Northern homestead
http://www.geocities.com/piparskegg/index.html

Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Freedom of Lingusitic Expression
From:	"JusticeCMO" <justicecmo@-------->
Date:	Tue, 6 Feb 2001 07:10:41 -0500

Salve,

>> MAF: Some might be content with being understood by those who can
undestand their chosen language of expression rather than by everyone.>>

The main list is not intended for private communication. Those wishing to
reach *only* a target audience ought to take advantage of private e-mail or,
in the case of language preference, utilize one of the language oriented
lists if, indeed, the poster only wishes to reach speakers of the same
language.

>> MAF: I completely agree! However, that does not mean the Main List
should be closed to communications between non-users or non-preferers of
English.>>

I will say *again* that all languages are welcome here, as long as an
English translation is provided. Non-speakers are already offered the
assistance of translators. Hardly a "closed" list.

Vale,

Priscilla Vedia Serena
Curatrix Sermonem



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

Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Freedom of Lingusitic Expression
From:	"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@-------->
Date:	Tue, 6 Feb 2001 09:02:25 -0500

Salve;

> -----Original Message-----
> From: M. Apollonius Formosanus [mailto:bvm3@--------]
> Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 21:04
>
> MAF: Some might be content with being understood by those who can
> undestand their chosen language of expression rather than by
> everyone.

There are sufficient non-English provincial lists (and more being created
all the time) for such communications. Private email also works just fine.
The main list's purpose is to facilitate public communications, and to
communicate one must be understood. Since the vast majority of Nova Romans
understand English, it is only logical that such be used as our "common
tongue".

(Of course, I share Vado's wish that someday we will have progressed to the
point that Latin may take that place, but for now it's just a question of
practicality.)

> (Kaj fakte, mia Vedio, estas kelkaj Esperantistoj en Nova Romo...)

Thanks for making my point. That's just gibberish to me.

> MAF: I completely agree! However, that does not mean the Main List
> should be closed to communications between non-users or non-preferers
> of English.

Nor is it. Provision is already made for such people; when the need arises,
the list moderator solicits folks knowledgeable in the appropriate language
to assist with translations to and from English. To my knowledge, the need
hasn't arisen more than a couple of times.

> But Lingua Franca or no, we can use other languages *as well*, and
> the Main List should be the most open place we can devise.

You confuse "openness" with "anarchy".

> We have
> done perfectly well until now with no such rules, and the
> multiplication of *unnecessary* rules is the bane of any state that
> wants to keep free and unbureaucratised.

It is necessary, if we want to have some standard for being understood. (And
I will note that this is not a new policy, but one which has been in place
for quite some time.)

> MAF: Limiting the minority (in fact the majority of the world) is,
> however, not necessary.

We are not concerned with the majority of people in the world (otherwise we
would be having this conversation in Mandarin Chinese; or more likely
scrambling to find someone who could translate into it!). We are concerned
with the majority of Citizens subscribed to the main list.

You have told me that you don't speak Polish, although you live there. How
do you manage to communicate? I'll bet you find more than enough people who
speak English to get by...

> Let us keep all languages welcome here on the
> Main List,

All languages _are_ welcome here. Along with their English translation.

> It's just practical.
>
> MAF: But not the most practical thing for everyone. Freedom of
> language choice is.

It's the most practical thing for everyone here, which is what we should
concern ourselves with.

Vale,

Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
Consul

"For Gracchus, hatred of the Patrician class is a profession, and not such a
bad one." (Crassus in the film "Spartacus")

email: germanicus@--------
AIM: Flavius Vedius
www: http://mediatlantica.novaroma.org

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Freedom of Lingusitic Expression
From:	Michel Loos <loos@-------->
Date:	Tue, 06 Feb 2001 12:27:44 -0200

Flavius Vedius Germanicus wrote:
>
> Salve;
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: M. Apollonius Formosanus [mailto:bvm3@--------]
> > Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 21:04
> >
> > MAF: Some might be content with being understood by those who can
> > undestand their chosen language of expression rather than by
> > everyone.
>
> There are sufficient non-English provincial lists (and more being created
> all the time) for such communications. Private email also works just fine.
> The main list's purpose is to facilitate public communications, and to
> communicate one must be understood. Since the vast majority of Nova Romans
> understand English, it is only logical that such be used as our "common
> tongue".

But it is in no way needed for communication. Of course anybody who does
not _understand_ english will not subscribe to the main list. But
understanding and writing are 2 totally different things.


>
> (Of course, I share Vado's wish that someday we will have progressed to the
> point that Latin may take that place, but for now it's just a question of
> practicality.)
>
> > (Kaj fakte, mia Vedio, estas kelkaj Esperantistoj en Nova Romo...)
>
> Thanks for making my point. That's just gibberish to me.
>
> > MAF: I completely agree! However, that does not mean the Main List
> > should be closed to communications between non-users or non-preferers
> > of English.
>
> Nor is it. Provision is already made for such people; when the need arises,
> the list moderator solicits folks knowledgeable in the appropriate language
> to assist with translations to and from English. To my knowledge, the need
> hasn't arisen more than a couple of times.
>

That si equivalent to previous censure, a dictatorial mean, totally
opposed to free speach and responsability. It costs absolutely nothing
(or near to) to accept all messages in their languages since the
messages can be translated shortly after by the same translators. The
argument of our Curatrix does not hold 1 second: in the last few month a
non-english message produced an extra 7 messages (unneeded in her
opinion) which increased the number of messages of this list that
already produces some 1200 messages/month. Supposing this happens once
every month it will be an increase in 0.5% in list traffic. This in
order to assure freedom of speach to all NovaRomans.
It seems to me that choosing -0.5% of list traffic over freedom of
speach is a very dangerous attitude nearing to fascism.
What next ? the words democracy and freedom will be unwelcome ?

Manius Villius Limitanus


> > But Lingua Franca or no, we can use other languages *as well*, and
> > the Main List should be the most open place we can devise.
>
> You confuse "openness" with "anarchy".
>
> > We have
> > done perfectly well until now with no such rules, and the
> > multiplication of *unnecessary* rules is the bane of any state that
> > wants to keep free and unbureaucratised.
>
> It is necessary, if we want to have some standard for being understood. (And
> I will note that this is not a new policy, but one which has been in place
> for quite some time.)
>
> > MAF: Limiting the minority (in fact the majority of the world) is,
> > however, not necessary.
>
> We are not concerned with the majority of people in the world (otherwise we
> would be having this conversation in Mandarin Chinese; or more likely
> scrambling to find someone who could translate into it!). We are concerned
> with the majority of Citizens subscribed to the main list.
>
> You have told me that you don't speak Polish, although you live there. How
> do you manage to communicate? I'll bet you find more than enough people who
> speak English to get by...
>
> > Let us keep all languages welcome here on the
> > Main List,
>
> All languages _are_ welcome here. Along with their English translation.
>
> > It's just practical.
> >
> > MAF: But not the most practical thing for everyone. Freedom of
> > language choice is.
>
> It's the most practical thing for everyone here, which is what we should
> concern ourselves with.
>
> Vale,
>
> Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
> Consul
>
> "For Gracchus, hatred of the Patrician class is a profession, and not such a
> bad one." (Crassus in the film "Spartacus")
>
> email: germanicus@--------
> AIM: Flavius Vedius
> www: http://mediatlantica.novaroma.org
>

Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Freedom of Lingusitic Expression
From:	nramos@--------
Date:	Tue, 06 Feb 2001 15:01:54 -0000

--- In novaroma@--------, Michel Loos <loos@u...> wrote:
Salvete, Limitanius!


> >
>
> That si equivalent to previous censure, a dictatorial mean, totally
> opposed to free speach and responsability. It costs absolutely
nothing
> (or near to) to accept all messages in their languages since the
> messages can be translated shortly after by the same translators.
The
> argument of our Curatrix does not hold 1 second: in the last few
month a
> non-english message produced an extra 7 messages (unneeded in her
> opinion) which increased the number of messages of this list that
> already produces some 1200 messages/month. Supposing this happens
once
> every month it will be an increase in 0.5% in list traffic. This in
> order to assure freedom of speach to all NovaRomans.
> It seems to me that choosing -0.5% of list traffic over freedom of
> speach is a very dangerous attitude nearing to fascism.
> What next ? the words democracy and freedom will be unwelcome ?
>
> Manius Villius Limitanus
>
With all due respect, I think you miss the point completely. To
date,
I have seen several declarations from our Curatrix Sermo stating
clearly that posts in ALL languages are welcome - but please, for the
sake of those who cannot speak other languages, could you be
courteous
enough to include a translation? Hades, she has even offered to
provide translation services for those who might have a problem with
that. Fascism? Mio caro Limitani, che fare lei? Que dice usted? Was
sagen sie, bitte? Qui dixit? Or as the Bard would put it - what are
you saying?

I have seen endless posts about how fascistic Nova Roma's magistrates
are for simply asking you and others to abide by the rules you signed
up for when you joined us! Iuppiter's thunderbolts! You KNEW exactly
what the rules were, you agreed with them (or at least so you claimed
when you applied for citizenship), and now we hear endless tirades
about how evil and despotic we are...

Perhaps I misunderstood the e-groups description of this list (i.e.
Primary Language = English). Before you start screaming about how
discriminatory I am for saying that - my primary language happens to
be Spanish. I have smatterings of Italian, French, German, Japanese,
Latin, and Portuguese. For the most part, the cives meeting on this
list can read and write passable English. Some of us even attempt
Latin (pace Vado, I do know my quote the other day was monstrously
mangled :-) ). If most of us can understand it, and we are willing to
make accomodations for those who do not, why is using English as our
primary language so oppressive?

Valete

Marius Cornelius Scipio
Curule Aedile, Nova Roma

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: Freedom of Lingusitic Expression
From:	Michel Loos <loos@-------->
Date:	Tue, 6 Feb 2001 14:03:34 -0200 (BRST)

On Tue, 6 Feb 2001 nramos@-------- wrote:

> --- In novaroma@--------, Michel Loos <loos@u...> wrote:
> Salvete, Limitanius!
>
>
> > >
> >
> > That si equivalent to previous censure, a dictatorial mean, totally
> > opposed to free speach and responsability. It costs absolutely
> nothing
> > (or near to) to accept all messages in their languages since the
> > messages can be translated shortly after by the same translators.
> The
> > argument of our Curatrix does not hold 1 second: in the last few
> month a
> > non-english message produced an extra 7 messages (unneeded in her
> > opinion) which increased the number of messages of this list that
> > already produces some 1200 messages/month. Supposing this happens
> once
> > every month it will be an increase in 0.5% in list traffic. This in
> > order to assure freedom of speach to all NovaRomans.
> > It seems to me that choosing -0.5% of list traffic over freedom of
> > speach is a very dangerous attitude nearing to fascism.
> > What next ? the words democracy and freedom will be unwelcome ?
> >
> > Manius Villius Limitanus
> >
> With all due respect, I think you miss the point completely. To
> date,
> I have seen several declarations from our Curatrix Sermo stating
> clearly that posts in ALL languages are welcome - but please, for the
> sake of those who cannot speak other languages, could you be
> courteous
> enough to include a translation?

The only honorable reason, I see to post in another language, on the
main list, is the impossibility to write/translate to english by one's
own means. i.e. the demand for an english translation stops effectively
those persons.

> Hades, she has even offered to
> provide translation services for those who might have a problem with
> that. Fascism? Mio caro Limitani, che fare lei? Que dice usted? Was
> sagen sie, bitte? Qui dixit? Or as the Bard would put it - what are
> you saying?

Tradutore traditore. (not sure about my italian spelling). This
_preliminary_ translation/edition/autorization is dictatorial in nature.
Fascism ? Well not really, no need for the other conotations of the word,
you can replace it by sovietic, taleban or whatever you want, I really
don t care.


>
> I have seen endless posts about how fascistic Nova Roma's magistrates
> are for simply asking you and others to abide by the rules you signed
> up for when you joined us! Iuppiter's thunderbolts! You KNEW exactly
> what the rules were, you agreed with them (or at least so you claimed
> when you applied for citizenship), and now we hear endless tirades
> about how evil and despotic we are...

Despotic, yes that s a fine word. Evil? never said that. While the list
is ruled by philosopher kings we are fine and nothing evil happens. If
it can be ruled by tyrans we are in danger. For knowing the list rules
before signing up, well not quite. I have absolutely NO problems with
Nova Roma, just with one little rule, which could be relaxed without any
harm.

>
> Perhaps I misunderstood the e-groups description of this list (i.e.
> Primary Language = English). Before you start screaming about how
> discriminatory I am for saying that - my primary language happens to
> be Spanish. I have smatterings of Italian, French, German, Japanese,
> Latin, and Portuguese. For the most part, the cives meeting on this
> list can read and write passable English. Some of us even attempt
> Latin (pace Vado, I do know my quote the other day was monstrously
> mangled :-) ). If most of us can understand it, and we are willing to
> make accomodations for those who do not, why is using English as our
> primary language so oppressive?
>

It is absolutely not oppresive to use english as our primary language.
There is a difference between primary language (which I knew off,
and totally agree that english is todays koine) and being the Official
language. Primary means that 99 % of the posts on this list are in
english,
it does not mean that "non-english posts (without translation) are
unwelcome", it just means they are, and should remain, rare.

Whoever is able to write in english and still comunicate most of his
thoughts should write english (I do and my primary languages are german
and french).

What about the citizen which is able to _understand_ english
but desists to speak because he feels unable to write a correct english?

What about the citizen which has a good contribution to an ongoing debate
but if he sends his mail first to the curatrix which forwards it to the
translater which send it back to the list, his contribution hits the list
when the dabate is long over, or won t because we (represented by the
curatrix) decided the debate is no more of interest to this list?

Would it not be easier to accept those posts in their own languages,
expecting some other citizen understanding the language to translate it
unformally for all?

As I said in one of my first posts on this subject, the problem is same
with Free Software vs Proprietary Software (Linux vs Windows) and the
Free software has proven over the years his superiority, without
generating any anarchy.


Manius Villius Limitanus.




> Valete
>
> Marius Cornelius Scipio
> Curule Aedile, Nova Roma
>
>
>
>
>
>

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

Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Re: Freedom of Lingusitic Expression
From:	"JusticeCMO" <justicecmo@-------->
Date:	Tue, 6 Feb 2001 11:49:07 -0500

Salve,

>>The only honorable reason, I see to post in another language, on the
main list, is the impossibility to write/translate to english by one's
own means. i.e. the demand for an english translation stops effectively
those persons.>>

On the contrary. As soon as such a need for assistance is seen, assistance
is provided. Therefore, no one is *stopped* from posting. At worst there is
a slight delay while a translator is contacted.

>>Tradutore traditore. (not sure about my italian spelling). This
_preliminary_ translation/edition/autorization is dictatorial in nature.
Fascism ? Well not really, no need for the other conotations of the word,
you can replace it by sovietic, taleban or whatever you want, I really don t
care.>>

You seem to be confusing translation with censoring. I must say, your
choice of colorful phrases to describe the process is offensive. There is
not only no basis in fact for your foul choices of terms, your entire
premise is incorrect.

>>Despotic, yes that s a fine word. Evil? never said that. While the list is
ruled by philosopher kings we are fine and nothing evil happens. If it can
be ruled by tyrans we are in danger.>>

Please let me know when a tyrant takes over. I will be sure to put them on
moderated status or, better still, ban them. In the meantime, your
insinuation could not be further from the truth.

>>I have absolutely NO problems with Nova Roma, just with one little rule,
which could be relaxed without any harm.>>

I am sorry, and somewhat baffled, that you are having such difficulty with
this policy. I will note that you have also not chosen to avail yourself of
any of the assistance available if, indeed, this policy is a hardship for
you personally. I would counter your statement with the simple fact that
your *adhering* to the policy does no harm either. If it does, I suggest
you avail yourself of the assistance I have so often offered.

>>Whoever is able to write in english and still comunicate most of his
thoughts should write english (I do and my primary languages are german
and french).>>

Agreed.

>>What about the citizen which is able to _understand_ english but desists
to speak because he feels unable to write a correct english?>>

Said person should avail themselves of the translators who have made their
services available. Such pairings of poster with translator are easy enough
to make, as so many wonderful cives have stepped forward to offer their
services. For someone so concerned with those who cannot write in English,
I would note with some curiosity that you have not yet offered to be of any
assistance as a translator.

>>What about the citizen which has a good contribution to an ongoing debate
but if he sends his mail first to the curatrix which forwards it to the
translater which send it back to the list, his contribution hits the list
when the dabate is long over,>>

Once again you work from an incorrect premise. Translators and posters are
directly paired. There is no need for me to see the posts. Further, if a
poster posts, has to wait for translations from random list mebers (if,
indeed, anyone takes it upon themselves TO translate)before anyone but a
very few understand them, and then have to wait for the replies to be
translated again.........well, are we really saving any time? The current
list policy allows for maximum efficiency of posting, while your idea of
"post anything and wait to see who translates" creates chaos.

>>Would it not be easier to accept those posts in their own languages,
expecting some other citizen understanding the language to translate it
unformally for all?>>

No, it would not. Again, it seems as though you fear that translating posts
leads to censoring posts. Nothing could be further from the truth. The
*content* of the post remains the same, only the format in which it is
stated changes so as to be understood on the list. As for this mysterious
"some other citizen" who you feel will translate, why do you object to that
being a specific volunteer as opposed to, potentially, 3-4 persons ALL
translating the same post?

The bottom line is that you are certainly free to disagree with this policy.
I have no problem with differences of opinion, they're part of what makes
the world go around. I will, however, ask that you look back over the facts
again. No one is being oppressed here and there is certainly NO call for
the inflammatory and insulting references made above.

Priscilla Vedia Serena
Curatrix Sermonem


Manius Villius Limitanus.




> Valete
>
> Marius Cornelius Scipio
> Curule Aedile, Nova Roma
>
>
>
>
>
>

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

Subject:	[novaroma] The Roles of Magistrates
From:	"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@-------->
Date:	Tue, 6 Feb 2001 13:15:33 -0500

Fl Vedius Germanicus novaromanis S.P.D.,

It has been stated recently that the Constitution is vague on the roles of
various magistrates in our society, and that such roles are never stated.
This is incorrect. While it is true that there are no places where it says
"The Censors are in charge of membership applications", and so forth, the
relative roles of our magistrates are indeed defined by their powers and
responsibilities as they are spelled out in the Constitution.

For example, in the case of the Censors, they are explicitly given the power
to issue nota to "safeguard the public morality and honor". Thus, one of
their responsibilities within our society is to act as the guardians of
public morality and honor.

In the case of the Consuls, they are explicitly given the power "To issue
those edicta (edicts) necessary to engage in those tasks which advance the
mission and function of Nova Roma..." This is a very broad mandate, but
nonetheless a clear one. The Consuls are to use their powers to advance Nova
Roma on all fronts, according to its mission.

And what is that mission? Once again, the Constitution makes it clear: "The
primary functions of Nova Roma shall be to promote the study and practice of
pagan Roman civilization, defined as the period from the founding of the
City of Rome in 753 BCE to the removal of the altar of Victory from the
Senate in 394 CE and encompassing such fields as religion, culture,
politics, art, literature, language, and philosophy."

And it continues. The Praetors, in addition to sharing the broad functions
of the Consuls in terms of their power to issue edicta, are also charged
with administering the legal system. The Aediles (both Curule and Plebeian)
share that legal-administration function, but add to it a responsibility to
use their powers to facilitate real-world meetings and facilities. The
Quaestores are financial officers, given their sole power is to administer
funds.

And the Tribunes? The mystery of their place within our society can likewise
be found spelled out in the Constitution. They are not even capable of
issuing their own edicta, and no mention is made of them broadly advancing
Nova Roma's mission or participating in the administration of the legal
system (although I see the latter as an omission that should be corrected).
Indeed, their exclusive (and arguably most important) function is listed
first; to protect the Constitution from being violated.

Naturally, this is not a comprehensive nor exhaustive listing of all the
various powers of the magistrates. Most have various administrative and
other functions also described in the Constitution, and many have (or will
have) their powers specifically defined by Law. But the general roles of
each magistrate are there for all to see, plain as day, in the powers they
possess.

Valete,

Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
Consul

"For Gracchus, hatred of the Patrician class is a profession, and not such a
bad one." (Crassus in the film "Spartacus")

email: germanicus@--------
AIM: Flavius Vedius
www: http://mediatlantica.novaroma.org

Subject:	[novaroma] Length of Elections
From:	"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@-------->
Date:	Tue, 6 Feb 2001 13:32:00 -0500

Fl Vedius Germanicus novaromanis S.P.D.,

It occurs to me that our elections and other votes do not have to take quite
so long as they do currently. The original intention for the duration of our
votes was to make sure that no one missed a vote because they didn't check
their email on a given day. But perhaps we have erred too far on the side of
caution.

I've asked for the voting trends from the last three elections, and it seems
that there was usually an initial surge of votes which tapered off after 3-4
days to a steady trickle.

Right now, votes in the Comitia Plebis and Comitia Populi have to last at
least 8 days, and votes in the Comitia Centuriata have to last at least 16
days! (At least, once the Collegium Pontificum gets around to defining our
nundinae for us...)

What do folks think? Could we trim some of the time from our voting periods?
I think it would certainly be nicer not to have an endless stream of one
vote hot on the heels of another...

Vale,

Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
Consul

"For Gracchus, hatred of the Patrician class is a profession, and not such a
bad one." (Crassus in the film "Spartacus")

email: germanicus@--------
AIM: Flavius Vedius
www: http://mediatlantica.novaroma.org

Subject:	[novaroma] Length of Elections
From:	Mike Macnair <MikeMacnair@-------->
Date:	Tue, 6 Feb 2001 15:41:16 -0500

Salvete!

I would wish to be cautious about shortening elections, because though it's
not that common, citizens do from time to time commit venial errors in
voting, e.g. transposition typos or o/0 errors. So we need time for

(1) it takes about 24 hours for people to get moving: the "initial surge"
is days 2,3,4 in the most recent elections

(2) the rogatores check and post invalid voter codes

(3) about another 24 (or perhaps 48) hours for citizens affected to see and
sort out the errors

giving about 6-7 days in all. Of course, we could take the view that if
citizens inadvertently cast invalid votes, that's tough; or we could re-set
up the Cista so that invalid votes produce an immediate error message.

Valete,

M. Mucius Scaevola Magister

Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Length of Elections
From:	"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@-------->
Date:	Tue, 6 Feb 2001 16:03:28 -0500

Salve;

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Macnair [mailto:MikeMacnair@--------]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 15:41
>
> giving about 6-7 days in all. Of course, we could take the view that if
> citizens inadvertently cast invalid votes, that's tough; or we could
re-set
> up the Cista so that invalid votes produce an immediate error message.

Actually I really like that last option. It would also, I'm sure, help the
rogatores not having to weed out invalid votes.

Vale,

Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
Consul

"For Gracchus, hatred of the Patrician class is a profession, and not such a
bad one." (Crassus in the film "Spartacus")

email: germanicus@--------
AIM: Flavius Vedius
www: http://mediatlantica.novaroma.org