Subject:	[novaroma] Patroni et clientes -Another perspective
From:	"Oppius Flaccus Severus" <oppiusflaccus@-------->
Date:	Fri, 6 Apr 2001 17:27:37 -0700

Salvete Quiritibus;

-----Original Message-----
From: loos [mailto:loos]On Behalf Of Michel
Sent: Friday, April 06, 2001 3:46 PM
To: novaroma@--------
Subject: Re: Patroni et clientes (was Re: Re:[novaroma] Keeping citizens
interested)


"S. Apollonius Draco" wrote:
>
> Salve Luci Corneli,
>
> (snipped)

<snipped further, OFS>

Lucius Cornelius Sulla originally writes:
> > try to rectify them as quickly as they are presented to me. But, I
> > think a way to overcome part of this is through the establishment of a
> > time honored Roman tradition of patron/client relationship. I am not
> > saying that we should follow every aspect of what it was like in
> > ancient
> > rome..but more like a tutelage. Where a newer member of Nova Roma is
> > taken under the wing of an "old-timer" and is taught what being in NR
> > is
> > about, how the political system works, and why it works that
> > way....etc. Because, I am of the opinion that once us old-timers are
> > no
> > longer in office it will be held by a newer generation, and I think it
> > would be better to give them training on how NR works, and why NR works
> > the way it does, than to leave our newer citizens on their own to drift
> > and not have the guidance of our learned citizens.
>

S. Apollonius Draco respondit:
> While I think this is a good idea on its face, and would work just fine in
> an ideal world (as communism would work in an ideal world), I'm afraid this
> will inevitably result in mass corruption. Imagine a new citizen coming
> under the tutelage of an influential person in NR, and being told lies, and
> promised easy promotions if he supports his patron in this and that - or
> else, expulsion, because that patron is so influential he could kill that
> new citizen's public life. A patron-client-relationship should be based on
> trust, and true trust is a very rare thing in this world, and it is even
> more rare on the internet.

Manius Villius Limitanus respondit:
That is exactly how it worked in Old Rome: large scale
corruption+immense power for the patrons. The worst possible world.
Seems the big guys which stayed are mostly admirers of all what Old Rome
had worst: Worst period (Sulla dictature), worst organisation
(Patron/Client).

Makes us regret even more the best of us who did leave a month ago.

OFS: respondit:
Well, here we go again. We have Lucius Cornelius putting forth
a suggestion on actually utilizing a physical Roman tradition,
and we have the usual suspects popping out of the woodwork
to tear it down; with the usual emotive terminology such as 'worst,'
'big guys,' 'communism' and the like. Why are the ones who left
the 'best' of us Marce? Just because you agreed with them? Just because
their idealized notion of a particular Roma they wanted were
most closely with your own avowed ideals?
Does this mean that those who do stay and actually work many
hours a day for the betterment of Nova Roma are 'worse' than those
who pack up and leave in a fit of rage because they want
to find their own sandbox instead of playing in ours?

Perhaps we can discuss the original idea further for a few minutes. Getting
back to what the original context was, we were discussing citizenship
involvement and having those that have actually been around a while,
and actually do physical work for Nova Roma sitting around silent for
weeks on end while real projects, topics and issues are discussed and
then pop up for a minute to sling arrows.

There are those of us that are ready
to back away from any tradition that we don't 'like,' or approve
of. The fact is, that though there were abuses then, (as there
are abuses now,) there were positive things that came from such
relationships as well. How do we think that Roma turned out so
many able administrators? Was it accidental? No. Roma established
a tradition and those that *knew* and *accomplished things,* were
those that taught.

The teaching was typically done in a client/patron relationship.
Did this mean that it was blind mutual support all the time? No.
Though, certainly one could look for (and in some cases find,)
abuses, it was not always this way. There was tradition, teaching,
and support.

It depends on what one's goals are. If one seeks politics, one
should learn from those who are master politicians. If one seeks
learning in the arts and sciences, then one goes to study under
a great artist. In short, one could think of 'clientage' as
'tutelage,' or journeymanship. It is in this context that the
issue should be addressed. Roma Mater was not perfect, and
NR is not perfect either. The further we continually run away
from our spiritual heritage, the worst off we'll be.

I for one, ask that we work a little less hard on sanitizing
Roma, and more towards looking at our ancient traditions
that can be beneficial when used properly. The notion of
'patronage' used in movies like the "Godfather" are only a
negative portrayal of the worst aspects. Part of our stated
object as a micronation is to take the 'best of Roma.'
To me, this can also mean taking the best from many if not
*all* of our great traditions.

In closing, I think that though the suggestions put forth by
Tribune Labienus are also very good ones -scriba positions
are typically very limited in number. I agree that these
positions are helpful, but given the nature of things in NR,
they do not always afford much direct
opportunity to learn directly from those most worthy of learning
from. It is not, however a requirement of patron-client
that it be in any way an 'unequal' transaction. It cannot
be only mutually beneficial, but the patron learns much
from the client as well.

Let's look at the benefits and consider the possibilities
of establishing Roma's next generation of leaders.

Bene valete,
Oppius Flaccus Severus, Legatus America Boreoccidentalis Major
Sacerdos Neptunus




<snipped>




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Patroni et clientes -Another perspective
From:	"Quintus Sertorius" <quintus-sertorius@-------->
Date:	Fri, 6 Apr 2001 19:18:40 -0500

Very insightful!

QS

----- Original Message -----
From: "Oppius Flaccus Severus" <oppiusflaccus@-------->
To: <novaroma@-------->
Sent: Friday, April 06, 2001 7:27 PM
Subject: [novaroma] Patroni et clientes -Another perspective


> Salvete Quiritibus;
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: loos [mailto:loos]On Behalf Of Michel
> Sent: Friday, April 06, 2001 3:46 PM
> To: novaroma@--------
> Subject: Re: Patroni et clientes (was Re: Re:[novaroma] Keeping citizens
> interested)
>
>
> "S. Apollonius Draco" wrote:
> >
> > Salve Luci Corneli,
> >
> > (snipped)
>
> <snipped further, OFS>
>
> Lucius Cornelius Sulla originally writes:
> > > try to rectify them as quickly as they are presented to me. But, I
> > > think a way to overcome part of this is through the establishment of
a
> > > time honored Roman tradition of patron/client relationship. I am not
> > > saying that we should follow every aspect of what it was like in
> > > ancient
> > > rome..but more like a tutelage. Where a newer member of Nova Roma is
> > > taken under the wing of an "old-timer" and is taught what being in NR
> > > is
> > > about, how the political system works, and why it works that
> > > way....etc. Because, I am of the opinion that once us old-timers are
> > > no
> > > longer in office it will be held by a newer generation, and I think
it
> > > would be better to give them training on how NR works, and why NR
works
> > > the way it does, than to leave our newer citizens on their own to
drift
> > > and not have the guidance of our learned citizens.
> >
>
> S. Apollonius Draco respondit:
> > While I think this is a good idea on its face, and would work just fine
in
> > an ideal world (as communism would work in an ideal world), I'm afraid
this
> > will inevitably result in mass corruption. Imagine a new citizen coming
> > under the tutelage of an influential person in NR, and being told lies,
and
> > promised easy promotions if he supports his patron in this and that - or
> > else, expulsion, because that patron is so influential he could kill
that
> > new citizen's public life. A patron-client-relationship should be based
on
> > trust, and true trust is a very rare thing in this world, and it is even
> > more rare on the internet.
>
> Manius Villius Limitanus respondit:
> That is exactly how it worked in Old Rome: large scale
> corruption+immense power for the patrons. The worst possible world.
> Seems the big guys which stayed are mostly admirers of all what Old Rome
> had worst: Worst period (Sulla dictature), worst organisation
> (Patron/Client).
>
> Makes us regret even more the best of us who did leave a month ago.
>
> OFS: respondit:
> Well, here we go again. We have Lucius Cornelius putting forth
> a suggestion on actually utilizing a physical Roman tradition,
> and we have the usual suspects popping out of the woodwork
> to tear it down; with the usual emotive terminology such as 'worst,'
> 'big guys,' 'communism' and the like. Why are the ones who left
> the 'best' of us Marce? Just because you agreed with them? Just because
> their idealized notion of a particular Roma they wanted were
> most closely with your own avowed ideals?
> Does this mean that those who do stay and actually work many
> hours a day for the betterment of Nova Roma are 'worse' than those
> who pack up and leave in a fit of rage because they want
> to find their own sandbox instead of playing in ours?
>
> Perhaps we can discuss the original idea further for a few minutes.
Getting
> back to what the original context was, we were discussing citizenship
> involvement and having those that have actually been around a while,
> and actually do physical work for Nova Roma sitting around silent for
> weeks on end while real projects, topics and issues are discussed and
> then pop up for a minute to sling arrows.
>
> There are those of us that are ready
> to back away from any tradition that we don't 'like,' or approve
> of. The fact is, that though there were abuses then, (as there
> are abuses now,) there were positive things that came from such
> relationships as well. How do we think that Roma turned out so
> many able administrators? Was it accidental? No. Roma established
> a tradition and those that *knew* and *accomplished things,* were
> those that taught.
>
> The teaching was typically done in a client/patron relationship.
> Did this mean that it was blind mutual support all the time? No.
> Though, certainly one could look for (and in some cases find,)
> abuses, it was not always this way. There was tradition, teaching,
> and support.
>
> It depends on what one's goals are. If one seeks politics, one
> should learn from those who are master politicians. If one seeks
> learning in the arts and sciences, then one goes to study under
> a great artist. In short, one could think of 'clientage' as
> 'tutelage,' or journeymanship. It is in this context that the
> issue should be addressed. Roma Mater was not perfect, and
> NR is not perfect either. The further we continually run away
> from our spiritual heritage, the worst off we'll be.
>
> I for one, ask that we work a little less hard on sanitizing
> Roma, and more towards looking at our ancient traditions
> that can be beneficial when used properly. The notion of
> 'patronage' used in movies like the "Godfather" are only a
> negative portrayal of the worst aspects. Part of our stated
> object as a micronation is to take the 'best of Roma.'
> To me, this can also mean taking the best from many if not
> *all* of our great traditions.
>
> In closing, I think that though the suggestions put forth by
> Tribune Labienus are also very good ones -scriba positions
> are typically very limited in number. I agree that these
> positions are helpful, but given the nature of things in NR,
> they do not always afford much direct
> opportunity to learn directly from those most worthy of learning
> from. It is not, however a requirement of patron-client
> that it be in any way an 'unequal' transaction. It cannot
> be only mutually beneficial, but the patron learns much
> from the client as well.
>
> Let's look at the benefits and consider the possibilities
> of establishing Roma's next generation of leaders.
>
> Bene valete,
> Oppius Flaccus Severus, Legatus America Boreoccidentalis Major
> Sacerdos Neptunus
>
>
>
>
> <snipped>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Old Business II: Resignation Edict
From:	"Oppius Flaccus Severus" <oppiusflaccus@-------->
Date:	Fri, 6 Apr 2001 17:48:23 -0700

Salvete Quiritibus;

This appears at least to this civis as a tight piece of
legislation. Also, surprisingly lenient given the serious
of the act of resignation.

Excellent job on the proposed legislation!

Bene valete,
Oppius Flaccus Severus, Legatus America Boreoccidentalis Major
Sacerdos Neptunus
-----Original Message-----
From: Flavius Vedius Germanicus [mailto:germanicus@--------]
Sent: Friday, April 06, 2001 11:50 AM
To: novaroma@--------
Subject: [novaroma] Old Business II: Resignation Edict


Flavius Vedius Germanicus novaromanis S.P.D.

As I mentioned in my previous email, this is the second of the measures
which were supposed to have been voted on in the comitia last year, but for
whatever reason were not. I am including it here to allow for easier
discussion. I intend to include it in the next vote of the Comitia, which
right now I am penciling in for June or July (barring any emergencies that
need attention).

-----

<snipped>



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Patroni et clientes
From:	QFabiusMax@--------
Date:	Fri, 6 Apr 2001 21:01:48 EDT

In a message dated 4/6/2001 3:44:01 PM Pacific Daylight Time, loos@--------
writes:

<< That is exactly how it worked in Old Rome: large scale
corruption+immense power for the patrons. The worst possible world.
Seems the big guys which stayed are mostly admirers of all what Old Rome
had worst: Worst period (Sulla dictature), worst organization
(Patron/Client).

Makes us regret even more the best of us who did leave a month ago.<<

Salve Manius Villius Limitanus
The best? Don't you mean those who followed your ideals? These people could
not be called the best. Nor can they be called the worst because they
abandoned Rome. Maybe what you should say those with common sense. They saw
that Rome was not working to their liking, and they left because they had
better things to do with their time.
Believe me I can relate. However the one thing that draws back is the chance
that this will be something special, and I a classical historian, will miss
out. That is the promise that Rome holds for me.

As for the Patron/Client relationship, it is still alive today. We call it
mentoring. There is the mentor and the protegee. We also keep it alive
through internships, and apprenticeships.
All work on the same principal. The younger unlearned, learns through the
guidance the older. In return he aids the older when he needs it. In Rome
however, you also had to supply food to the client. We don't have that
problem, here. I have lent money to my "clients" so I suppose that is the
same. However I do not see it as the terrible thing you have made it out to
be. Must be because I see it as a help, and you see it as a problem.

Vale
Q. Fabius Maximus.

Subject:	[novaroma] Appointment of Legatus
From:	V_Praetoria@--------
Date:	Sat, 07 Apr 2001 02:04:15 -0000

I, Pontius Sejanus Marius, I do hereby appoint Iulia Cornelia Gaia
as Legate for the Provinciae of America Austroccidentalis. Her
assistance and faith in the Republic have proven her to be worthy of
the position.

Pontius Sejanus Marius
Propraetor, America Austroccidentalis




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Appointment of Legatus
From:	"L. Cornelius Sulla Felix" <alexious@-------->
Date:	Fri, 06 Apr 2001 19:08:49 -0700

on 4/6/01 7:04 PM, V_Praetoria@-------- at V_Praetoria@--------
wrote:

> I, Pontius Sejanus Marius, I do hereby appoint Iulia Cornelia Gaia
> as Legate for the Provinciae of America Austroccidentalis. Her
> assistance and faith in the Republic have proven her to be worthy of
> the position.
>
> Pontius Sejanus Marius
> Propraetor, America Austroccidentalis
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
Ave,

Congratulations again....Gaia on your re-appointment!!!! :)

I am so pleased!!!

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
Pater




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Appointment of Legatus
From:	"Pompeia Cornelia" <scriba_forum@-------->
Date:	Sat, 07 Apr 2001 02:09:30 -0000

Salvete Omnes:

Congratulations, Iulia Cornelia Gaia, on your continued position of Legate
of America Austrooccidentalis.

You are a great asset to your both Nova Roma and your Provincia.

Valete,
Pompeia Cornelia


>From: V_Praetoria@--------
>Reply-To: novaroma@--------
>To: novaroma@--------
>Subject: [novaroma] Appointment of Legatus
>Date: Sat, 07 Apr 2001 02:04:15 -0000
>
>I, Pontius Sejanus Marius, I do hereby appoint Iulia Cornelia Gaia
>as Legate for the Provinciae of America Austroccidentalis. Her
>assistance and faith in the Republic have proven her to be worthy of
>the position.
>
>Pontius Sejanus Marius
>Propraetor, America Austroccidentalis
>

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	[novaroma] Patrons and Clients: MYOB
From:	gcassiusnerva@--------
Date:	Fri, 6 Apr 2001 22:30:32 EDT

It seems to me that if one citizen enters into a client/patron relationship
with another citizen, that is their own business.

Nerva


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

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Govenors Removed?
From:	gcassiusnerva@--------
Date:	Fri, 6 Apr 2001 22:34:04 EDT

But the bottom line is that her friends did not come through with the votes,
which would have kept her in that job.

Nerva


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




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Patrons and Clients: MYOB
From:	"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@-------->
Date:	Fri, 6 Apr 2001 23:06:50 -0400

Salvete

> -----Original Message-----
> From: gcassiusnerva@-------- [mailto:gcassiusnerva@--------]
> Sent: Friday, April 06, 2001 10:31 PM
>
> It seems to me that if one citizen enters into a client/patron
relationship
> with another citizen, that is their own business.

With all due respect, in Roma Antiqua the patron-client relationship wasn't
a secret affair. Clients and patrons were well and publically known; the
very practice of salutatio (where the client would show up at his patron's
home at dawn to accompany him to the Senate or his others duties in
government) demonstrates that the relationship between patronus and cliens
was hardly "their own business", but something to be flaunted.

Indeed, I would hope and expect that a similar openness would accompany such
a practice in Nova Roma as well; after all, we've seen that often needless
trouble arises when innocent actions are hidden for no good reason. Surely a
patronus would not be ashamed of his cliens, and nor would cliens be ashamed
of their chosen patronus. If otherwise, one wonders why either of them would
choose the other.

Next year in the Forum!

Vale,

Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
Consul

email: germanicus@--------
AIM: Flavius Vedius
ICQ: 106199729
www: http://mediatlantica.novaroma.org




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Patrons and Clients: MYOB
From:	gcassiusnerva@--------
Date:	Fri, 6 Apr 2001 23:40:23 EDT

Salve Consul,

My point was that the relationships citizens enter into are a matter of
their own choice. The discussion looked to me to be about whether or not NR
should have these relationships. But it is not a matter NR as a whole can
decide. It is soley a matter for the individuals involved. Are such
relationships good? Maybe so, maybe no. But whether or not they happen is
not something others can decide, except in their own case.

Nerva


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




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Patrons and Clients: MYOB
From:	"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@-------->
Date:	Fri, 6 Apr 2001 23:40:58 -0400

Salve

> -----Original Message-----
> From: gcassiusnerva@-------- [mailto:gcassiusnerva@--------]
> Sent: Friday, April 06, 2001 11:40 PM
>
> My point was that the relationships citizens enter into are a matter
of
> their own choice.

<snip>

My apologies; I completely agree with your point in that case; if someone
wants to become a cliens or a patronus, it is their choice. But I do think
the point I made is still valid; even if such arrangements are entered into
voluntarily, they are best entered into publically.

Next year in the Forum!

Vale,

Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
Consul

email: germanicus@--------
AIM: Flavius Vedius
ICQ: 106199729
www: http://mediatlantica.novaroma.org




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Codex
From:	=?iso-8859-1?q?Gnaeus=20Salix=20Astur?= <salixastur@-------->
Date:	Sat, 7 Apr 2001 04:35:55 +0200 (CEST)

Salve, romani.

--- Oppius Flaccus Severus <oppiusflaccus@-------->
escribió: > Salvete Quiritibus;
>
> In regards to the Codex, it might be useful to
> engage some of the younger members of NR (perhaps
> ones that are non-voting as of yet,) to act
> as scribae for this project. It would provide
> an invaluable learning opportunity for potential
> future offices, and would also provide a solid
> venue of involvement for those whom think they
> might have no other way of participation.

I'd rather present myself as volunteer, although I
really don'y know whee I should apply to.



=====
Bene Valete!
Gnaeus Salix Astur.
Protocivis romanus.

_______________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Envía mensajes instantáneos y recibe alertas de correo con
Yahoo! Messenger - http://messenger.yahoo.es




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Latin Translation
From:	=?iso-8859-1?q?Gnaeus=20Salix=20Astur?= <salixastur@-------->
Date:	Sat, 7 Apr 2001 04:44:19 +0200 (CEST)

--- Mark A Bird <mark_a_bird@-------->
escribió: > Can anyone help me with a Latin
translation - I
> cannot find a word for Urine
> - which I need for a play I am writing - a comedy in
> fact - greatly
> appreciated...
>
> Marcus Sentius Claudius
>

I¡d think that "urina, urinae" (first declination)
should be correct. I'm no expert, though.


=====
Bene Valete!
Gnaeus Salix Astur.
Protocivis romanus.

_______________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Envía mensajes instantáneos y recibe alertas de correo con
Yahoo! Messenger - http://messenger.yahoo.es




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	[novaroma] Start an Egroup for your Gens
From:	"Quintus Sertorius" <quintus-sertorius@-------->
Date:	Fri, 6 Apr 2001 23:08:27 -0500

7 Apr 2001

Salve All

Good day, I have a suggestion for all Gens Paters/Maters, if you do not already have an egroup for your Gens, please start one by going to this link; http://groups.yahoo.com/start . It has been proven that in NR strong Gens are a great asset. These groups increase our communications, and help us organize. It does not have to be an egroup for your Gens, it can be about any interest concerning Roma that you want to use to contact others through. So, please use the link, and share your egroup with the rest of us!

Vale

Quintus Sertorius

Queastor
Nova Roma
Propraetor
Canada Occidentalis

Join the Main List for Nova Roma
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/novaroma

Join the egroup for Canada Occidentalis
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NR_CanOcc

Join the egroup for the Quintus Sertorius of Old Rome
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sertorii


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




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Latin Translation
From:	"A. Cato" <a.cato@-------->
Date:	Sat, 7 Apr 2001 00:49:03 -0400

Salve Marce Senti: The best I can come up with is: n.urina, f. Urina
Vale, Appius Tullius Marcellus Cato,
Rogator
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark A Bird" <mark_a_bird@-------->
To: <novaroma@-------->
Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2001 8:14 PM
Subject: [novaroma] Latin Translation


> Can anyone help me with a Latin translation - I cannot find a word for
Urine
> - which I need for a play I am writing - a comedy in fact - greatly
> appreciated...
>
> Marcus Sentius Claudius
>
>
>
> **********************************************************************
> This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
> intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
> are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
> the Network Administrator on +61 3 9667 6699.
>
> This footnote also confirms that this email message has been scanned
> for the presence of computer viruses and inappropriate content.
> **********************************************************************
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	Re: Patroni et clientes (was Re: Re:[novaroma] Keeping citizens interested)
From:	LSergAust@--------
Date:	Sat, 7 Apr 2001 01:13:37 EDT

On 4/6/01 5:46 PM Michel (loos@--------) wrote:

>
>That is exactly how it worked in Old Rome: large scale
>corruption+immense power for the patrons. The worst possible world.
>Seems the big guys which stayed are mostly admirers of all what Old Rome
>had worst: Worst period (Sulla dictature), worst organisation
>(Patron/Client).
>
>Makes us regret even more the best of us who did leave a month ago.

Manius Villius Limitanus:

This is the second time you have made this preposterous statement. One
can only think that you must be looking for excuses to repeat it because
you are trolling for a response. Let me oblige so that you won't have to
keep finding excuses to repeat that assertion ad infinitum.

To assert that those who would despise their sacred oaths, abandon their
duty posts, and desert their friends and compatriots, all because some
things were not going entirely the way they wanted, can be described as
"the best of us" is ludicrous. If those were the actions of "the best of
us," we would be in a sorry state indeed. I thought highly of many of
those people until they showed their true colors. The best of us? Don't
make me laugh. In the old days, we would all have taken staves and beaten
them to death for desertion.

On the other hand, if you are so certain that "the best of us" are gone,
why are you still here?

Lucius Sergius Australicus



certe, Toto, sentio nos in Kansate non iam adesse.

(You know, Toto, I have a feeling we're not in Kansas anymore.)




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Taxes
From:	"Lucius Mauricius Procopious" <procopious@-------->
Date:	Fri, 6 Apr 2001 23:06:22 -0700

Salvete Omnes,

I'd like to add a few thoughts to the discussion below about taxes. It was
suggested that cives who did not pay taxes be moved to one of the Urban
tribes. In another recent post the issue of keeping cives active was
discussed. I think a joint solution might be possible, one that could be
worked into the resignation lex also. Didn't Roma Mater recognize
non-citizens as Peregrini? Could out of contact cives, non-tax payers, and
individual who resign, be designated Peregrini (SP?). Recognized by Nova
Roma, with a magistrate assigned to deal with this particular group of
people ( I don't recall the title, help anyone?). Perhaps a way to
reconstruct another of Roma's institutions?
As for tax rates, I would prefer to see a system based on macronational GNP
as suggested earlier on the main list. It seems simple and fair. (Could you
please repost that data?) It was something like 3X minimum hourly wage. Or
the average annual income was divided by a certain number to get an annual
tax rate for that macronation.
And I wouldn't be serving the cives of my Province if I didn't lobby for
taxes to be collected and spent locally! (Sure I know we Propraetors are
appointed by the Senate but it never hurts to have the populace behind you.
:) Oh, Oppius, hope you don't feel decimated! )

Next year in the Forum!

Lucius Mauricius Procopious
Propraetor America Boreoccidentalis
(This is an unofficial post for which I assume full responsibility)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
procopious@--------
ICQ# 83516618
*America Boreoccidentalis Mail List
http://www.egroups.com/group/AmBor_Waves
* The Gens Mauricia
http://www.geocities.com/procopious

"Indeed, it is not by the plans of men, but by the hand of God that the
affairs of men are directed; and this men call Fate, not knowing the reason
for what things they see occur; and what seems to be without cause is easy
to call the accident of chance. Still, this is a matter every mortal will
decide for himself according to his taste."
-Procopius of Caesarea (in Palestine) [born c.490/507- died c.560s]
----- Original Message -----
From: "Oppius Flaccus Severus" <oppiusflaccus@-------->
To: <novaroma@-------->
Sent: Friday, April 06, 2001 11:52 AM
Subject: RE: [novaroma] Taxes


> Salvete Consul Germanice et Quiritibus;
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Flavius Vedius Germanicus [mailto:germanicus@--------]
> Sent: Friday, April 06, 2001 9:22 AM
> To: novaroma@--------
> Subject: [novaroma] Taxes
>
>
> Flavius Vedius Germanicus novaromanis S.P.D.
>
> <snipped>
>
> I gathered from the discussion several weeks ago that the general
consensus
> was that taxes (perhaps better thought of as a membership fee) in and of
> themselves were a good and justified thing. Certainly the amount that had
> been suggested by myself (US$12 per year) did not seem excessive to most
> people, especially when compared to membership dues paid to organizations
> such as Mensa ($49 per year) or the SCA ($35 per year). Special rates for
> families, full-time students, and persons living on fixed incomes could of
> course also be adopted.
>
> OFS: Though I've spoken on this before, now seems like as good a time
> as any to revisit. Prior to doing so, I'd like to make clear that it's
> not my intention to do disservice to those on limited incomes, to those
from
> countries with low national incomes. (These are not my terms, just ones
> that have been used in conjunction with this issue before.) Thoughts:
>
> 1-We're non-profit, but that doesn't mean that we have to lower our
> financial standards of membership. Per my response to Senator Audens,
*any*
> organization of import or recognition has a membership fee attached
> to it. Also as mentioned there, I personally think it might be a good
> idea to drop the word 'tax' from these discussions; at least until the
> fundraising system gets off the ground a bit. -'Tax' has too many
> negative connotations. -Just my thoughts.
>
> 2-Though I'm admittedly no expert on managing a non-profit organization,
> I would think that any organization that tries to micromanage exchange
> rates, age-based rates, income-based rates, GDP-based rates and the like
> are in for a whole lot of headache. Compounded with the fact, that banks
> typically charge additional fees for certain types of transactions.
> Setting the financial target too low might create more problems than
> it would solve.
>
> 3-Collection rates should be based on US dollars for now, but we could
> add additional exchange rates in the future as needed. If we adopt
> a credit-card pay option, or use some form of our current 'Pay Pal,'
> then exchange rates are handled automatically by the credit card
> company and member banks. -It would be transparent to the user.
>
> 4-To bypass the whole issue of various payment scales, going back to
> your points regarding maybe a couple of varying grades of memberships.
> This presents the option for cives who wish to spend less, without
> worrying about issues of stigma such as individual income levels and
> so forth. Perhaps the following:
>
> -Golden (life) membership: $1200 (Might include flags, t-shirts,
> coinage, plaques, etc.) The grand daddy of all memberships. Maybe
> even some books/videos and the like could be included.
> This rate is calculated by taking $20/year multiplied by 60
>
> -Silver (annual, individual): $30 (might include a subscription
> the "Eagle," a t-shirt or flag.
>
> -Family (annual)Perhaps to an individual family or as a Gens. $60
> Maybe includes two shirts and some coinage.
>
> -Junior (individual): $20 Maybe a membership certificate and that's
> about it.
>
> My only humble request Quirites; is that if you decide to decimate me
> for suggesting such things, please include alternative suggestions :-)
>
> Initially, the money would be used to fund both a Latin composition
contest
> for high-school students, and to subsidize an archaeological dig at some
> Roman site next year. There would be enough left over for our Land Fund
and
> endowment, and generally start us on the road to fiscal soundness.
>
> OFS: An excellent suggestion! Provides a growth stimulus for us
> and increases our reputation in the international community.
>
> Taxes would not be mandatory for all citizens, but those who declined to
pay
> taxes during a given year would be placed in the urban tribes (along with
> non-voters) and a specially-designated Century (or perhaps a couple of
> Centuries). Thus, everyone would be able to participate in Nova Roman
> society, but the voting clout of those who do not contribute to the
> financial health of the Republic would be limited. Naturally, they would
> still be free to exercise their rights to free speech to influence votes
> and elections...
>
> OFS: I'd go one further: annual dues should be a requirement.
> Those that opt not to pay could be placed on some sort of limited
> probation.
>
> Ultimately, the whole question of taxes, rates, and collection mechanisms
> will be decided by the Senate (as it is their Constitutional duty to do
so),
> but as Consul I thought it would be best to get input from the people
before
> bringing a proposal for a vote.
>
> OFS: Gratias multas. We welcome the chance!
>
> There are, of course, several questions that remained unanswered. Chief
> among them were the problem for persons living outside the U.S. with
regards
> to local conditions, and the lack of steady funds for provincial and local
> governments (since the taxes would all be going to the central government,
> to fund national programs).
>
> OFS: Some of this can be addressed by the membership fees.
> Perhaps similar to macronational funds, there could be a
> 'provincial' fund where monies are allocated evenly across
> provinces after the initial national budget had been satisfied.
>
> From there, additional provincial funds could be raised in a variety
> of ways, including contributions for events or raffles,
> membership drives (perhaps with every new membership
> fee that is raised in a provincial membership drive, $3 or $4
> per new civis could be directed back to the province.
>
> <snipped>
>
> My thought is thus: what if the Senate were to set a "baseline" tax rate
for
> the nation, to which the provincial governors could then add their own
> provincial tax rate? Any taxes levied by the province in excess of the
> baseline would be used to fund the provincial treasury and any activities
> the province might wish to support. Naturally, there would be a limit on
how
> much a given province could add on to the baseline (say, 100%, so I as
> governor of Mediatlantica could only levy a maximum of $24 per year should
I
> wish to use the maximum, while a governor of a less economically well-off
> province could simply go with the baseline and collect $12 per citizen).
>
> In essence, each province sets its own taxes, a set portion of which
> (between half and all, depending on the province) goes to the central
> government. Naturally, we might want to discuss nudging the baseline down
> from $12 to maybe $10 or $8, but that's a detail that can be discussed if
> the general principle is thought sound.
>
> OFS: Has potential given the correct national oversight and
> equitability of application.
>
> Bene valete,
> -Oppius
>
>
> <snipped>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Taxes
From:	Christer Edling <tjalens.h@-------->
Date:	Sat, 7 Apr 2001 11:05:51 +0200

Illustrus Senator and Consul Flavius Vedius Germanicus!

Here are my comments:

>I wanted to revisit the idea of taxes/membership dues/etc., as the subject
>has been mentioned earlier today in a post by Marcus Audens, and it seemed
>like a good thing to take a cue from such a statesman as he.

>I gathered from the discussion several weeks ago that the general consensus
>was that taxes (perhaps better thought of as a membership fee) in and of
>themselves were a good and justified thing. Certainly the amount that had
>been suggested by myself (US$12 per year) did not seem excessive to most
>people, especially when compared to membership dues paid to organizations
>such as Mensa ($49 per year) or the SCA ($35 per year). Special rates for
>families, full-time students, and persons living on fixed incomes could of
>course also be adopted.

I stand behind the Illustrus Propraetor Lucius Mauricius Procopious and
others who have proposed something like: "I would prefer to see a system
based on macronational GNP as suggested earlier on the main list. It seems
simple and fair. (Could you please repost that data?) It was something like
3X minimum hourly wage. Or the average annual income was divided by a
certain number to get an annual tax rate for that macronation."

>Initially, the money would be used to fund both a Latin composition contest
>for high-school students, and to subsidize an archaeological dig at some
>Roman site next year. There would be enough left over for our Land Fund and
>endowment, and generally start us on the road to fiscal soundness.

Those endovours seems good to establish our reputation as a serious entity
would be good, but not all money should go to those purposes.

>Taxes would not be mandatory for all citizens, but those who declined to pay
>taxes during a given year would be placed in the urban tribes (along with
>non-voters) and a specially-designated Century (or perhaps a couple of
>Centuries). Thus, everyone would be able to participate in Nova Roman
>society, but the voting clout of those who do not contribute to the
>financial health of the Republic would be limited. Naturally, they would
>still be free to excercise their rights to free speech to influence votes
>and elections...

I find this a good suggestion. Are we to retain the system for those who
didn't vote in the last elections too. I think so myself!

>Ultimately, the whole question of taxes, rates, and collection mechanisms
>will be decided by the Senate (as it is their Constitutional duty to do so),
>but as Consul I thought it would be best to get input from the people before
>bringing a proposal for a vote.

Exactly!

>There are, of course, several questions that remained unanswered. Chief
>among them were the problem for persons living outside the U.S. with regards
>to local conditions, and the lack of steady funds for provincial and local
>governments (since the taxes would all be going to the central government,
>to fund national programs).
>
>I believe, thanks to an idea spawned in a conversation yesterday with
>Pontius Sejanus Marius, that those two problems can be addressed by the
>application of a single mechanism.
>
>It is, of course, true that a provincial governor is going to have more
>first-hand knowledge of the financial conditions within his or her province.
>Such was recognized in last year's Senatus Consultum which set up a
>framework for taxation (proposed by Quintus Fabius, in which governors made
>recommendations to the Senate regarding what the tax rate should be, and
>then retained 10% of all taxes paid through them). It is also, of course,
>true that as our provincial administrations become more and more developed,
>they will become more and more important and active in the everyday lives of
>our Citizens. Such is already beginning to happen. (Eventually, I would also
>like to see a similar decentralization from the provinces to local chapters,
>but that's another topic...)
>
>My thought is thus: what if the Senate were to set a "baseline" tax rate for
>the nation, to which the provincial governors could then add their own
>provincial tax rate? Any taxes levied by the province in excess of the
>baseline would be used to fund the provincial treasury and any activities
>the province might wish to support. Naturally, there would be a limit on how
>much a given province could add on to the baseline (say, 100%, so I as
>governor of Mediatlantica could only levy a maximum of $24 per year should I
>wish to use the maximum, while a governor of a less economically well-off
>province could simply go with the baseline and collect $12 per citizen).

Good idea! What are we going to "do", with those who don't pay provincial
taxes. Should You be "punished" for not paying taxes or only for not paying
central taxes.

>In essence, each province sets its own taxes, a set portion of which
>(between half and all, depending on the province) goes to the central
>government. Naturally, we might want to discuss nudging the baseline down
>from $12 to maybe $10 or $8, but that's a detail that can be discussed if
>the general principle is thought sound.

It is sound!

>This, I believe, solves a number of problems. It affords a great deal of
>flexibility to the provincial governors in determining taxes (which could be
>adjusted to reflect the economic realities of their provincia) without the
>Senate having to consider each one on a case-by-case basis, affords the
>provinces a means to collect funds that would stay local and support local
>projects (although nothing says funds from the central government couldn't
>be used for provincial projects, depending on the circumstances), and yet
>still provides the central government a means by which national programs
>could be funded.
>
>In short, this seems to afford us a maximum of flexibility and a stable
>income, while at the same time encouraging local activity and autonomy at
>the provincial level.
>
>I encourage any comments, suggestions, etc. on this idea (as well as any
>aspect of the whole question of taxes/membership dues). There's no
>particular rush, as I feel this of all the issues before the public should
>be thoroughly discussed before anything is brought to a vote, but I would
>like to keep the discourse going.
>
>Next year in the Forum!
>
>Vale,
>
>Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
>Consul
>
>email: germanicus@--------
>AIM: Flavius Vedius
>www: http://mediatlantica.novaroma.org
>
>
>
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


Vale

Christer Edling
alias
Caeso Fabius Quintilianus
Quaestor of Nova Roma
Propraetor of Thule
Accensus to Consul Marcus Cassius Julianus

The Opinions expressed are my own,
and not an offical opinion of Nova Roma
************************************************
Join the Main List for Nova Roma
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/novaroma
************************************************
Aut inveniam viam aut faciam
"I'll either find a way or make one"
************************************************
"Do not give in to hate. That leads to the dark side."
************************************************
SHAMALI SALUKIS
************************************************
CAMELOT ROLEPLAYING WORKSHOP
Robert Andersson & Christer Edling
************************************************
IF GAMES - If reality was different!
Markus Sundbom & Christer Edling
************************************************
MAIN E-MAIL ADDRESS: tjalens.h@--------
************************************************
PRIVATE PHONE: +90 - 10 09 10
DOG BOARDING HOUSE PHONE: +90 - 503 56
MOBILE: +70 - 643 88 80



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Taxes
From:	lsicinius@--------
Date:	Sat, 07 Apr 2001 12:52:21 -0000

--- In novaroma@--------, "Lucius Mauricius Procopious" <procopious@h...>
wrote:
> Salvete Omnes,
>
> I'd like to add a few thoughts to the discussion below about taxes.
It was
> suggested that cives who did not pay taxes be moved to one of the Urban
> tribes. In another recent post the issue of keeping cives active was
> discussed. I think a joint solution might be possible, one that could be
> worked into the resignation lex also. Didn't Roma Mater recognize
> non-citizens as Peregrini? Could out of contact cives, non-tax
payers, and
> individual who resign, be designated Peregrini (SP?). Recognized by Nova
> Roma, with a magistrate assigned to deal with this particular group of
> people ( I don't recall the title, help anyone?). Perhaps a way to
> reconstruct another of Roma's institutions?

In Roma Anitquita when the Censores placed Citizens into thier classes
this was not just done for voting reasons. Your Class also reflected
how much taxes you were able to contribute to the treasury. Your
policital power was based on how much you contributed to the state in
taxes In the earliest days service in the army was based on how well
you could equip yourself, and was also reflected in your class
assignment so again we see policital power meted out acording to how
much service the citizen could give the state. Those who couldn't
afford to pay any taxes or arm themselves were placed in the Capite
Censi, the "head count" and belonged to no class. They were all
grouped into a single century. The Censores also had the power to
reassign a citizen to a different tribe, and could punish those who
failed to live up to thier obligations by placing them in an urban
tribe and limiting thier policital power. The is ample precedent for
the plan to limit the voting strength of those who fail to pay thier
taxes. It upholds the mos maiorum.

> As for tax rates, I would prefer to see a system based on
macronational GNP
> as suggested earlier on the main list. It seems simple and fair.
(Could you
> please repost that data?) It was something like 3X minimum hourly
wage. Or
> the average annual income was divided by a certain number to get an
annual
> tax rate for that macronation.

http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/indexgeo.html

> And I wouldn't be serving the cives of my Province if I didn't lobby for
> taxes to be collected and spent locally! (Sure I know we Propraetors are
> appointed by the Senate but it never hurts to have the populace
behind you.

SNIP

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Oppius Flaccus Severus" <oppiusflaccus@-------->
> To: <novaroma@-------->
> Sent: Friday, April 06, 2001 11:52 AM
> Subject: RE: [novaroma] Taxes
>
>
> > Salvete Consul Germanice et Quiritibus;
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Flavius Vedius Germa--------s [mailto:germa--------s@--------] > > Sent: Friday, April 06, 2001 9:22 AM
> > To: novaroma@--------
> > Subject: [novaroma] Taxes
> >
> >
> > Flavius Vedius Germanicus novaromanis S.P.D.
> >
> > <snipped>
> >
> > I gathered from the discussion several weeks ago that the general
> consensus
> > was that taxes (perhaps better thought of as a membership fee) in
and of
> > themselves were a good and justified thing. Certainly the amount
that had
> > been suggested by myself (US$12 per year) did not seem excessive
to most
> > people, especially when compared to membership dues paid to
organizations
> > such as Mensa ($49 per year) or the SCA ($35 per year). Special
rates for
> > families, full-time students, and persons living on fixed incomes
could of
> > course also be adopted.
> >
> > OFS: Though I've spoken on this before, now seems like as good a time
> > as any to revisit. Prior to doing so, I'd like to make clear that it's
> > not my intention to do disservice to those on limited incomes, to
those
> from
> > countries with low national incomes. (These are not my terms, just
ones
> > that have been used in conjunction with this issue before.) Thoughts:
> >
> > 1-We're non-profit, but that doesn't mean that we have to lower our
> > financial standards of membership. Per my response to Senator
Audens,
> *any*
> > organization of import or recognition has a membership fee attached
> > to it. Also as mentioned there, I personally think it might be a
good
> > idea to drop the word 'tax' from these discussions; at least
until the
> > fundraising system gets off the ground a bit. -'Tax' has too many
> > negative connotations. -Just my thoughts.
> >
> > 2-Though I'm admittedly no expert on managing a non-profit
organization,
> > I would think that any organization that tries to micromanage
exchange
> > rates, age-based rates, income-based rates, GDP-based rates and
the like
> > are in for a whole lot of headache.

No. Setting a rate structure based on GDP is simple. Since the United
States has the highest GDP it would be assigned a value of 1. Then you
Take the GDP per capita of the Provincia you want to assign the rate
for and divide it by the US GDP per capita giving a percentage of the
US GDP. If the Provincia of Antartica's GDP per capita was 75% of the
US then it's rate would be .75 and if the tax were 12 US Dollars the
Antartic tax would be .75 times 12 or 9 US Dollars. Anyone with a
caculator could do the math in an hour or so for all the provinces. In
Antiquita the Censores were elected every five years, and in effect
set the rates when they let out the tax collecting contracts to the
Publicani, so it would be in keeping with the mos maiorum to adjust
the provincial rates every five years. An hours work every five years
isn't much of a headache!

> > Compounded with the fact, that banks
> > typically charge additional fees for certain types of transactions.
> > Setting the financial target too low might create more problems than
> > it would solve.
> >
> > 3-Collection rates should be based on US dollars for now, but we could
> > add additional exchange rates in the future as needed. If we adopt
> > a credit-card pay option, or use some form of our current 'Pay Pal,'
> > then exchange rates are handled automatically by the credit card
> > company and member banks. -It would be transparent to the user.
> >

The Exchange rates are a problem. This could be partially solved by
setting up a separate account in Europe, and collecting the taxes in
that area in Euros. Since we are discussing an archaeological dig and
this would more than likely occur in Europe having a Euro account
would save us the inital exchange in sending the money to the US and a
second exchange in sending it back to Europe for the dig.

> > 4-To bypass the whole issue of various payment scales, going back to
> > your points regarding maybe a couple of varying grades of
memberships.
> > This presents the option for cives who wish to spend less, without
> > worrying about issues of stigma such as individual income levels and
> > so forth. Perhaps the following:
> >
> > -Golden (life) membership: $1200 (Might include flags, t-shirts,
> > coinage, plaques, etc.) The grand daddy of all memberships.
Maybe
> > even some books/videos and the like could be included.
> > This rate is calculated by taking $20/year multiplied by 60
> >
> > -Silver (annual, individual): $30 (might include a subscription
> > the "Eagle," a t-shirt or flag.
> >
> > -Family (annual)Perhaps to an individual family or as a Gens. $60
> > Maybe includes two shirts and some coinage.
> >
> > -Junior (individual): $20 Maybe a membership certificate and that's
> > about it.
> >
> > My only humble request Quirites; is that if you decide to decimate me
> > for suggesting such things, please include alternative suggestions :-)
> >
> > Initially, the money would be used to fund both a Latin composition
> contest
> > for high-school students, and to subsidize an archaeological dig
at some
> > Roman site next year. There would be enough left over for our Land
Fund
> and
> > endowment, and generally start us on the road to fiscal soundness.
> >
> > OFS: An excellent suggestion! Provides a growth stimulus for us
> > and increases our reputation in the international community.
> >
> > Taxes would not be mandatory for all citizens, but those who
declined to
> pay
> > taxes during a given year would be placed in the urban tribes
(along with
> > non-voters) and a specially-designated Century (or perhaps a couple of
> > Centuries). Thus, everyone would be able to participate in Nova Roman
> > society, but the voting clout of those who do not contribute to the
> > financial health of the Republic would be limited. Naturally, they
would
> > still be free to exercise their rights to free speech to influence
votes
> > and elections...
> >
> > OFS: I'd go one further: annual dues should be a requirement.
> > Those that opt not to pay could be placed on some sort of limited
> > probation.
> >
> > Ultimately, the whole question of taxes, rates, and collection
mechanisms
> > will be decided by the Senate (as it is their Constitutional duty
to do
> so),
> > but as Consul I thought it would be best to get input from the people
> before
> > bringing a proposal for a vote.
> >
> > OFS: Gratias multas. We welcome the chance!
> >
> > There are, of course, several questions that remained unanswered.
Chief
> > among them were the problem for persons living outside the U.S. with
> regards
> > to local conditions, and the lack of steady funds for provincial
and local
> > governments (since the taxes would all be going to the central
government,
> > to fund national programs).
> >
> > OFS: Some of this can be addressed by the membership fees.
> > Perhaps similar to macronational funds, there could be a
> > 'provincial' fund where monies are allocated evenly across
> > provinces after the initial national budget had been satisfied.
> >
> > From there, additional provincial funds could be raised in a variety
> > of ways, including contributions for events or raffles,
> > membership drives (perhaps with every new membership
> > fee that is raised in a provincial membership drive, $3 or $4
> > per new civis could be directed back to the province.
> >
> > <snipped>
> >
> > My thought is thus: what if the Senate were to set a "baseline"
tax rate
> for
> > the nation, to which the provincial governors could then add their own
> > provincial tax rate? Any taxes levied by the province in excess of the
> > baseline would be used to fund the provincial treasury and any
activities
> > the province might wish to support. Naturally, there would be a
limit on
> how
> > much a given province could add on to the baseline (say, 100%, so I as
> > governor of Mediatlantica could only levy a maximum of $24 per
year should
> I
> > wish to use the maximum, while a governor of a less economically
well-off
> > province could simply go with the baseline and collect $12 per
citizen).
> >
> > In essence, each province sets its own taxes, a set portion of which
> > (between half and all, depending on the province) goes to the central
> > government. Naturally, we might want to discuss nudging the
baseline down
> > from $12 to maybe $10 or $8, but that's a detail that can be
discussed if
> > the general principle is thought sound.
> >
> > OFS: Has potential given the correct national oversight and
> > equitability of application.

If there is only one National rate this would handicap the propraetors
of provinces with lower incomes. After sending the National Tax they
would have problems raising the local tax simply because thier
citizens couldn't afford to pay as much. If the taxes are set by GDP
rates then the propraetors would have more leeway to raise funds for
provincial activities.

In Roma Antiquita the taxes were collected by the Publicani at the
provincial level and then sent to Roma. It would be in keeping with
the mos maiorum to leave the actual collecting of the taxes at the
provincial level, though I think few citizens would want the Publicani
involved. I favor that the Senate set the rates based on the GDP
formula I discussed earlier, then the propraetors add the local
ammount. Then a single tax would be collected by the Propraetor (Or
his/her Legate), who would then forward the National tax to Nova Roma.

This does bring up another problem. Some Provinces are suffering from
the actions of past governers who weren't very active. My Provincia
has NO government. No Propraetor, No legates, No website, No mailing
list, Nothing! (The only reason I didn't offer my services was I've
only been a citizen a little over 3 months and therefore can't meet
the requirements the Senate has set for 9 months as a citizen and 6
months experence in another office.) Perhaps leaving the collection of
taxes up to the Provinces would make the Senate a little more diligent
in thier duty to oversee the provinces and prevent a future recurrance
of the sad state of affairs that exists in America Austrorientalis
(among other provinces) today.

Lucius Sicinius Drusus




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Taxes
From:	Marcus Octavius Germanicus <haase@-------->
Date:	Sat, 7 Apr 2001 08:23:39 -0500 (CDT)

Salve Luci Maurici,

> As for tax rates, I would prefer to see a system based on macronational GNP
> as suggested earlier on the main list. It seems simple and fair. (Could you
> please repost that data?) It was something like 3X minimum hourly wage. Or
> the average annual income was divided by a certain number to get an annual
> tax rate for that macronation.

I had suggested earlier that the rate be set at either one one-thousandth
or one two-thousandth of the average working person's annual income in
each country. For the United States, this would result in annual
membership dues of either 12 or 24 dollars (approximately), depending
one whether we choose the higher or or lower multiplier. (Average
annual income here is about $25,000).

The only difficulty with this scheme is that there will be a lot of
research needed to find the appropriate figures for each country, and
making sure that the equivalent numbers are used everywhere. (When
I did a search on this earlier, I found that some of the average
income statistics were based upon working people only, some were
per-family, some included the unemployed, etcetera).

(I also think we should avoid the term "tax", this will get us in
trouble with the IRS.)

Vale, Octavius.

--
M. Octavius Germanicus
Propraetor, Lacus Magni
Curator Araneum et Senator




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	[novaroma] Patroni et clientes
From:	lsicinius@--------
Date:	Sat, 07 Apr 2001 13:43:47 -0000

> That is exactly how it worked in Old Rome: large scale
> corruption+immense power for the patrons. The worst possible world.
> Seems the big guys which stayed are mostly admirers of all what Old Rome
> had worst: Worst period (Sulla dictature), worst organisation
> (Patron/Client).
>
> Makes us regret even more the best of us who did leave a month ago.
>
> Manius Villius Limitanus
>

Salvete,

The "corruption" that existed in Roma Antiquita would have been there
if the Patron/Client relationship hadn't existed. The modern notion
that it's wrong to profit from public office has only existed for the
last 200 years or so. What you are calling "corruption" was the norm,
and existed before Rome was founded, and continued long after Rome
fell from power.

The problem wasn't the Patron/Client relationship, it was an entirely
different outlook on public affairs, One in which the dishonarable act
wasn't profiting from public office, but in going too far in
profiting. It was a time when it wasn't considered dishonorable to
accept a bribe, but rather dishonorable to take a bribe and fail to
deliver the promised actions.

Patrons didn't just seek Clients to increase thier Auctoritas, but
also to enhance thier Dignitas. A Patron who cheated a Client was
considered to be a despicable person who couldn't be trusted, He
suffered an enormous loss in his Dignitas. Vergil cosigned these
Patrons to the lowest level of the underworld, a region that much like
that of the Christian Hell.

Trying to discredit the Patron/Client relationship will do little more
than encourage secrect deals, while encougaging it will will bring the
actions of Patrons under public scuritiny, where those who abuse the
system will first lose thier Dignitas, then thier Auctoritas, leaving
them despised and powerless.

Valete,
Lucius Sicinius Drusus




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Taxes
From:	lsicinius@--------
Date:	Sat, 07 Apr 2001 13:54:11 -0000

--- In novaroma@--------, Marcus Octavius Germanicus <haase@c...> wrote:
> Salve Luci Maurici,
>
> > As for tax rates, I would prefer to see a system based on
macronational GNP
> > as suggested earlier on the main list. It seems simple and fair.
(Could you
> > please repost that data?) It was something like 3X minimum hourly
wage. Or
> > the average annual income was divided by a certain number to get
an annual
> > tax rate for that macronation.
>
> I had suggested earlier that the rate be set at either one
one-thousandth
> or one two-thousandth of the average working person's annual income in
> each country. For the United States, this would result in annual
> membership dues of either 12 or 24 dollars (approximately), depending
> one whether we choose the higher or or lower multiplier. (Average
> annual income here is about $25,000).
>
> The only difficulty with this scheme is that there will be a lot of
> research needed to find the appropriate figures for each country, and
> making sure that the equivalent numbers are used everywhere. (When
> I did a search on this earlier, I found that some of the average
> income statistics were based upon working people only, some were
> per-family, some included the unemployed, etcetera).
>
> (I also think we should avoid the term "tax", this will get us in
> trouble with the IRS.)
>
> Vale, Octavius.
>
> --
> M. Octavius Germanicus
> Propraetor, Lacus Magni
> Curator Araneum et Senator

Salvete,

The US CIA has allready gathered the data and posted it on the
internet. See

http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/indexgeo.html

Just click on a nation, then economy, and you'll quickly find "GDP -
per capita: purchasing power parity" which is not just average income
but weighted for local cost of living. For example the first entry is
for afganistan where we find the shocking figure of 800 dollars a year!

Valete,
Lucius Sicinius Drusus




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Govenors Removed?
From:	"Marcus Cassius Julianus" <cassius622@-------->
Date:	Sat, 07 Apr 2001 16:54:56 -0000

--- In novaroma@--------, Fortunatus <labienus@t...> wrote:

> This is inaccurate. First, Consul Vedius'[Cassius'] analysis is
flawed. Livia Marcia was not prorogued. This is the same thing as
being removed from office. Yes, it was quite possible, and even
likely, for her to get her job back, but she was removed. Before the
vote, she was a propraetrix. After the vote, she wasn't.

Cassius (still at Mithracon, but using a cool free terminal at the
Yale University Library) replies:

The vote on Livia Marcia was tied. Therefore, the Senate had no
choice
but to vote again on the subject. As I'm no expert on the finer
points
of Roman law, I am not entirely certain if a tied vote left Livia
Marcia *not* a Propraetrix, or simply *acting* Propraetrix until the
vote could be finalized one way or another. As a Senator I certainly
would have had no problem with her continuing in the role until
another vote. A vote, as she was well aware, she'd have won without
difficulty.

Valete,

Marcus Cassius Julianus
Consul




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Egroup Challenge
From:	"Diana Meridia Aurelia" <diana_h@-------->
Date:	Sat, 07 Apr 2001 17:10:58 -0000

Salve Quinte Sertori et Omnes,

All I can say to that is this:
here's to Provincia Germania proudly entering the contest with 31
members to its provincial Egroup and an overall population of
currently 37 (growing every week).

Any challengers ????

Valete,
Diana Meridia Aurelia

Moderatrix NRGermania
Scriba Praetoria
Materfamilias Gentis Meridiae


--- In novaroma@--------, "Quintus Sertorius" <quintus-sertorius@h...>
wrote:
> 5 Apre 2001
>
> Salve All
>
> I recently sent an email to my Provincial egroup proudly
proclaiming to them that our Provincial egroup was the largest in all
NR! This is no longer the case, the largest Provincial egroup is now
the one from America Austroccidentalis with 26 members! WE in Canada
Occidentalis have only 23 on our egroup, but we only have a
Provincial population of 21 though! I am now challenging these other
Provincias, especially those with big Provincial populations, to join
their respective Provincial egroups and lets get involved and knock
off the current Champs America Austroccidentalis!
>
> Vale
>
> Quintus Sertorius
>
> Queastor
> Nova Roma
> Propraetor
> Canada Occidentalis
>
> Join the Main List for Nova Roma
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/novaroma
>
> Join the egroup for Canada Occidentalis
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NR_CanOcc
>
> Join the egroup for the Quintus Sertorius of Old Rome
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sertorii
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Govenors Removed?
From:	lsicinius@--------
Date:	Sat, 07 Apr 2001 17:59:39 -0000

--- In novaroma@--------, "Marcus Cassius Julianus" <cassius622@a...> wrote:
> --- In novaroma@--------, Fortunatus <labienus@t...> wrote:
>
> > This is inaccurate. First, Consul Vedius'[Cassius'] analysis is
> flawed. Livia Marcia was not prorogued. This is the same thing as
> being removed from office. Yes, it was quite possible, and even
> likely, for her to get her job back, but she was removed. Before the
> vote, she was a propraetrix. After the vote, she wasn't.
>
> Cassius (still at Mithracon, but using a cool free terminal at the
> Yale University Library) replies:
>
> The vote on Livia Marcia was tied. Therefore, the Senate had no
> choice
> but to vote again on the subject. As I'm no expert on the finer
> points
> of Roman law, I am not entirely certain if a tied vote left Livia
> Marcia *not* a Propraetrix, or simply *acting* Propraetrix until the
> vote could be finalized one way or another. As a Senator I certainly
> would have had no problem with her continuing in the role until
> another vote. A vote, as she was well aware, she'd have won without
> difficulty.
>
> Valete,
>
> Marcus Cassius Julianus
> Consul

Salvete,

A tied vote? The Senatus Consultum de Ratione Senatus states votes
will be determined by a "shall be decided by majority vote unless
otherwise mandated". Since the action before the Senate was proroguing
Propraetors There wasn't a majority in favor, so it seems the vote was
that Liva Marcia would NOT be prorogued. It may be a good idea to put
a Consulta before the Senate that sets up procedures for a tied vote
however so there will be no future confusion on this matter.

Another point that needs to be cleared up is exactally what the
decession not to prorogue a Propraetor entails. Is it immediate
removal from office? This would then mean that a provincia was to be
left without a Propraetor untill the Senate decided on the
replacement. In Roma Antiquita when a Propraetor wasn't proguged he
remained in his provincia untill a replacement arrived and releaved him.

Since it isn't desirable that a Provincia be left without a Propraetor
I would suggest that a vote to not prorogue a Propraetor be considered
a vote without prejudice, and that the Senate mearly desired a
different Propraetor, and that the current Propraetor sould retain
office untill the replacement was named. I realize that a case may
arrise where the immediate removal of a Propraetor was nessacary, and
in these cases the vote placed before the Senate would be for removal,
not a regular vote on proroguing the term of office.

Valete,
Lucius Sicinius Drusus




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: Egroup Challenge
From:	"Lucius Mauricius Procopious" <procopious@-------->
Date:	Sat, 7 Apr 2001 11:20:04 -0700

Salvete Omnes,
Will the Province with the fewest E-list subscribers be voted out of Nova
Roma? Will there be an immunity challenge? (I deeply apologize for this
Survivor moment) :)

Next year in the Forum!

Lucius Mauricius Procopious
Propraetor America Boreoccidentalis
(This is an unofficial post for which I assume full responsibility)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
procopious@--------
ICQ# 83516618
*America Boreoccidentalis Mail List
http://www.egroups.com/group/AmBor_Waves
* The Gens Mauricia
http://www.geocities.com/procopious

"Indeed, it is not by the plans of men, but by the hand of God that the
affairs of men are directed; and this men call Fate, not knowing the reason
for what things they see occur; and what seems to be without cause is easy
to call the accident of chance. Still, this is a matter every mortal will
decide for himself according to his taste."
-Procopius of Caesarea (in Palestine) [born c.490/507- died c.560s]
----- Original Message -----
From: "Diana Meridia Aurelia" <diana_h@-------->
To: <novaroma@-------->
Sent: Saturday, April 07, 2001 10:10 AM
Subject: [novaroma] Re: Egroup Challenge


> Salve Quinte Sertori et Omnes,
>
> All I can say to that is this:
> here's to Provincia Germania proudly entering the contest with 31
> members to its provincial Egroup and an overall population of
> currently 37 (growing every week).
>
> Any challengers ????
>
> Valete,
> Diana Meridia Aurelia
>
> Moderatrix NRGermania
> Scriba Praetoria
> Materfamilias Gentis Meridiae
>
>
> --- In novaroma@--------, "Quintus Sertorius" <quintus-sertorius@h...>
> wrote:
> > 5 Apre 2001
> >
> > Salve All
> >
> > I recently sent an email to my Provincial egroup proudly
> proclaiming to them that our Provincial egroup was the largest in all
> NR! This is no longer the case, the largest Provincial egroup is now
> the one from America Austroccidentalis with 26 members! WE in Canada
> Occidentalis have only 23 on our egroup, but we only have a
> Provincial population of 21 though! I am now challenging these other
> Provincias, especially those with big Provincial populations, to join
> their respective Provincial egroups and lets get involved and knock
> off the current Champs America Austroccidentalis!
> >
> > Vale
> >
> > Quintus Sertorius
> >
> > Queastor
> > Nova Roma
> > Propraetor
> > Canada Occidentalis
> >
> > Join the Main List for Nova Roma
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/novaroma
> >
> > Join the egroup for Canada Occidentalis
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NR_CanOcc
> >
> > Join the egroup for the Quintus Sertorius of Old Rome
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sertorii
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: Egroup Challenge
From:	"Quintus Sertorius" <quintus-sertorius@-------->
Date:	Sat, 7 Apr 2001 13:08:05 -0500

How do I join!!!

QS


----- Original Message -----
From: "Diana Meridia Aurelia" <diana_h@-------->
To: <novaroma@-------->
Sent: Saturday, April 07, 2001 12:10 PM
Subject: [novaroma] Re: Egroup Challenge


> Salve Quinte Sertori et Omnes,
>
> All I can say to that is this:
> here's to Provincia Germania proudly entering the contest with 31
> members to its provincial Egroup and an overall population of
> currently 37 (growing every week).
>
> Any challengers ????
>
> Valete,
> Diana Meridia Aurelia
>
> Moderatrix NRGermania
> Scriba Praetoria
> Materfamilias Gentis Meridiae
>
>
> --- In novaroma@--------, "Quintus Sertorius" <quintus-sertorius@h...>
> wrote:
> > 5 Apre 2001
> >
> > Salve All
> >
> > I recently sent an email to my Provincial egroup proudly
> proclaiming to them that our Provincial egroup was the largest in all
> NR! This is no longer the case, the largest Provincial egroup is now
> the one from America Austroccidentalis with 26 members! WE in Canada
> Occidentalis have only 23 on our egroup, but we only have a
> Provincial population of 21 though! I am now challenging these other
> Provincias, especially those with big Provincial populations, to join
> their respective Provincial egroups and lets get involved and knock
> off the current Champs America Austroccidentalis!
> >
> > Vale
> >
> > Quintus Sertorius
> >
> > Queastor
> > Nova Roma
> > Propraetor
> > Canada Occidentalis
> >
> > Join the Main List for Nova Roma
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/novaroma
> >
> > Join the egroup for Canada Occidentalis
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NR_CanOcc
> >
> > Join the egroup for the Quintus Sertorius of Old Rome
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sertorii
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: Egroup Challenge
From:	ObsidianBat@--------
Date:	Sat, 7 Apr 2001 14:07:35 EDT

In a message dated 4/7/01 11:15:05 AM Mountain Daylight Time,
diana_h@-------- writes:

<< Salve Quinte Sertori et Omnes,

All I can say to that is this:
here's to Provincia Germania proudly entering the contest with 31
members to its provincial Egroup and an overall population of
currently 37 (growing every week).

Any challengers ????

Valete,
Diana Meridia Aurelia
>>
Salve,
Sorry that my first post is this but I can't help it, YOU GO MOM!!! ;)

Valete
Decimus Meridius Laevinus




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	[novaroma] Appointments in Thule 7th April 2754
From:	Christer Edling <tjalens.h@-------->
Date:	Sat, 7 Apr 2001 21:26:00 +0200

Ex Officio Propraetoris Thulae

Edictum Propraetoricium II
about the appointment of Legati and Scribae

It is a great pleasure for me, Caeso Fabius Quintilianus, to appoint the
following Honorable citizens to official positions within Provincia Thule!
I, as Nova Roma citizens within the Provincia Thule, am proud to see the
Gravitas and Pietas these citizens show!

I. Honorable Legatus Gaius Rubellius Rufus is hereby appointed as Senior
Legatus of Provincia Thule.

II. Honorable Titus Curius Dannicus is hereby appointed as Legatus Regionis
Danicae, (Legate of the Danish Region).

III. Honorable Legatus Gaius Rubellius Rufus is hereby appointed as Legatus
Regionis Norvegicae, (Legate of the Norweigian Region).

IV. Honorable Titus Curius Dannicus is hereby appointed as Scriba with the
title Praefectus Sermonis Thules (Provincial List Moderator, Head of Speech
of Thule).

V. Honorable Titus Octavius Pius is hereby appointed as Scriba with the
title Praeco Aranei Thules (Provincial webmaster, Crier of the Web of
Thule).

VI. Honorable Senior Legatus Gaius Rubellius Rufus, Honorable Legatus Titus
Curius Dannicus and Honorable Consilarius Titus Octavius Pius are hereby
appointed to sit in the Consilium Provinciale Thules.

VII. Above appointed officials are asked to observe that they are bound by
the "Approved Regula (Charter) for the Administration of Thule" as it will
be published on the 15th of April 2001.

VIII. All officials in Provincia Thule are asked to within one week swear
the public oath shown on
http://www.novaroma.org/tabularium/lex99191002.html, using both their Nova
Roman name and within parenthesis their macroworld (real) name. Observe
that the Oath of must include all appointed positions of each cives. The
Oath must be published on the NovaRomaThule List and the Nova Roma Roma
Main List!

IX. This edictum becomes effective immediately.

Given April 7th, in the year of the consulship of Flavius Vedius Germanicus
and Marcus Cassius Iulianus, 2754 AUC.

Caeso Fabius Quintilianus
Propraetor Thules

Vale

Christer Edling
alias
Caeso Fabius Quintilianus
Quaestor of Nova Roma
Propraetor of Thule
Accensus to Consul Marcus Cassius Julianus

The Opinions expressed are my own,
and not an offical opinion of Nova Roma
************************************************
Join the Main List for Nova Roma
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/novaroma
************************************************
Aut inveniam viam aut faciam
"I'll either find a way or make one"
************************************************
"Do not give in to hate. That leads to the dark side."
************************************************
SHAMALI SALUKIS
************************************************
CAMELOT ROLEPLAYING WORKSHOP
Robert Andersson & Christer Edling
************************************************
IF GAMES - If reality was different!
Markus Sundbom & Christer Edling
************************************************
MAIN E-MAIL ADDRESS: tjalens.h@--------
************************************************
PRIVATE PHONE: +90 - 10 09 10
DOG BOARDING HOUSE PHONE: +90 - 503 56
MOBILE: +70 - 643 88 80

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




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Old Business I: Name Change Edict
From:	"S. Apollonius Draco" <hendrik.meuleman@-------->
Date:	Sat, 7 Apr 2001 21:06:25 +0200

Salve Consul Vedi,

> > So while this Edictum is certainly thorough, it's on some points just
not
> > very "user friendly", shall we say.
>
> So what specific changes would you recommend? That's the whole point of
> posting these sorts of things far before the actual vote; to be able to
> adjust them based on input from the people. I had hoped to get a few more
> practical comments than "I don't like it"... :-)

Ok ok, you're right :-). I thought that solely providing documents from a
psychologist or a psychiatrist who declares and signs that the citizen
applying for a name change (gender) truly feels it to be right, ought to be
enough. No fuss with ID cards and possibly confidential data. It would
simplify the procedure, imo, especially for people who are no transsexuals
(i.e. they don't have the visible signs of their experienced gender).

Vale bene!
Draco





Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Taxes
From:	"S. Apollonius Draco" <hendrik.meuleman@-------->
Date:	Sat, 7 Apr 2001 21:13:51 +0200

Salvete omnes et Consul Vedi!

I think the current plan regarding taxation looks pretty well overall, but I
still strongly feel that taxes should be °at least° continental and
preferredly provincial. I don't think a Chinese citizen would like to pay up
for a US organization that can spend the money to make NR grow and sponsor
Roman events in America... meaning the Chinese citizen wouldn't get much
back from what he paid up, except from being placed in a different century.

Perhaps if the taxes were regulated provincially or continentally, cives
would a) be more willing to pay, because they won't have the feeling their
money has "disappeared" b) be less worried about transaction costs and c)
would be able to have more input on what happens with their money. To
regulate all financial stuff, each provincia could have a procurator.
Britannia used to have one, and currently Gallia has one, too (me). This
way, the propraetor wouldn't have to do all the work by himself, and each
province has a relative freedom. A percentage of that taxation should of
course go to the central treasury, but only on the condition that all of NR
all over the world will benefit, and not only a certain regio. For example,
the poll held in Britannia has shown that most of the people over there
didn't like the taxation plan in its current state. Comments on this idea
also appreciated!

Valete bene,
Draco





Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Old Business II: Resignation Edict
From:	"S. Apollonius Draco" <hendrik.meuleman@-------->
Date:	Sat, 7 Apr 2001 21:24:22 +0200

Salve iterum Consul Vedi,

Well, I've come to bother the people once again :).

> EDICTUM CENSORIAL DE CIVITATE EIURANDA
>
>
> RESIGNATION OF CITIZENSHIP IN NOVAROMA
>
> AUGUST 27, 2000

(snipped)

> When a citizen resigns citizenship in Nova Roma, and the resignation
becomes
> official after nine days, the ex-citizen is barred from reapplication and
> reinstatement for a period of six months, effective from the date his or
her
> resignation became official.

Opponents of this edict said that people who °really° want out simply won't
care for this edictum, while people who truly love Roma are being punished
by this. This was and is a non-solution for a non-problem.

> (For example, if a citizen resigned on May 1 2000, and his resignation
> became official on May 9, 2000, he could not be reinstated until November
9,
> 2000)
>

(snipped)

> Senatorial status may be resumed
> at the discretion of both the Senate and of the censores collegially. Gens
> affiliation in all instances remains at the discretion of the pater or
> materfamilias.

Why would the Censores have power over the Senate in this matter? In fact,
they are both Senatores, so even if 18 out of 20 Senatores vote in favour of
said citizen, the two Censores could still prevent that citizen from
returning into the Senate. So I'd scrap the Censores from this paragraph.

> If a citizen resigns, is subsequently reinstated, and resigns a second
time,
> that ex-citizen is barred for two years from reinstatement. Such a citizen
> is furthermore barred from running for any elected public office for two
> years following re-admission, with no recourse.
>
>
> If a citizen resigns, is subsequently reinstated, and resigns a second
time,
> is subsequently reinstated, and resigns a third time, that ex-citizen is
> barred forever from reinstatement. The ex-citizen has despised his
> citizenship and shown contempt for the state: he may never be reinstated
> thereafter.

"Contempt for the state" sounds, and I am sorry to say it, °very°
authoritarian. However, I do think two paragraphs above are better, and
truly offer a solution (for what is still a non-problem anyway) in case some
cives keep leaving and coming back. I'd change the "two years" to six months
though.

(snipped)

Valete bene,
Draco




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Egroups
From:	"S. Apollonius Draco" <hendrik.meuleman@-------->
Date:	Sat, 7 Apr 2001 21:32:13 +0200

Salve Quinte Sertori,

If I may shamelessly use your email to promote my email lists...

NR_Philosophy

Cives, I urge you to join this list if you are somewhat intrested in
philosophy. Right now the list has 24 subscribers but seldomly has any
activity. The conversations that do occur are always being done by the same
persons, while the others sit passively by around the campfire, nodding off.
Revitalize this list, Quirites!

NR_DignitasForum

While this should have been a politico-philosophical forum, it suffers from
chronic emptiness, and it's as silent as the Vasistas Borealis on a windless
day. People who enjoy both philosophical and political debate should head
there!

NR_Iuventas

Mailing list for young Novaromani, only has 5 subscribers thusfar, which is
a very poor outcome. It's intended for youths aged 15-25, with the eventual
purpose of having a Sodalitas Iuventutis one day.

NRGallia_GalliaBelgicaF

The provincial Gaul list in French. People who like the language are also
more than welcome, as are all other francophones in the world (think of
Canada!).

NRGallia_BelgicaBataviaD

The provincial Gaul list in Dutch. As a Legatus of the dutch-speaking region
of Gallia, I strongly recommend all cives from that place to subsrcibe to
this list (of course, people who know the language may also subscribe).


Vale bene,
Draco




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	[novaroma] Clientelism (a general comment)
From:	"S. Apollonius Draco" <hendrik.meuleman@-------->
Date:	Sat, 7 Apr 2001 21:54:17 +0200

Salvete Quirites!

(noooo Quirites, you're not rid of me yet!)




Salve Oppi Flacce,

(snipped)

> OFS: respondit:
> Well, here we go again. We have Lucius Cornelius putting forth
> a suggestion on actually utilizing a physical Roman tradition,
> and we have the usual suspects popping out of the woodwork
> to tear it down; with the usual emotive terminology such as 'worst,'
> 'big guys,' 'communism' and the like.

You are reversing the situation. It's not because my relations with the good
Censor aren't very good that I disagree with this. It's the other way
around, actually. Don't tell me I'm only delivering criticism, because
that's not true. I did constructive things in NR, too, which I'm not going
deeper into right now, but I just wanted to tell you that I'm not a critic
merely for the sake of being one.

> Why are the ones who left
> the 'best' of us Marce? Just because you agreed with them? Just because
> their idealized notion of a particular Roma they wanted were
> most closely with your own avowed ideals?
> Does this mean that those who do stay and actually work many
> hours a day for the betterment of Nova Roma are 'worse' than those
> who pack up and leave in a fit of rage because they want
> to find their own sandbox instead of playing in ours?

With all due respect, you haven't known these people as long and as good as
I did. I take it Manius Villius didn't really know them good just as well.
It may be not his place to judge in a good way about those who left, but I
think it's not your place to judge them in a bad way as well.

> Perhaps we can discuss the original idea further for a few minutes.
Getting
> back to what the original context was, we were discussing citizenship
> involvement and having those that have actually been around a while,
> and actually do physical work for Nova Roma sitting around silent for
> weeks on end while real projects, topics and issues are discussed and
> then pop up for a minute to sling arrows.
>
> There are those of us that are ready
> to back away from any tradition that we don't 'like,' or approve
> of. The fact is, that though there were abuses then, (as there
> are abuses now,) there were positive things that came from such
> relationships as well. How do we think that Roma turned out so
> many able administrators? Was it accidental? No. Roma established
> a tradition and those that *knew* and *accomplished things,* were
> those that taught.
>
> The teaching was typically done in a client/patron relationship.
> Did this mean that it was blind mutual support all the time? No.
> Though, certainly one could look for (and in some cases find,)
> abuses, it was not always this way. There was tradition, teaching,
> and support.

There were positive aspects in slavery as well. I simply think the bad
possibilites in this are outweighing the good ones.

> It depends on what one's goals are. If one seeks politics, one
> should learn from those who are master politicians. If one seeks
> learning in the arts and sciences, then one goes to study under
> a great artist. In short, one could think of 'clientage' as
> 'tutelage,' or journeymanship. It is in this context that the
> issue should be addressed. Roma Mater was not perfect, and
> NR is not perfect either. The further we continually run away
> from our spiritual heritage, the worst off we'll be.

There's a difference between running away and simply taking a different
course. Tutelage is in itself a good thing, and would work quite well in the
real world, but internet communication, as it is based on even more trust,
lends itself to larger forms of abuse than real-world-trust.

> I for one, ask that we work a little less hard on sanitizing
> Roma, and more towards looking at our ancient traditions
> that can be beneficial when used properly. The notion of
> 'patronage' used in movies like the "Godfather" are only a
> negative portrayal of the worst aspects. Part of our stated
> object as a micronation is to take the 'best of Roma.'
> To me, this can also mean taking the best from many if not
> *all* of our great traditions.

Italian culture is an inheritant from Roman culture, but that's besides the
point. Point is; it's hard to have the good things without the bad things on
a certain aspect. If you want to have a car that can drive say past the
speed of sound, you have a great security risk. You can also opt not have
that super fast car at all, to avoid getting (pretty likely) killed in a
crash one day.

(snipped)



Salve Praetor Maxime; scripsisti, inter alia:

>> Must be because I see it as a help, and you see it as a problem. <<

"Help" and "problem" are no oppositons. Help becomes a problem when it
becomes a moral obligation (cfr. "returning the favour" in something the
cliens doesn't like at all).



Salve Nerva,

> It seems to me that if one citizen enters into a client/patron
relationship
> with another citizen, that is their own business.

True, but a newbie can be easy to delude and mislead. This is dangerous.



Salve Senator Australice,

> This is the second time you have made this preposterous statement. One
> can only think that you must be looking for excuses to repeat it because
> you are trolling for a response. Let me oblige so that you won't have to
> keep finding excuses to repeat that assertion ad infinitum.
>

Not so long ago you accused Formosanus of being a crusader; now look what
you're doing.

> To assert that those who would despise their sacred oaths, abandon their
> duty posts, and desert their friends and compatriots, all because some
> things were not going entirely the way they wanted, can be described as
> "the best of us" is ludicrous. If those were the actions of "the best of
> us," we would be in a sorry state indeed. I thought highly of many of
> those people until they showed their true colors. The best of us? Don't
> make me laugh. In the old days, we would all have taken staves and beaten
> them to death for desertion.

Excuse me? Attacking people who aren't here to defend themselves from this
vicious twisting of the truth is a little cheap.

> On the other hand, if you are so certain that "the best of us" are gone,
> why are you still here?

Why don't you add "leave NR, so you can be backstabbed later in the same
fashion"? This sort of anger makes me suspicious, I must say.




Valete bene!
Draco




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Clientelism (a general comment)
From:	gcassiusnerva@--------
Date:	Sat, 7 Apr 2001 16:56:41 EDT

In a message dated 4/7/01 12:59:03 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
hendrik.meuleman@-------- writes:

<<> True, but a newbie can be easy to delude and mislead. This is dangerous.>>


So these newbies need to be protected? Is this the point you are getting at?
If so, it seems to me that most people old enough to be citizens should be
wise and mature enough to regulate their own relationships. If they get
burned, so be it. Part of being an adult is taking risks, and all
relationships are risks.

Nerva

>
>
>
>




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




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: Govenors Removed?
From:	LSergAust@--------
Date:	Sat, 7 Apr 2001 17:00:16 EDT

Salve Lucius Sicinius Drusus

I had started using your Basilica theme with Mozilla 0.8, and
subsequently with Mozilla 0.8.1 (which seems to be buggier than 0.8).

The latest build of 0.8.1 (2001040608 downloaded yesterday) will not load
Basilica from the Yahoogroups page from which I installed it earlier. I
am also unable to select it from the theme options in Mozilla's menus.
Basilica shows up as an option, but nothing happens when it is selected.

All of this is on a Mac running OS 8.6, BTW.

L. Sergius Aust.


certe, Toto, sentio nos in Kansate non iam adesse.

(You know, Toto, I have a feeling we're not in Kansas anymore.)

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: Govenors Removed?
From:	LSergAust@--------
Date:	Sat, 7 Apr 2001 17:00:15 EDT

Salve Lucius Drusus

I agree with your proposal. Clarification in this area is needed. I am
one of those who understood that when a governor was not prorogued, they
were no longer governor.

L. Sergius Aust.

On 4/7/01 12:59 PM lsicinius@-------- (lsicinius@--------) wrote:

>
>Salvete,
>
>A tied vote? The Senatus Consultum de Ratione Senatus states votes
>will be determined by a "shall be decided by majority vote unless
>otherwise mandated". Since the action before the Senate was proroguing
>Propraetors There wasn't a majority in favor, so it seems the vote was
>that Liva Marcia would NOT be prorogued. It may be a good idea to put
>a Consulta before the Senate that sets up procedures for a tied vote
>however so there will be no future confusion on this matter.
>
>Another point that needs to be cleared up is exactally what the
>decession not to prorogue a Propraetor entails. Is it immediate
>removal from office? This would then mean that a provincia was to be
>left without a Propraetor untill the Senate decided on the
>replacement. In Roma Antiquita when a Propraetor wasn't proguged he
>remained in his provincia untill a replacement arrived and releaved him.
>
>Since it isn't desirable that a Provincia be left without a Propraetor
>I would suggest that a vote to not prorogue a Propraetor be considered
>a vote without prejudice, and that the Senate mearly desired a
>different Propraetor, and that the current Propraetor sould retain
>office untill the replacement was named. I realize that a case may
>arrise where the immediate removal of a Propraetor was nessacary, and
>in these cases the vote placed before the Senate would be for removal,
>not a regular vote on proroguing the term of office.
>
>Valete,
>Lucius Sicinius Drusus
>


certe, Toto, sentio nos in Kansate non iam adesse.

(You know, Toto, I have a feeling we're not in Kansas anymore.)

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Taxes
From:	gcassiusnerva@--------
Date:	Sat, 7 Apr 2001 17:01:44 EDT

In a message dated 4/7/01 1:35:14 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
hendrik.meuleman@-------- writes:


> <<Perhaps if the taxes were regulated provincially or continentally, cives
> would a) be more willing to pay.....>>
>
> I have no problem with local taxation myself, but this is what will happen:
> Larger provinces {more citizens} will naturally have more revenue than
> smaller provinces {fewer citizens} and then there will be cries of "unfair"
> and "redistribute the wealth".

Then, the larger provinces will have to see their money sent to the Laotian
citizens, all two of them, if that ,many, in the the interest of "fairness".

Nerva
>
>
> Nerva




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




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Clientelism (a general comment)
From:	"Oppius Flaccus Severus" <oppiusflaccus@-------->
Date:	Sat, 7 Apr 2001 16:05:54 -0700

Salvete Draco et Quiritibus;
-----Original Message-----
From: S. Apollonius Draco [mailto:hendrik.meuleman@--------]
Sent: Saturday, April 07, 2001 12:54 PM
To: novaroma@--------
Subject: [novaroma] Clientelism (a general comment)


Salvete Quirites!

(noooo Quirites, you're not rid of me yet!)

OFS: I hope not mi Draco -debates would be boring
without you! :-) You're not rid of me either :-)


Salve Oppi Flacce,

(snipped)

> OFS: respondit:
> Well, here we go again. We have Lucius Cornelius putting forth
> a suggestion on actually utilizing a physical Roman tradition,
> and we have the usual suspects popping out of the woodwork
> to tear it down; with the usual emotive terminology such as 'worst,'
> 'big guys,' 'communism' and the like.

Draco writes:
You are reversing the situation. It's not because my relations with the good
Censor aren't very good that I disagree with this.

OFS: No problem Draco -for the record, I did not intend to imply,
nor did I infer directly from what you yourself said that your
comments had anything directly to do with Sulla. That particular
comment was a direct response to Manius Villius Limitanus, who
seemed to be trawling for one as L. Sergius suggested; and got
one. It was Mani that made the direct personal attack. Your
comments on the other hand were general regarding the idea
itself.

However, since we seemed to be having a 'block vote' if you will
between your statements, those of Labiene et Mani; then the
situation/debate begged a different perspective.

Draco writes:
It's the other way
around, actually. Don't tell me I'm only delivering criticism, because
that's not true. I did constructive things in NR, too, which I'm not going
deeper into right now, but I just wanted to tell you that I'm not a critic
merely for the sake of being one.

OFS: Yes, this is the problem and perception of 'lumping,' where I
did indeed 'lump' an intentionally personal and inflammatory post
from Mani together with the much more topic-focused comments by
Labienus and yourself.

Again for the record, neither I nor anyone would accuse either
you or Labiene of not doing anything for the Respublica. Unfortunately,
because my post was a 'composite response to a composite view,'
then the words intended solely for one could be taken as
intended for the whole. For this particular usage, I apologize.
I will be the first to say that though I may disagree often with
your views, it is the views only and not a personal issue. As we
are able to work so well in other venues such as the Musarum,
I hope you can understand where I'm coming from.

> Why are the ones who left
> the 'best' of us Marce? Just because you agreed with them? Just because
> their idealized notion of a particular Roma they wanted were
> most closely with your own avowed ideals?
> Does this mean that those who do stay and actually work many
> hours a day for the betterment of Nova Roma are 'worse' than those
> who pack up and leave in a fit of rage because they want
> to find their own sandbox instead of playing in ours?

Draco writes:
With all due respect, you haven't known these people as long and as good as
I did.

OFS: Again, I'll be the first to admit it -I did *not* know them
personally or well at all for that matter; beyond the few posts
and correspondences I shared with a few of them. That being said
though, I might humbly point you back to the wording of my post.
It was not *personal,* but addressed a collective action.

So -for the record, there is no personal *grudge* or anything held
on my behalf towards those that left -on an individual basis.
It is simply because they left *as a collective,* and invoked
some brief chaos and instability in their wake (as I believe
must have been their intention,) then they deserve to be viewed
as a collective. For those of us who do value our citizenship
and stick it out through all the good *and* bad times, watching
people who acting as a collective turn on the Respublica
like that will never be looked upon favorably by me. Period.

I think perhaps a key difference between some of us that look
differently upon on the matter is that there are those who
look to separate an individual from a collective action and
those who think that individuals deciding to operate as a single
unit be thusly addressed. My opinions of course fall towards
the latter. Intentions, feelings, state of health and related
concerns matter not to me in a collective action.

And also for the record, it should be remembered that those
leaving threw plenty of grenades behind their backs as they
departed as well.

This is likely to always be an area of disagreement between
us and I for one have made peace with that fact. As some wise
cives have said recently, it does no good to belabor that
which is over and done with. -So, nothing else on that
matter to say from me. We can maybe just agree to disagree
and move on to more productive matters.

Draco writes
I take it Manius Villius didn't really know them good just as well.
It may be not his place to judge in a good way about those who left, but I
think it's not your place to judge them in a bad way as well.

OFS: My answers above summarize my final thoughts on the
matter.

> Perhaps we can discuss the original idea further for a few minutes.
Getting
> back to what the original context was, we were discussing citizenship
> involvement and having those that have actually been around a while,
> and actually do physical work for Nova Roma sitting around silent for
> weeks on end while real projects, topics and issues are discussed and
> then pop up for a minute to sling arrows.
>
> There are those of us that are ready
> to back away from any tradition that we don't 'like,' or approve
> of. The fact is, that though there were abuses then, (as there
> are abuses now,) there were positive things that came from such
> relationships as well. How do we think that Roma turned out so
> many able administrators? Was it accidental? No. Roma established
> a tradition and those that *knew* and *accomplished things,* were
> those that taught.
>
> The teaching was typically done in a client/patron relationship.
> Did this mean that it was blind mutual support all the time? No.
> Though, certainly one could look for (and in some cases find,)
> abuses, it was not always this way. There was tradition, teaching,
> and support.

Draco writes:
There were positive aspects in slavery as well. I simply think the bad
possibilites in this are outweighing the good ones.

OFS: Then that's fine Draco, we can disagree on that as well.
You seem to want to find potential for evil and corruption behind
every corner. With all due respect, this is not a discussion of slavery and
*slavery,* has nothing to do with a productive client/patron
relationship; especially when it is mutually beneficial AND it's
done in the manner of an 'apprenticeship,' which is the
context in which it was trying to be discussed in the
first place. Consul Germanicus, Praetor Fabius and others
have already spoken to the actual practices and positive
aspects and I have nothing to further to add to what
has already been said there.

<snipped>

Draco Writes:
There's a difference between running away and simply taking a different
course. Tutelage is in itself a good thing, and would work quite well in the
real world, but internet communication, as it is based on even more trust,
lends itself to larger forms of abuse than real-world-trust.

OFS: Ah, but tutelage in itself *is* what is being discussed.
A time-honored tradition in Roma Mater and regardless of efforts
to give it an out-of-hand negative spin, also had positive aspects.
I do agree that the Internet-medium is much more complex in some
ways to manage the various nuances of communication. I've spoken
on this before. Also, having advocated real-world meetings and phone
discussions I will grant you that for client/patron/tutelage to
be successful, equitable and beneficial to both parties involved;
then real and personal communication must accompany the written/e-mail
forms of communication. Trust is complex in *any* relationship, no
matter what the variety and nature of the relationship is.
Though I haven't been completely through all my mail yet today,
I believe that Nerva addressed this pretty well and I have nothing
much further to add.



> I for one, ask that we work a little less hard on sanitizing
> Roma, and more towards looking at our ancient traditions
> that can be beneficial when used properly. The notion of
> 'patronage' used in movies like the "Godfather" are only a
> negative portrayal of the worst aspects. Part of our stated
> object as a micronation is to take the 'best of Roma.'
> To me, this can also mean taking the best from many if not
> *all* of our great traditions.

Draco writes:
Italian culture is an inheritant from Roman culture, but that's besides the
point.

OFS: I would normally agree with you, except that most
current images of 'client patron' originate from current
perceptions of 'Underworld' culture and not from an in-depth
study of the practices in Antiqua. I believe the metaphor
was apt in this case. -(Yes mi Draco, we can disagree on
this as well :-)

Draco writes:
Point is; it's hard to have the good things without the bad things on
a certain aspect. If you want to have a car that can drive say past the
speed of sound, you have a great security risk. You can also opt not have
that super fast car at all, to avoid getting (pretty likely) killed in a
crash one day.

OFS: I'm not sure I completely follow your reasoning here,
but I think (correct me if I'm wrong,) you're saying that we
should only want to ever see the absolute 'good' things without
any of the nasty bad stuff. Well, the 'good and bad' might be
a better topic for kicking off some wanted activity on the
Philosophy list; but as far as *real life* goes, there's always
'good' and 'bad' inherent in anything and everything. Every
road, every twist of fate. What may be 'good' for one, may be
'bad' for another. To say that because one chooses a path that *may*
lead to 'badness' (emphasis on the *may*) somewhere down the
road is frankly not realistic Draco.

Life is what we make it, the choices we make thusly are ours
to deal with.

(snipped)



Salve Praetor Maxime; scripsisti, inter alia:

>> Must be because I see it as a help, and you see it as a problem. <<

Draco writes:
"Help" and "problem" are no oppositons. Help becomes a problem when it
becomes a moral obligation (cfr. "returning the favour" in something the
cliens doesn't like at all).

OFS: Who imposed the 'moral' obligation Draco? Is this one
of those 'absolute free will' type of arguments?
Let me just say a little bit about 'obligation' here. Life,
is *full* of obligations. Moral, physical, spiritual.
We have obligations to our friends, obligations to our employers,
obligations to our spouses and partners, obligations to family,
etc. How two or more people in *any* sort of relationship
deal with these obligations, or 'feel' about them is up to
their own moral fiber.

One could split hairs between terms such as obligation and
loyalty for example. There are worse things in life than
those having no 'obligations,' traditions to follow or
family to fall back on. One of the many things that made
Roma Mater so great was the sense of 'obligation' that
the citizens felt for it. One could say that the sanitized,
'rainbow frosted,' notion of Roma espoused by some is not
glorious at all. -Perspective, all in one's perspective.


Salve Nerva,

> It seems to me that if one citizen enters into a client/patron
relationship
> with another citizen, that is their own business.

Draco writes:
True, but a newbie can be easy to delude and mislead. This is dangerous.

OFS: Delude and mislead. Hmm...not much I can say in response
to such a statement. If our cives are so easily deluded, mislead
and manipulated then we have no future anyway. I however, do not
for a moment believe this to be the case. We are intelligent,
learned, adult and capable of making our own decisions. Again;
you make an assumption that someone entering into a relationship
with another in NR will ultimately lead to the corruption or
destruction of one or more of these parties.



Salve Senator Australice,

<snipped>

> To assert that those who would despise their sacred oaths, abandon their
> duty posts, and desert their friends and compatriots, all because some
> things were not going entirely the way they wanted, can be described as
> "the best of us" is ludicrous. If those were the actions of "the best of
> us," we would be in a sorry state indeed. I thought highly of many of
> those people until they showed their true colors. The best of us? Don't
> make me laugh. In the old days, we would all have taken staves and beaten
> them to death for desertion.

Draco writes:
Excuse me? Attacking people who aren't here to defend themselves from this
vicious twisting of the truth is a little cheap.

OFS: It is not 'attack' Draco, to speak truth of antiqua.
You see, some people *do* (as I do for one, per my previous comments,)
see this as a simple act of desertion. No civis of Roma Mater
would have EVER voluntarily resigned their citizenship; without
understanding that there were consequences to such actions.
We are a state, we are bound to the state by obligation and
citizenship and should view it thusly.


> On the other hand, if you are so certain that "the best of us" are gone,
> why are you still here?

Draco writes:
Why don't you add "leave NR, so you can be backstabbed later in the same
fashion"? This sort of anger makes me suspicious, I must say.

OFS: The sort of anger that leads to the usage of
terms such as 'backstabbed' could also be held in
suspicion. Personally, I don't view it that way as I
know you were close friends with some of the departed.
Speaking *truths* of a situation can not be called by
any reasonable account 'backstabbing.'

It is a leap of assumption that anyone 'wanted,' or
was 'waiting' to pounce on those that left. In fact, other
than two or three words from people who are long-time cives
and take their citizenships seriously and were justifiably
angered, most of the wording was 'above board,' so to speak
and addressed the situation, not the individuals themselves.

Calling a situation
like it is *not* attack or twisting truth. It's
called (here at least,) 'plainspeak.' When we don't
have 'plainspeak,' we have sanitized political correctness
that looks to sugarcoat, change or utilize emotive wording
to attempt and alter an actual outcome or people's perception
of same.

Bene valete,
-Oppius



<snipped>



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Egroups
From:	"Oppius Flaccus Severus" <oppiusflaccus@-------->
Date:	Sat, 7 Apr 2001 16:13:25 -0700

Salvete Draco et Omnes;
-----Original Message-----
From: S. Apollonius Draco [mailto:hendrik.meuleman@--------]
Sent: Saturday, April 07, 2001 12:32 PM
To: novaroma@--------
Subject: Re: [novaroma] Egroups


<snipped>

NR_Philosophy

Cives, I urge you to join this list if you are somewhat intrested in
philosophy. Right now the list has 24 subscribers but seldomly has any
activity. The conversations that do occur are always being done by the same
persons, while the others sit passively by around the campfire, nodding off.
Revitalize this list, Quirites!

OFS: This one does indeed sound interesting. I shall join
it promptly and gratias for shamelessly promoting it to our
attention :-)

NR_DignitasForum

While this should have been a politico-philosophical forum, it suffers from
chronic emptiness, and it's as silent as the Vasistas Borealis on a windless
day. People who enjoy both philosophical and political debate should head
there!

OFS: Yes, I think that membership declined directly around last
March 15th or so...

NR_Iuventas

Mailing list for young Novaromani, only has 5 subscribers thusfar, which is
a very poor outcome. It's intended for youths aged 15-25, with the eventual
purpose of having a Sodalitas Iuventutis one day.

OFS: Excellent! Am looking to add at least one or two under-20-somethings
to my gens soon. (Children of my new Gens members.) I will strongly
suggest that they join your list.

<snipped>

Bene valete,
-Oppius



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	[novaroma] Clientelism and Gens Recruiting
From:	gcassiusnerva@--------
Date:	Sat, 7 Apr 2001 19:34:47 EDT

Salvete,

I have to admit this conversation has me a little concerned, and I hope my
concerns are baseless. But when Draco and anyone else who may agree with him
consider clientelism a danger, leading to corruption, doesn't this bother you
a bit? I have to ask myself what their goal is. Is it some sort of
regulating what kind of business relationships we, as citizens, may enter
into? Does Draco want to protect us from some kind of dangerous liason? I
hope not, and I hope I have misread his intentions. Because, as a free man,
I have no wish or need for such "protection". I am perfectly capable of
choosing my associations myself, thank you very much.

This reminds me of a similar issue I saw in the taverna some time ago,
perhaps early March. I only half-paid attention then, and frankly I can't
even remember who was doing the talking,but the subject was about whether or
not it is wrong to actively recruit potential new citizens into your own
gens. One guy thought it somehow wrong and corrupt. I disagree totally. If
someone wants a larger gens, why not invite or encourage people to join? And
what law does this break? I glanced through the laws in the tabularium, and
found none prohibiting this practice.

The fellow who was opposed to gens-recruiting has something in common with
those who are opposed to the clientage option. Both are wannabe social
engineers, regulating the kind of associations and relationships we free
citizens have. We ARE adults here, or at least most of us are, are we not?
We ARE capable of deciding for ourselves, aren't we?

If Draco and the long forgotten person who was dead-set against gens
recruiting are in fact advocating such regulating of our own social lives,
then I really hope these guys are the minority. And I hope still more that I
am misreading their goals and that they have no such agenda for us.

Gaius Cassius Nerva



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	[novaroma] Results of vote in Comitia Populi
From:	"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@-------->
Date:	Sat, 7 Apr 2001 19:55:29 -0400

Flavius Vedius Germanicus novaromanis S.P.D.

The results of the recent election in the Comitia Populi Tributa have been
reported, and are as follow:

In the election for the post of rogator, 3 tribes voted for Franciscus
Apulus Caesar, 10 tribes voted for Domna Claudia Auspicata, 8 tribes voted
for Titus Curius Dannicus, 10 tribes tied, 2 tribes abstained, and 2 tribes
failed to vote. Domna Claudia Auspicata wins the position.

In the vote on the Lex Vedia de Ratione Comitiorum Populi Tributorum, 31
tribes voted in favor, 1 tribe voted against, 1 tribe abstained, and 2
tribes failed to vote. The lex is passed.

In the vote on the Lex Labienia de Edictium Vigintisexviris, 30 tribes voted
in favor, 0 tribes voted against, 2 tribes tied, 1 tribe abstained, and 2
tribes failed to vote. The lex is passed.

My thanks to all who voted, congratulations to Domna Claudia, and
condolences to Franciscus Apulus and Titus Curius.

Valete,

Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
Consul




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/