Forum Romanum


Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Digest No 1349 Duplicated citizenship
From:	Mark A Bird <mark_a_bird@-------->
Date:	Thu, 19 Apr 2001 10:14:57 +1000

Salve

I envisaged the same problem with this in that it could easily be opened up
to manipulation and fraud - we had a similar thing happen in Australia in
that our local political party branches "branch stacking" where local party
members would be mysteriously enrolled so as they would elect certain
members, without question. Some were even enrolled eventhough they resided
at the local cemetery.

What I suggested for Roma Nova was that it could get the Governors to ask
the citizens in its province to provide a copy of their macro nation birth
certificates to authenticate their identify and this could then be reported
to the censors etc. This "audit" which would clean up the roles.

I had no reply to my idea.

Vale

Marcus Sentius Claudius

-----Original Message-----
From: Lucius Equitius [mailto:vze23hw7@--------]
Sent: Thursday, 19 April 2001 9:59 Am
To: novaroma@--------
Subject: [novaroma] Digest No 1349 Duplicated citizenship

Salvete, Quirites

We Censores are sent an automatic email of each application, so we can do
some checking of information provided. If someone is dishonest they can
circumvent what precautions that we do have, so I certainly agree we could
have more precautions.
I was against the 'online' form from the beginning. As one of the first
citizens, along with my colleague, I printed out and "snail mailed" a signed
application. I didn't find that particularly difficult, but it was argued
that it would be difficult for some prospective citizens from other
'nations'.
I favor a return to mail in applications, but that should not surprise
anyone as I favor a Dues/Tax/Registration Fee too.

Sure the online form is much easier, but then it may be *so* easy that it
means little to the majority who do complete it. This could be a reason for
the low number of voters in election, nonne? This could be a reason for the
non-responsiveness of Gens, nonne?

There is also the issue of privacy. The Censores have received requests for
'contact information' from many of the Praetores. Censor Sulla and I have
sent to various Praetores the Roman Name and the email address of record.
This is all that is to be given due to the Lex Cornelia de Privatis Rebus
and the statement on the application itself. "All of your personal
information will be kept completely confidential, and will be released only
as compelled by the civil law (exception: Paterfamiliae and Materfamiliae
will have their email addresses linked on the gentes page unless they
request otherwise)."
If a new Lex is passed giving authorization to provide the Phone No. and
street address of the citizens of a Provincia to the Praetor, I will be glad
to do that.

Also, you will note that I am replying to the digest form of this list. I
did so while trimming, snipping, deleting etc.all of the unnecessary
posting. I too grow weary of having to scroll through tremendous amounts of
redundant material and consider those posts that are not "edited for
brevity", inconsiderate.

Valete, Censor Lucius Equitius Cincinnatus
________________________________________________________________________

From: LSergAust@--------
Subject: Re: Duplicated citizenship

Salve Gn. Salix

As far as I can see, we have no safeguards at all in our application
process. We don't verify location, name, age, nationality, species, or
planet of origin.

That's what makes it so peculiar for us to demand proof of physical
gender. Of all the things to worry about making sure of......

We have had people expelled from Nova Roma and later re-admitted under an
different identity (and as a matter of fact, I'm getting a little
suspicious that may have happened again).

We need some safeguards, mea sententia.

Vale, L. Sergius Aust. Obst.

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

**********************************************************************
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.
**********************************************************************


Subject:	[novaroma] Rights of Citizens
From:	"L. Sicinius Drusus" <lsicinius@-------->
Date:	Wed, 18 Apr 2001 17:30:07 -0700 (PDT)

Salvete Quirites,

I found quite a few posts in my in box today
mentioning Rights, so I would like to comment on the
Rights of the Citizens.

Legally Nova Roma is a private organization, and as
such has the Right to set whatever terms she wishes
regarding who can be a member, and what kind of
conduct members can engage in as long as these terms
do not violate the laws of the State of New Hampshire
where Nova Roma is chartered nor the Laws of the
United States. This gives the private organization
called Nova Roma a great deal of leeway in setting the
rules of conduct that it's members must abide by.
These rules of conduct do NOT violate your rights
since no one is forced to be a member of this private
organization. There is NO legal right to belong to a
private organization, Nor is there any right to force
your ideas of how this private organization ought to
be run on the other members contrary to whatever
bylaws Nova Roma wishes to adopt.

This is fine if Nova Roma desires no more than just
being a private organization, To be no more than the
"Roman Club" or a fraternal lodge like some kind of
"Loyal Order of Romans". Quirites, aren't our
aspirations higher than this? Do we want to be the
Nova Roma club, or do we want to be the NATION of Nova
Roma?

Nations are judged by a far higher standard of conduct
than mere private clubs, and are expected to protect
the rights of all of thier citizens. Nations are
expected to have a just government that doesn't just
obey the wishes of the majority, but also to protect
the rights of the minority.

Here is a Quote from Ayn Rand that I consider to be
important on the subject of the rights of minorities.
"The smallest minority on earth is the individual.
Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be
defenders of minorities."

I fully agree with Ms Rand on this point, and I'll go
even farther. There is no such thing as group rights.
Any group has no more rights than it's individual
members have. The only thing a group has is the
strength of numbers.

A Just government doesn't derive it's powers from the
wishes of it's citizens. It is no more than a group of
citizens, and it's powers come from a grant by the
citizens acting in common. You can NOT cede a power to
the government that you do not pocess as an
individual. You do not gain new powers to cede to the
government by joining a group, you only become a
member of a mob, and the only power a mob has is brute
strength. No mob has the right to force it's will upon
others. There is no real difference between a mob that
meets by torchlight to violate the rights of others
and a mob that assembles by daylight and enters the
polls to violate the rights of others.

Quirites,
If you wish Nova Roma to be a nation with a just
government, then you should consider one thing before
you vote on any lex. Do I as an individual pocess the
power that I'm trying to cede to the government? If
you do not then when you vote for that lex you are
asking your government to violate the rights of
another human being.

Valete,
Lucius Sicinius Drusus

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Rights of Citizens
From:	Iasonvs Serenvs Carolvs <iasonvs_serenvs@-------->
Date:	Wed, 18 Apr 2001 17:45:35 -0700 (PDT)

Honorable Drusus,

Bravo.

Iasonvs Serenvs

--- "L. Sicinius Drusus" <lsicinius@--------> wrote:
> Salvete Quirites,
> >
> I fully agree with Ms Rand on this point, and I'll
> go
> even farther. There is no such thing as group
> rights.
> Any group has no more rights than it's individual
> members have. The only thing a group has is the
> strength of numbers.
>
> A Just government doesn't derive it's powers from
> the
> wishes of it's citizens. It is no more than a group
> of
> citizens, and it's powers come from a grant by the
> citizens acting in common. You can NOT cede a power
> to
> the government that you do not pocess as an
> individual. You do not gain new powers to cede to
> the
> government by joining a group, you only become a
> member of a mob, and the only power a mob has is
> brute
> strength. No mob has the right to force it's will
> upon
> others. There is no real difference between a mob
> that
> meets by torchlight to violate the rights of others
> and a mob that assembles by daylight and enters the
> polls to violate the rights of others.
>
> Quirites,
> If you wish Nova Roma to be a nation with a just
> government, then you should consider one thing
> before
> you vote on any lex. Do I as an individual pocess
> the
> power that I'm trying to cede to the government? If
> you do not then when you vote for that lex you are
> asking your government to violate the rights of
> another human being.
>
> Valete,
> Lucius Sicinius Drusus
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great
> prices
> http://auctions.yahoo.com/
>

=====
Iasonvs Serenvs Carolvs Peregrinvs
(this is a post for which I accept all responsibility)
"The cosmos works by harmony of tensions, like the lyre and the bow."
"Time is a game played beautifully by children."
Heraclitus of Ephesus
HeraclitusFreehold@--------

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Rights of Citizens
From:	Marcus Octavius Germanicus <haase@-------->
Date:	Wed, 18 Apr 2001 20:06:55 -0500 (CDT)

Salve Luci Sicini,

> A Just government doesn't derive it's powers from the
> wishes of it's citizens. It is no more than a group of
> citizens, and it's powers come from a grant by the
> citizens acting in common. You can NOT cede a power to
> the government that you do not pocess as an
> individual. You do not gain new powers to cede to the
> government by joining a group, you only become a
> member of a mob, and the only power a mob has is brute
> strength. No mob has the right to force it's will upon
> others. There is no real difference between a mob that
> meets by torchlight to violate the rights of others
> and a mob that assembles by daylight and enters the
> polls to violate the rights of others.

So, are you saying that because I myself have no right to imprison
a murderer, governments have no right to imprison a murderer?

Vale, Octavius.

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


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Rights of Citizens
From:	lsicinius@--------
Date:	Thu, 19 Apr 2001 01:15:23 -0000

--- In novaroma@--------, Marcus Octavius Germanicus <haase@c...> wrote:
> Salve Luci Sicini,
>
> > A Just government doesn't derive it's powers from the
> > wishes of it's citizens. It is no more than a group of
> > citizens, and it's powers come from a grant by the
> > citizens acting in common. You can NOT cede a power to
> > the government that you do not pocess as an
> > individual. You do not gain new powers to cede to the
> > government by joining a group, you only become a
> > member of a mob, and the only power a mob has is brute
> > strength. No mob has the right to force it's will upon
> > others. There is no real difference between a mob that
> > meets by torchlight to violate the rights of others
> > and a mob that assembles by daylight and enters the
> > polls to violate the rights of others.
>
> So, are you saying that because I myself have no right to imprison
> a murderer, governments have no right to imprison a murderer?
>
> Vale, Octavius.
>
> --
> M. Octavius Germanicus
> Propraetor, Lacus Magni
> Curator Araneum et Senator

You have the right to use force to defend your self. You have the
right to cede this power of defense to the government, and it from
this cession that just governments derive thier police powers to
restrain those who would use force to violate the rights of others.
This grant is also where governments derive thier power to set up
armed forces for defending a nation from attack.

Drusus


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Digest No 1349 Duplicated citizenship
From:	mansker@--------
Date:	Thu, 19 Apr 2001 01:19:33 -0000

Salve -

Although I agree with your idea in principal, it may be difficult
(and take quite a while) to provide a copy of your birth certificate
if you don't have one handy. (I know in Oregon, if you order your
birth certificate it can take 6 weeks and the cost is $20).

How about a copy of their driver's license or other ID? It would
include the present address (which the birth certificate wouldn't
include)as well as their name. This would solve two problems, such
as someone using a false address, and would prove identity.

I, for one, would not have a problem doing this. What do you think?

Gaia Flacca Severa

--- In novaroma@--------, Mark A Bird <mark_a_bird@r...> wrote:
> Salve
>
> > What I suggested for Roma Nova was that it could get the
Governors to ask
> the citizens in its province to provide a copy of their macro
nation birth
> certificates to authenticate their identify and this could then be
reported
> to the censors etc. This "audit" which would clean up the roles.
>
> I had no reply to my idea.
>
> Vale
>
> Marcus Sentius Claudius
>


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Duplicated citizenship
From:	octavianuslucius@--------
Date:	Thu, 19 Apr 2001 01:43:26 -0000

Salve Luci Maurici Procopioe

I agree with your idea of governors aiding the Censors. Since NR
becomes bigger and bigger, governors's aid to the censors would be
very helpful. I do not know how this could be implemented, but I am
sure that in the future the censors will need some help.

Lucius Pompeius Octavianus
Propraetor provinciae Argentinae

--- In novaroma@--------, "Lucius Mauricius Procopious" <procopious@h...>
wrote:
> Salvete Omnes,
> Could the Governors of Nova Roma be enlisted to aid the Censors and
ensure
> no duplicate citizenship's exist? If existing laws were changed or
their
> interpretation is altered the Governors of Nova Roma could be given
the
> necessary contact information and could then be responsible for
verifying
> the cives in their provinces.
> For those that don't know, the Governors of NR are working on this
very
> issue.
>
> 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: "Lucius Corn--------s Sulla F--------" <al--------us@-------->
> To: <novaroma@-------->
> Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2001 1:36 PM
> Subject: Re: [novaroma] Duplicated citizenship
>
>
> > Ave,
> >
> > Senator Lucius Sergius, that is easily rectified. Remember when
Nova
> > Roma started we had to snail mail our applications to the
Censors. I
> > know I did. Censor Equitius do you have any comments on this
issue?
> >
> > Respectfully,
> >
> > Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
> > Censor of Nova Roma
> >
> > LSergAust@-------- wrote:
> > >
> > > Salve Gn. Salix
> > >
> > > As far as I can see, we have no safeguards at all in our
application
> > > process. We don't verify location, name, age, nationality,
species, or
> > > planet of origin.
> > >
> > > That's what makes it so peculiar for us to demand proof of
physical
> > > gender. Of all the things to worry about making sure of......
> > >
> > > We have had people expelled from Nova Roma and later re-
admitted under
> an
> > > different identity (and as a matter of fact, I'm getting a
little
> > > suspicious that may have happened again).
> > >
> > > We need some safeguards, mea sententia.
> > >
> > > Vale,
> > >
> > > L. Sergius Aust. Obst.
> > >
> > > On 4/18/01 2:10 PM Gnaeus Salix Astur (salixastur@--------) wrote:
> > >
> > > >Salvete, romani quirites.
> > > >
> > > >A terrible doubt has ocurred to me: do we have some system to
avoid
> > > >multiple citizenship applications? I mean, under our actual
application
> > > >system, I could apply several times for citizenship with
different
> > > >names and be accepted all the times.
> > > >
> > > >Am I wrong? Is there some identity control system that makes
this
> > > >impossible? I sincerely hope there is!
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >=====
> > > >Bene Valete!
> > > >Gnaeus Salix Astur.
> > > >Civis romanus.
> > > >
> > >
> > > 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/
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
> >


Subject:	[novaroma] Security Warning
From:	lsicinius@--------
Date:	Thu, 19 Apr 2001 01:49:46 -0000

Salvete,
I'm just passing on a warning I recived from one of the Security News
letters I subscribe to.

If you are using Netscape 4.76 or an earlier version there is a bug
that allows a website server to obtain information about your browser
history (sites you have visited) or the configuration of your browser.
If you want to protect your privacy you should disable javascript
(which will mess up how many sites are displayed) or upgrade to
version 4.77.

Drusus


Subject:	[novaroma] =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_Situaci=F3n_en_Hispania?=
From:	LOBORUBRO@--------
Date:	Thu, 19 Apr 2001 01:26:09 -0000

> >
> > PS Oye, como andan las cosas alla en Hispania? Soy de Puerto
Rico,
> > aunque radico en California...
>
> Pues aqu�, en Hispania, estamos intentando organizarnos. Si quieres
> contribuir, te invito a subscribirte a NRHispania@--------

Salve, Iberian frater,

What is being done in Spain?

Valete,

Lobo Rubro


Subject:	=?ISO-8859-1?Q?RE=3A_=5Bnovaroma=5D_Re=3A_Situaci=F3n_en_Hispa?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?nia?=
From:	Mark A Bird <mark_a_bird@-------->
Date:	Thu, 19 Apr 2001 12:12:43 +1000

Salve

I think we send Pompey over with some Legions to sort them out .....

Marcus Sentius Claudius

-----Original Message-----
From: LOBORUBRO@-------- [mailto:LOBORUBRO@--------]
Sent: Thursday, 19 April 2001 11:26 Am
To: novaroma@--------
Subject: [novaroma] Re: Situaci�n en Hispania

> >
> > PS Oye, como andan las cosas alla en Hispania? Soy de Puerto
Rico,
> > aunque radico en California...
>
> Pues aqu�, en Hispania, estamos intentando organizarnos. Si quieres
> contribuir, te invito a subscribirte a NRHispania@--------

Salve, Iberian frater,

What is being done in Spain?

Valete,

Lobo Rubro

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

*
*********************************************************************
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.
**********************************************************************


Subject:	[novaroma] Nova Roman Citizenship -Time to get Real.
From:	"Oppius Flaccus Severus" <oppiusflaccus@-------->
Date:	Wed, 18 Apr 2001 19:29:23 -0700

Salvete Quiritibus!

I've been watching this discussion with keen interest;
as many of these points are key even though they have
been brought up in one form or another in previous debates.

In short, I could not agree more that we need to strengthen
our measures and determinants of citizenship. To synthesize
my views with some other current posts on the matter:

1-An absolute and resounding YES to snail mail applications.
These applications should be at least as thorough as
the current ones and preferably more so. Anyone, anywhere
can fill out a generic html form and post it somewhere
with it meaning next to nothing at all. The act of writing
something, including funds and a stamp is a much more
tangible act than posting text in a web form.

2-Snail mail applications should be accompanied by a facsimile
of an applicant's macronational ID of record. Depending
on the country, this could be a driver's license (I would
think the most common,) state/federal/local/provincial
ID card, or the good old standby -a passport. While
birth certificates are a nice secondary form of ID when
available, I agree that it can be a pain in the podex
to get one of these in a timely manner. -Have been
through this exercise for myself, son and wife.
*Inconvenient* is a polite term for what we dealt with :-)

3-Applications should be accompanied by an application
fee. This could be done either via enclosed personal
check, traveler's check -or on the web, via PayPal.
If done via PayPal, the application is held in
'escrow' until funds have been verified.

4-In *addition* to the steps above, when an application
arrives for processing -either the mater/paterfamilias
of the gens being petitioned and/or the Provincial
Governor/Legatus performs some physical form of
verification. Preferably in the form of a face to
face meeting.

5-As a slightly different alternative, membership
drives at public events could be utilized for
instant 'pre-approval,' by performing all the
physical verifications and money collection.

I fully agree that provincial officials are key to making
such a system work. Of course, it also puts more
responsibility on the pater/materfamilias to assist
in the verification process. This will require
some fundamental changes in our infrastructure and
likely at least one or more leges to be promulgated
to allow the appropriate officials the appropriate
powers to conduct business.

Furthermore, the approval process of provincial
officials and pater/materfamilias will need to be
more stringent to ensure that they have the ability
to perform the requirements of verification in their
particular situation.

While the organization was in the midst of applying
for NPC status, I could see how it made perfect sense
to play the raw numbers game and get as many names as
possible tied to the association. Now that this status
has been granted, it is time to make the
citizenship count for something and to ensure that
we are all in effect who we say we are.

Furthermore, the mater/paterfamilias, provincial
officials and Censores could conduct an actual census
to see just who really exists, who is where and whether
or not they're actually members of the organization
or not. It seems apparent that we have at least several
hundred in our midst who either no longer exist, may
have never been real at all and/or have no interest
in participation or involvement.

A case in point: a recent provincial 'census' message
sent to the civis of my Regio returned *2* responses.
At least one e-mail has bounced and the other six or
so names I fully expect not to hear from at all.

Before the flames fly, let me tell you as a civis
that has actually contributed *real* time and perhaps
even more importantly *real money* to our organization,
I have little sympathy for those that do not value
their citizenship. If we're really going to grow
and become a physical *nation,* then we need to get
real; make it count and get to know one another
as people and not keyboard operators.

Bene valete,
Oppius Flaccus Severus, Legatus America Boreoccidentalis Major


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Duplicated citizenship
From:	=?iso-8859-1?q?Jerry=20Anguston?= <gaiussentius@-------->
Date:	Thu, 19 Apr 2001 13:49:58 +1000 (EST)

Ave omnes,

I have to say that this is a pretty strange idea, and
open to all sorts of problems in itself. An example of
this is my brother, who pit-crews around the world,
and could be away for periods as long as two years. By
your reckoning, he would not be present to prove his
identity or etc., so therefore what is to stop his
being struck off as a spurious citizen while he is
absent? Currently, he is in Mongolia, and will not be
back for sometime. He spends around 15 days of every
year at home (if that), and the rest of the time is
going around the world. That makes him fairly
uncontactable, so I would say that in his case,
failing the fact that we have no proof of his identity
here at home as he carries it with him everywhere,
that he could just as easily return home and find
himself no longer a citizen.

Valete bene omnes,

Gaius Sentius Bruttius Sura

--- Lucius Mauricius Procopious <procopious@-------->
wrote:
<HR>
<html><body>
<tt>
Salvete Omnes, 
Could the Governors of Nova Roma be enlisted to aid
the Censors and ensure 
no duplicate citizenship's exist? If existing laws
were changed or their 
interpretation is altered the Governors of Nova Roma
could be given the 
necessary contact information and could then be
responsible for verifying 
the cives in their provinces. 
For those that don't know, the Governors of NR are
working on this very 
issue. 
 
Lucius Mauricius Procopious 
Propraetor America Boreoccidentalis 
(This is an unofficial post for which I assume full
responsibility) 
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 
procopious@-------- 
ICQ# 83516618 
*America Boreoccidentalis Mail List 
<a
href="http://www.egroups.com/group/AmBor_Waves">http://www.egroups.com/group/AmBor_Waves</a> 
* The Gens Mauricia 
<a
href="http://www.geocities.com/procopious">http://www.geocities.com/procopious</a> 
 
"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: "Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix"
<alexious@--------> 
To: <novaroma@--------> 
Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2001 1:36 PM 
Subject: Re: [novaroma] Duplicated citizenship 
 
 
> Ave, 
> 
> Senator Lucius Sergius, that is easily
rectified. Remember when Nova 
> Roma started we had to snail mail our
applications to the Censors. I 
> know I did. Censor Equitius do you have any
comments on this issue? 
> 
> Respectfully, 
> 
> Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix 
> Censor of Nova Roma 
> 
> LSergAust@-------- wrote: 
> > 
> > Salve Gn. Salix 
> > 
> > As far as I can see, we have no
safeguards at all in our application 
> > process. We don't verify location, name,
age, nationality, species, or 
> > planet of origin. 
> > 
> > That's what makes it so peculiar for us to
demand proof of physical 
> > gender. Of all the things to worry about
making sure of...... 
> > 
> > We have had people expelled from Nova Roma
and later re-admitted under 
an 
> > different identity (and as a matter of fact,
I'm getting a little 
> > suspicious that may have happened
again). 
> > 
> > We need some safeguards, mea sententia. 
> > 
> > Vale, 
> > 
> > L. Sergius Aust. Obst. 
> > 
> > On 4/18/01 2:10 PM Gnaeus Salix Astur
(salixastur@--------) wrote: 
> > 
> > >Salvete, romani quirites. 
> > > 
> > >A terrible doubt has ocurred to me: do
we have some system to avoid 
> > >multiple citizenship applications? I
mean, under our actual application 
> > >system, I could apply several times for
citizenship with different 
> > >names and be accepted all the times. 
> > > 
> > >Am I wrong? Is there some identity
control system that makes this 
> > >impossible? I sincerely hope there
is! 
> > > 
> > > 
> > >===== 
> > >Bene Valete! 
> > >Gnaeus Salix Astur. 
> > >Civis romanus. 
> > > 
> > 
> > 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 
<a
href="http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/">http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/</a> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to <a
href="http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/">http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/</a> 
> 
> 
 
</tt>

 



<table border=0 cellspacing=0 cellpadding=2>
<tr bgcolor=#FFFFCC>
<td align=center><font size="-1"


Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Nova Roman Citizenship -Time to get Real.
From:	Mark A Bird <mark_a_bird@-------->
Date:	Thu, 19 Apr 2001 13:51:53 +1000

Salve Oppius Flaccus Severus

Extremely good reasoning and excellent recommendations - presumably someone
from the Senate will take notice and start to make some (if not all) of your
recommendations happen.

Vale

Marcus Sentius Claudius

-----Original Message-----
From: Oppius Flaccus Severus [mailto:oppiusflaccus@--------]
Sent: Thursday, 19 April 2001 12:29 Pm
To: novaroma@--------
Subject: [novaroma] Nova Roman Citizenship -Time to get Real.

Salvete Quiritibus!

I've been watching this discussion with keen interest;
as many of these points are key even though they have
been brought up in one form or another in previous debates.

In short, I could not agree more that we need to strengthen
our measures and determinants of citizenship. To synthesize
my views with some other current posts on the matter:

1-An absolute and resounding YES to snail mail applications.
These applications should be at least as thorough as
the current ones and preferably more so. Anyone, anywhere
can fill out a generic html form and post it somewhere
with it meaning next to nothing at all. The act of writing
something, including funds and a stamp is a much more
tangible act than posting text in a web form.

2-Snail mail applications should be accompanied by a facsimile
of an applicant's macronational ID of record. Depending
on the country, this could be a driver's license (I would
think the most common,) state/federal/local/provincial
ID card, or the good old standby -a passport. While
birth certificates are a nice secondary form of ID when
available, I agree that it can be a pain in the podex
to get one of these in a timely manner. -Have been
through this exercise for myself, son and wife.
*Inconvenient* is a polite term for what we dealt with :-)

3-Applications should be accompanied by an application
fee. This could be done either via enclosed personal
check, traveler's check -or on the web, via PayPal.
If done via PayPal, the application is held in
'escrow' until funds have been verified.

4-In *addition* to the steps above, when an application
arrives for processing -either the mater/paterfamilias
of the gens being petitioned and/or the Provincial
Governor/Legatus performs some physical form of
verification. Preferably in the form of a face to
face meeting.

5-As a slightly different alternative, membership
drives at public events could be utilized for
instant 'pre-approval,' by performing all the
physical verifications and money collection.

I fully agree that provincial officials are key to making
such a system work. Of course, it also puts more
responsibility on the pater/materfamilias to assist
in the verification process. This will require
some fundamental changes in our infrastructure and
likely at least one or more leges to be promulgated
to allow the appropriate officials the appropriate
powers to conduct business.

Furthermore, the approval process of provincial
officials and pater/materfamilias will need to be
more stringent to ensure that they have the ability
to perform the requirements of verification in their
particular situation.

While the organization was in the midst of applying
for NPC status, I could see how it made perfect sense
to play the raw numbers game and get as many names as
possible tied to the association. Now that this status
has been granted, it is time to make the
citizenship count for something and to ensure that
we are all in effect who we say we are.

Furthermore, the mater/paterfamilias, provincial
officials and Censores could conduct an actual census
to see just who really exists, who is where and whether
or not they're actually members of the organization
or not. It seems apparent that we have at least several
hundred in our midst who either no longer exist, may
have never been real at all and/or have no interest
in participation or involvement.

A case in point: a recent provincial 'census' message
sent to the civis of my Regio returned *2* responses.
At least one e-mail has bounced and the other six or
so names I fully expect not to hear from at all.

Before the flames fly, let me tell you as a civis
that has actually contributed *real* time and perhaps
even more importantly *real money* to our organization,
I have little sympathy for those that do not value
their citizenship. If we're really going to grow
and become a physical *nation,* then we need to get
real; make it count and get to know one another
as people and not keyboard operators.

Bene valete,
Oppius Flaccus Severus, Legatus America Boreoccidentalis Major

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

**********************************************************************
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.
**********************************************************************


Subject:	[novaroma] Call to Census in Oklahoma
From:	britil@--------
Date:	Thu, 19 Apr 2001 04:23:13 -0000

Salvete,

To all members of NovaRoma in Oklahoma. This is a call of
Census. By order of our Governor, Pontius Sejanus Marius.

Please send your email with name and e-mail address to Legatus Marcus
Flavius so an official record my be compiled and sent to the
Governor's office.
This is very important. This allows us to know each cive in our
province. This will allow us to plan meetings and chats, which I feel
is important to start as soon as we can. So we can feel a common bond
of closeness and not feel so many miles for Roma. I have met some of
the members in Oklahoma over the past few days through e-mail since
becoming Legatus, but not near as many as I would like, so to remedy
this I ask for all Oklahoma Roman citizens to please answer this call
of census as soon as possible. So, lets band together and grow in
strength for the betterment of Roma.

Avete,

Marcus Flavius
Legatus of Oklahoma


Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Nova Roman Citizenship -Time to get Real.
From:	Patrick Ferguson <pvitruviusiulianus@-------->
Date:	Wed, 18 Apr 2001 21:24:25 -0700 (PDT)

Avete omnes!

I have no problems with most of what has been said so
far, but not *all* of what has been said so far. When
I applied for citizenship to Nova Roma I desired to
form my own gens. So I obviouly could'nt meet with
its pater/materfalmilias. Also, my provincial
governor lives in another city in another state. If
the burden of visiting the governor were on my
shoulders and were a requirement, it would be
impossible for me to fufill. If it were on the
shoulders of the governor, there would bea lot of
traveling and travel expenses for the governor.

Valete optime :->!

Patricius Vitruvius Iulianus,

Civis Novae Romae.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Rights of Citizens
From:	"Lucius Mauricius Procopious" <procopious@-------->
Date:	Wed, 18 Apr 2001 22:33:04 -0700

Salvete Omnes,
A well thought and informative post from Lucius Sicinius Drusus! Great
advice, vote carefully, protect each others rights.
I won't argue whether or not a group should or does have rights. I'll agree
to disagree there. I'd feel more comfortable discussing this if I had a
better idea what you see as a "right". Are they only those things I have the
ability to let government do for me? It's not a right if I can't cede my
power to do so to the government?

As for an individual constituting a minority, are you suggesting that any
government that does not have 100% consensual support for it's laws is not
just? Otherwise isn't that law actually the mob violating the rights of the,
possibly, one dissenting individual.
It almost sounds like you advocate anarchy. Is this so? No government is
good government?

I'll end with a quote myself. Mine is from Epictetus, an ancient
philosopher, regarding those things we have power over, as they seem to be
key to this discussion of rights.

"For, if the greatest hurt be a deprivation of the most valuable things,
and the most valuable thing to everyone be rectitue of will; when anyone is
deprived of this, why, after all, are you angry? You ought not to be
affected, O man! contrary to nature, by the evil deeds of another. Pity him
rather. Yield not to hatred and anger, nor say, as many do: "What! shall
these execrable and odious wretches dare to act thus?" Whence have you so
suddenly learned wisdom?
Why are we thus enraged? Because we make idols of those things which such
people take from us. Make not an idol of your clothes, and you will not be
enraged with the thief. Make not an idol of a woman's beauty, and you will
not be enraged with an adulterer. Know that thief and adulterer cannot reach
the things that are properly your own; but those only which belong to
others, and are not within your power."

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: "L. Sicinius Drusus" <lsicinius@-------->
To: <novaroma@-------->
Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2001 5:30 PM
Subject: [novaroma] Rights of Citizens

> Salvete Quirites,
>
> I found quite a few posts in my in box today
> mentioning Rights, so I would like to comment on the
> Rights of the Citizens.
>
> Legally Nova Roma is a private organization, and as
> such has the Right to set whatever terms she wishes
> regarding who can be a member, and what kind of
> conduct members can engage in as long as these terms
> do not violate the laws of the State of New Hampshire
> where Nova Roma is chartered nor the Laws of the
> United States. This gives the private organization
> called Nova Roma a great deal of leeway in setting the
> rules of conduct that it's members must abide by.
> These rules of conduct do NOT violate your rights
> since no one is forced to be a member of this private
> organization. There is NO legal right to belong to a
> private organization, Nor is there any right to force
> your ideas of how this private organization ought to
> be run on the other members contrary to whatever
> bylaws Nova Roma wishes to adopt.
>
> This is fine if Nova Roma desires no more than just
> being a private organization, To be no more than the
> "Roman Club" or a fraternal lodge like some kind of
> "Loyal Order of Romans". Quirites, aren't our
> aspirations higher than this? Do we want to be the
> Nova Roma club, or do we want to be the NATION of Nova
> Roma?
>
> Nations are judged by a far higher standard of conduct
> than mere private clubs, and are expected to protect
> the rights of all of thier citizens. Nations are
> expected to have a just government that doesn't just
> obey the wishes of the majority, but also to protect
> the rights of the minority.
>
> Here is a Quote from Ayn Rand that I consider to be
> important on the subject of the rights of minorities.
> "The smallest minority on earth is the individual.
> Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be
> defenders of minorities."
>
> I fully agree with Ms Rand on this point, and I'll go
> even farther. There is no such thing as group rights.
> Any group has no more rights than it's individual
> members have. The only thing a group has is the
> strength of numbers.
>
> A Just government doesn't derive it's powers from the
> wishes of it's citizens. It is no more than a group of
> citizens, and it's powers come from a grant by the
> citizens acting in common. You can NOT cede a power to
> the government that you do not pocess as an
> individual. You do not gain new powers to cede to the
> government by joining a group, you only become a
> member of a mob, and the only power a mob has is brute
> strength. No mob has the right to force it's will upon
> others. There is no real difference between a mob that
> meets by torchlight to violate the rights of others
> and a mob that assembles by daylight and enters the
> polls to violate the rights of others.
>
> Quirites,
> If you wish Nova Roma to be a nation with a just
> government, then you should consider one thing before
> you vote on any lex. Do I as an individual pocess the
> power that I'm trying to cede to the government? If
> you do not then when you vote for that lex you are
> asking your government to violate the rights of
> another human being.
>
> Valete,
> Lucius Sicinius Drusus
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
> http://auctions.yahoo.com/
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Nova Roman Citizenship -Time to get Real.
From:	Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix <alexious@-------->
Date:	Wed, 18 Apr 2001 22:58:40 -0700

Ave,

Actually, many of the ideas can be implemented by the Censors. We, the
Censors shall have a conversation about implementing some of these
ideas.

Respctfully,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
Censor

Mark A Bird wrote:
>
> Salve Oppius Flaccus Severus
>
> Extremely good reasoning and excellent recommendations - presumably someone
> from the Senate will take notice and start to make some (if not all) of your
> recommendations happen.
>
> Vale
>
> Marcus Sentius Claudius
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Oppius Flaccus Severus [mailto:oppiusflaccus@--------]
> Sent: Thursday, 19 April 2001 12:29 Pm
> To: novaroma@--------
> Subject: [novaroma] Nova Roman Citizenship -Time to get Real.
>
> Salvete Quiritibus!
>
> I've been watching this discussion with keen interest;
> as many of these points are key even though they have
> been brought up in one form or another in previous debates.
>
> In short, I could not agree more that we need to strengthen
> our measures and determinants of citizenship. To synthesize
> my views with some other current posts on the matter:
>
> 1-An absolute and resounding YES to snail mail applications.
> These applications should be at least as thorough as
> the current ones and preferably more so. Anyone, anywhere
> can fill out a generic html form and post it somewhere
> with it meaning next to nothing at all. The act of writing
> something, including funds and a stamp is a much more
> tangible act than posting text in a web form.
>
> 2-Snail mail applications should be accompanied by a facsimile
> of an applicant's macronational ID of record. Depending
> on the country, this could be a driver's license (I would
> think the most common,) state/federal/local/provincial
> ID card, or the good old standby -a passport. While
> birth certificates are a nice secondary form of ID when
> available, I agree that it can be a pain in the podex
> to get one of these in a timely manner. -Have been
> through this exercise for myself, son and wife.
> *Inconvenient* is a polite term for what we dealt with :-)
>
> 3-Applications should be accompanied by an application
> fee. This could be done either via enclosed personal
> check, traveler's check -or on the web, via PayPal.
> If done via PayPal, the application is held in
> 'escrow' until funds have been verified.
>
> 4-In *addition* to the steps above, when an application
> arrives for processing -either the mater/paterfamilias
> of the gens being petitioned and/or the Provincial
> Governor/Legatus performs some physical form of
> verification. Preferably in the form of a face to
> face meeting.
>
> 5-As a slightly different alternative, membership
> drives at public events could be utilized for
> instant 'pre-approval,' by performing all the
> physical verifications and money collection.
>
> I fully agree that provincial officials are key to making
> such a system work. Of course, it also puts more
> responsibility on the pater/materfamilias to assist
> in the verification process. This will require
> some fundamental changes in our infrastructure and
> likely at least one or more leges to be promulgated
> to allow the appropriate officials the appropriate
> powers to conduct business.
>
> Furthermore, the approval process of provincial
> officials and pater/materfamilias will need to be
> more stringent to ensure that they have the ability
> to perform the requirements of verification in their
> particular situation.
>
> While the organization was in the midst of applying
> for NPC status, I could see how it made perfect sense
> to play the raw numbers game and get as many names as
> possible tied to the association. Now that this status
> has been granted, it is time to make the
> citizenship count for something and to ensure that
> we are all in effect who we say we are.
>
> Furthermore, the mater/paterfamilias, provincial
> officials and Censores could conduct an actual census
> to see just who really exists, who is where and whether
> or not they're actually members of the organization
> or not. It seems apparent that we have at least several
> hundred in our midst who either no longer exist, may
> have never been real at all and/or have no interest
> in participation or involvement.
>
> A case in point: a recent provincial 'census' message
> sent to the civis of my Regio returned *2* responses.
> At least one e-mail has bounced and the other six or
> so names I fully expect not to hear from at all.
>
> Before the flames fly, let me tell you as a civis
> that has actually contributed *real* time and perhaps
> even more importantly *real money* to our organization,
> I have little sympathy for those that do not value
> their citizenship. If we're really going to grow
> and become a physical *nation,* then we need to get
> real; make it count and get to know one another
> as people and not keyboard operators.
>
> Bene valete,
> Oppius Flaccus Severus, Legatus America Boreoccidentalis Major
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
> **********************************************************************
> 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/


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Duplicated citizenship
From:	gaiuscoriolanus@--------
Date:	Thu, 19 Apr 2001 06:19:36 -0000

Salvete omnes

Surra is right, because there are more citizens inactive, or
uncontactable some way among us. There must be established another
security system.

Here is my thoughts about this issue:

First of all there is pater/materfamilias who has to revise his
family members. Althoug it could be difficult for him/her because
some mebers are from the other side of world there are censors that
should help him/her with it.

Interesting idea is to make legates to check it up. Yes, they are
best knowledgeable about local situation and their abilities to
contact provincial citizens are better than censors who are far away.

Censors really can not recognize dual citizenship now and governors
could help them to do it, but some provinces are somewhat larger and
more settled than others and it will be more difficult to check up
all citizens in there.

There are still problem with inactive citizens as Surra said. How to
check up them? Maybe it could be solved with mail approvals send by
other citizens, but this is very bureucratic way.

There is only one really safe way. To make a provincial gathering and
there will be clear who is who. But it's not possible to make it with
full attendance.

As you can see there is more issues than solutions in my thoughts.

valete omnes

Gaius Marcius Coriolanus
Paterfamilias Gens Marcia
Legatus Pannoniae Inferioris

--- In novaroma@--------, Jerr--------guston <gaiussentius@--------> wrote:
> Ave omnes,
>
> I have to say that this is a pretty strange idea, and
> open to all sorts of problems in itself. An example of
> this is my brother, who pit-crews around the world,
> and could be away for periods as long as two years. By
> your reckoning, he would not be present to prove his
> identity or etc., so therefore what is to stop his
> being struck off as a spurious citizen while he is
> absent? Currently, he is in Mongolia, and will not be
> back for sometime. He spends around 15 days of every
> year at home (if that), and the rest of the time is
> going around the world. That makes him fairly
> uncontactable, so I would say that in his case,
> failing the fact that we have no proof of his identity
> here at home as he carries it with him everywhere,
> that he could just as easily return home and find
> himself no longer a citizen.
>
> Valete bene omnes,
>
> Gaius Sentius Bruttius Sura
>
> --- Lucius Mauricius Procopious <procopious@-------->
> wrote:
> <HR>
> <html><body>
> <tt>
> Salvete Omnes, 
> Could the Governors of Nova Roma be enlisted to aid
> the Censors and ensure 
> no duplicate citizenship's exist? If existing laws
> were changed or their 
> interpretation is altered the Governors of Nova Roma
> could be given the 
> necessary contact information and could then be
> responsible for verifying 
> the cives in their provinces. 
> For those that don't know, the Governors of NR are
> working on this very 
> issue. 
> 
> Lucius Mauricius Procopious 
> Propraetor America Boreoccidentalis 
> (This is an unofficial post for which I assume full
> responsibility) 
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 
> procopious@-------- 
> ICQ# 83516618 
> *America Boreoccidentalis Mail List 
> <a
>
href="http://www.egroups.com/group/AmBor_Waves">http://www.egroups.com
/group/AmBor_Waves</a> 
> * The Gens Mauricia 
> <a
>
href="http://www.geocities.com/procopious">http://www.geocities.com/pr
ocopious</a> 
> 
> "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: "Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix"
> al--------us@-------- 
> To: novaroma@-------- 
> Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2001 1:36 PM 
> Subject: Re: [novaroma] Duplicated citizenship 
> 
> 
> > Ave, 
> > 
> > Senator Lucius Sergius, that is easily
> rectified. Remember when Nova 
> > Roma started we had to snail mail our
> applications to the Censors. I 
> > know I did. Censor Equitius do you have any
> comments on this issue? 
> > 
> > Respectfully, 
> > 
> > Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix 
> > Censor of Nova Roma 
> > 
> > LSergAust@-------- wrote: 
> > > 
> > > Salve Gn. Salix 
> > > 
> > > As far as I can see, we have no
> safeguards at all in our application 
> > > process. We don't verify location, name,
> age, nationality, species, or 
> > > planet of origin. 
> > > 
> > > That's what makes it so peculiar for us to
> demand proof of physical 
> > > gender. Of all the things to worry about
> making sure of...... 
> > > 
> > > We have had people expelled from Nova Roma
> and later re-admitted under 
> an 
> > > different identity (and as a matter of fact,
> I'm getting a little 
> > > suspicious that may have happened
> again). 
> > > 
> > > We need some safeguards, mea sententia. 
> > > 
> > > Vale, 
> > > 
> > > L. Sergius Aust. Obst. 
> > > 
> > > On 4/18/01 2:10 PM Gnaeus Salix Astur
> (salixastur@--------) wrote: 
> > > 
> > > >Salvete, romani quirites. 
> > > > 
> > > >A terrible doubt has ocurred to me: do
> we have some system to avoid 
> > > >multiple citizenship applications? I
> mean, under our actual application 
> > > >system, I could apply several times for
> citizenship with different 
> > > >names and be accepted all the times. 
> > > > 
> > > >Am I wrong? Is there some identity
> control system that makes this 
> > > >impossible? I sincerely hope there
> is! 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > >===== 
> > > >Bene Valete! 
> > > >Gnaeus Salix Astur. 
> > > >Civis romanus. 
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > 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 
> <a
>
href="http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/">http://docs.yahoo.com/info/te
rms/</a> 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to <a
>
href="http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/">http://docs.yahoo.com/info/te
rms/</a> 
> > 
> > 
> 
> </tt>
>
> 
>
> 
>
> <table border=0 cellspacing=0 cellpadding=2>
> <tr bgcolor=#FFFFCC>
> <td align=center> color=#003399>Yahoo! Groups Sponsor</td>
> </tr>
> <tr bgcolor=#FFFFFF>
> <td width=470><a
>
href="http://rd.yahoo.com/M=131860.1389494.2986703.2/D=egroupmail/S=17
00313712:N/A=639281/?
http://rd.yahoo.com/M=131860.1389494.2986703.2/D=egroupmail/S=17003137
12:N/A=639281/R=0/O=1/I=season-
mom01/b2/*http://shopping.yahoo.com/promotions/momsday01/"
> target="_top"><img width=468 height=60
>
src="http://us.a1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/a/pr/promo/mom2001/ad_mom20014.
gif"
> alt="Click Here!" border=0></a></td>
> </tr>
> <tr><td><img alt="" width=1 height=1
> src="http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?
M=131860.1389494.2986703.2/D=egroupmail/S=1700313712:N/A=639281/rand=5
67211820"></td></tr>
> </table>
>
> 
>
>
>
> 
> <tt>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the <a
> href="http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/">Yahoo! Terms
> of Service</a>.</tt>
> 
>
> </body></html>
>
>
>
>
______________________________________________________________________
_______
> http://movies.yahoo.com.au - Yahoo! Movies
> - Now showing: Dude Where's My Car, The Wedding Planner, Traffic..


Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Nova Roman Citizenship -Time to get Real.
From:	"Oppius Flaccus Severus" <oppiusflaccus@-------->
Date:	Wed, 18 Apr 2001 23:21:20 -0700

Salve Patrici Vitruvi;

You bring up a very good point, which I tried
to partially address in my admittedly non-
comprehensive post. For such a system
to work well in the proposed scenario,
the powers of verification would have to
vested in the governor's office itself,
as opposed to applying to the governor only.

The final citizenship approvals would of
course, still rest with the Censores office;
(by 'office,' am including both the
Censores and their appointed or recognized
officials,) as what's being
proposed is a comprehensive system of
*verification* only. There are a vast
number of other steps that the Censores must
do to complete the final citizen
approvals.

Such a system would allow the Legates
(typically assigned by state, country
or Regio,) or even a city-level officer
to perform verifications. Additionally,
tables at events, recruiting drives and
the likes could be advertised as yet
another means of verification.

The key being- some trusted entity saying
'yes, this individual is who they say
they are.' Said verification official reports to the
next official in the chain -Censor most
likely, though possibly a Legate or Governor,
depending on where the official is in the
hierarchy.

The physical verification, coupled with the
written verification and membership
fees -along with the Censores stamp
of approval become the comprehensive system
for completing the citizenship cycle.

Bene vale,
Oppius

-----Original Message-----
From: Patrick Ferguson [mailto:pvitruviusiulianus@--------]
Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2001 9:24 PM
To: novaroma@--------
Subject: RE: [novaroma] Nova Roman Citizenship -Time to get Real.

Avete omnes!

I have no problems with most of what has been said so
far, but not *all* of what has been said so far. When
I applied for citizenship to Nova Roma I desired to
form my own gens. So I obviouly could'nt meet with
its pater/materfalmilias. Also, my provincial
governor lives in another city in another state.

<snipped>


Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Duplicated citizenship
From:	"Oppius Flaccus Severus" <oppiusflaccus@-------->
Date:	Wed, 18 Apr 2001 23:50:33 -0700

Salvete Gai Senti et Quiritibus;

I must admit that it's always very
interesting to see the extreme examples
that we're able to come up with in response
to issues :-) (yes, that's a smile)
Seriously though, you bring up a good case
of what would indeed be an interesting
situation. Comments below:
-----Original Message-----
From: Jerry Anguston [mailto:gaiussentius@--------]
Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2001 8:50 PM
To: novaroma@--------
Subject: Re: [novaroma] Duplicated citizenship

Ave omnes,

Gaius Sentius writes:
I have to say that this is a pretty strange idea, and
open to all sorts of problems in itself.

OFS: Well, let's see if we can work through
them then; though the idea in and of itself
is not strange at all. I agree with you though,
that a case like this would require special
handling. Further comments....

Gaius Sentius writes:
An example of
this is my brother, who pit-crews around the world,
and could be away for periods as long as two years. By
your reckoning, he would not be present to prove his
identity or etc., so therefore what is to stop his
being struck off as a spurious citizen while he is
absent?

OFS: While I won't speak for another's intent, I
don't think this is what Procopius was saying. As
you'll note from my post on related subject matter,
the governor's office is being proposed as an
*additional* tool of verification. Such a tool
however is just that -one of many tools. In the case
of your brother, much like the rest of us in a census
situation -he would need submit to some form of
verification.

Using your brother's situation as an example, he
could be verified by any official empowered to do
so, anywhere in our micronation. Since we are not
subject to national borders per se, he could thus
be verified by a Legatus or Governor *or* other
appointed official in the areas through which he
travels. In such a case, he would notify the
Censores for instance that he was going to be
in country 'x' for 'x' length of time. -Arrangements
are made, verification is completed.

Also though, I think such an extreme case could
have special exceptions; even including that he
be verified when returning to his 'home' province,
provided that he communicated with the Censores
and/or his home provincial officials as to his
intent.

Gaius Sentius writes:
Currently, he is in Mongolia, and will not be
back for sometime. He spends around 15 days of every
year at home (if that), and the rest of the time is
going around the world. That makes him fairly
uncontactable, so I would say that in his case,
failing the fact that we have no proof of his identity
here at home as he carries it with him everywhere,
that he could just as easily return home and find
himself no longer a citizen.

OFS: See above. I don't think anyone is advocating
not keeping a citizen as a citizen, *provided* that
they meet the requirements of citizenship. A point
to keep in mind; once someone is verified, *they are
verified.* All your brother would do then would get
the initial verification and then send in his annual
membership fee (assuming one is established,) and
he's good to go regardless of where he is.

Honestly though and this is not meant as a criticism;
more as an observation -I'm not at all sure why anyone
would join an organization, get verified and pay dues
for something they had neither the intention or ability to
participate in. -If I am indeed understanding what you're
saying correctly, your brother has no access to phone,
post or computer equipment with which to be contacted.

Nevertheless, the situation is most interesting indeed
and I hope I've helped clarify at least my perspective
on it.

Bene valete,
Oppius

<snipped>


Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Call to Census in Oklahoma
From:	"Oppius Flaccus Severus" <oppiusflaccus@-------->
Date:	Wed, 18 Apr 2001 23:57:02 -0700

Salve Marce Flavi!

Excellent letter! You've inspired me to
send a copy of my provincial census mail
to the main list as well, in hopes that
someone here will speak up for the moribund
individuals in our province that are
'missing in action.' Hope your responses
are numerous and comprehensive!

Bene vale,
Oppius
-----Original Message-----
From: britil@-------- [mailto:britil@--------]
Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2001 9:23 PM
To: novaroma@--------
Subject: [novaroma] Call to Census in Oklahoma

Salvete,

To all members of NovaRoma in Oklahoma. This is a call of
Census. By order of our Governor, Pontius Sejanus Marius.

<snipped>


Subject:	[novaroma] Census -Cives of America Boreoccidentalis Major
From:	"Oppius Flaccus Severus" <oppiusflaccus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 19 Apr 2001 00:00:20 -0700

Salvete Quiritibus;

This is a letter to inform you of some happenings in our province.
Some of you may already be aware of these changes -some may
not. As we are in the process of rebuilding the province, this letter
is being sent specifically to confirm the following:

1-That you are still a currently registered and active citizen.

2-That your name, address, e-mail and phone contact information
is still the same as it was when you were granted citizenship

3-Your goals and projected level of involvement in provincial
activities.

As far as provincial structure, I am your legatus: Oppius Flaccus Severus. I
report directly to Lucius Mauricius Procopious and am working with him to ensure
that we can fully understand everyone's interests, level of involvement and
commitment to their citizenship.

Note that this e-mail is a 'blind' list, in that I have no
wish to put anyone on the spot. In fact, it is my sincere hope that everyone on
our citizenship roster will respond to this letter and notify me of your status.
Please be aware that we are slowly gathering information from the Censores, but
this is a time-consuming process and your assistance would be *greatly*
appreciated. Also, note
that for most of you on this list, we quite simply are unaware
if you still exist or have any interest in participation
here. That's largely the reason behind this e-mail. Once
we get everyone confirmed, then I will be sharing my full
macronational contact information with each respondent
so that we may get our task of province building well
under way.

So, with that in mind, please reply to me directly and
privately in e-mail with the following information:

1-Your full Roman Name
2-Your current e-mail address
3-Your current preferred contact telephone number
4-Your current mailing address
5-Degree (if any) of interest in provincial gatherings,
holding office, cultural interests, etc.
6-Whether or not you are subscribed to the provincial
mailing list: ambor_waves@--------
7-Do you know of any cives in the province that
require any non-electronic means of contact such
as phone or post? If so, please provide a means
of contacting these individuals.

Please forgive the intrusion on your time. Any and
all help in helping us update our provincial records
would be most appreciated. As always -any questions,
please do not hesitate to ask.

Bene valete,
Oppius Flaccus Severus, Legatus America Boreoccidentalis Major
mailto:oppiusflaccus@--------


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Rights of Citizens
From:	lsicinius@--------
Date:	Thu, 19 Apr 2001 09:40:57 -0000

--- In novaroma@--------, "Lucius Mauricius Procopious" <procopious@h...>
wrote:
> Salvete Omnes,
> A well thought and informative post from Lucius Sicinius Drusus! Great
> advice, vote carefully, protect each others rights.
> I won't argue whether or not a group should or does have rights.
I'll agree
> to disagree there. I'd feel more comfortable discussing this if I had a
> better idea what you see as a "right". Are they only those things I
have the
> ability to let government do for me? It's not a right if I can't cede my
> power to do so to the government?
>

You only have one basic right, the right to your life. All other
rights are derived from this one basic right, for example the right of
defense stems from prttecting your right to your life, or they exist
in a negative sense. You have the right of freedom of speach because
no one has the right to use force to prevent you from saying what you
wish.

> As for an individual constituting a minority, are you suggesting
that any
> government that does not have 100% consensual support for it's laws
is not
> just? Otherwise isn't that law actually the mob violating the rights
of the,
> possibly, one dissenting individual.

The Citizens as a group have the right to decide how to regulate the
use of common properity, for example deciding which side of the road
we are going to drive on when Nova Roma aquires land. (That will be a
fun debate) This is a matter of simple majority rule. The Citizens do
NOT have the right to interfere in matters that do not involve common
properity or the violations of others rights.

I grew up in the Southeastern USA during the Cival Rights struggle. If
a law had been presented for a vote in 1963 that stated "Shall Negros
(the term of the time) have the same rights as whites?" That law would
have been defeated in any of the Southern states. Anoter person's
rights are not subject to the vote of the majority and this remains
true if 49% of the populations rights are violated, or 10% or a single
indiviual.

> It almost sounds like you advocate anarchy. Is this so? No government is
> good government?

Anarchy is no more than a prelude to dictatorship. The lawlessness
that would exist under anarchy would cause the people to turn to a
strong man for protection. I favor a government that strictly limited
in it's powers.

> I'll end with a quote myself. Mine is from Epictetus, an ancient
> philosopher, regarding those things we have power over, as they seem
to be
> key to this discussion of rights.
>
> "For, if the greatest hurt be a deprivation of the most valuable
things,
> and the most valuable thing to everyone be rectitue of will; when
anyone is
> deprived of this, why, after all, are you angry? You ought not to be
> affected, O man! contrary to nature, by the evil deeds of another.
Pity him
> rather. Yield not to hatred and anger, nor say, as many do: "What! shall
> these execrable and odious wretches dare to act thus?" Whence have
you so
> suddenly learned wisdom?
> Why are we thus enraged? Because we make idols of those things which
such
> people take from us. Make not an idol of your clothes, and you will
not be
> enraged with the thief. Make not an idol of a woman's beauty, and
you will
> not be enraged with an adulterer. Know that thief and adulterer
cannot reach
> the things that are properly your own; but those only which belong to
> others, and are not within your power."
>
> Lucius Mauricius Procopious
> Propraetor America Boreoccidentalis
> (This is an unofficial post for which I assume full responsibility)

Vale
L. Sicinius Drusus


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Digest Number 1350
From:	bvm3@--------
Date:	Thu, 19 Apr 2001 12:18:20 +0200

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

I must admit that I was appalled to read the following set of
suggestions and those of other posters whose mindset has been
similar.

Before criticising, let me clarify that this is not an ethical or
human rights issue, but one of simple common sense. Also let it
be clarified that I am against individuals' having duplicate
memberships, as this might skew our democratic processes.

However, it is not an *infinitely* serious problem and does not
merit a level of effort and expense and collective self-harassment
that is a still worse nuisance than to suffer from a few duplicate
memberships. We should keep this all in proportion.

Nova Roma has been growing by leaps and bounds precisely
because

(1) it makes excellent use of the internet to do things without old-
fashioned snail mail hassle,

(2) membership is fundamentally easy to obtain without
complicated documentation and controls, and

(3) there are no dues, taxes or registration fees.

If these advantages are thrown away in an over-ambitious
attempt to reduce fraud - which I at least presume to be
exceedingly rare, since there is no special motivation for it, we will
experience:

(1) a dramatic decline in new members,

(2) a dramatic decline in old memebers to the extent that it is
made retroactive (taxes in themselves would do this, of course)

(3) a nuisance for everyone involved of considerable proportions.

Now, the rest is a value judgement on which people may very
well disagree. Is it worthwhile suffering from the above
disadvantages to reduce (prsumably never completely eliminate)
probably very rare cases of fraud?

I do not doubt that the measures would be quite efficacious, I
simply think the proposed cure to be infinitely worse than the
disease. A disease that is hardly even a mild case of the sniffles,
not something that requires radical chemotherapy and surgical
dismemberment.

By the way, taxes in themselves would greatly cut down on
casual duplicate members, if they exist. For obvious reasons.

But I recommend that we not turn into control freaks, and that
we carefully consider whether the costs of this kind of thinking,
human as well as financial, are really justified by real benefits.
Most of us already suffer from a serious excess of red tape in our
outside lives - do we really want to bring it into Nova Roma to make
ourselves feel more real? We have so far avoided that sort of thing
here - let's hang on to that very precious attainment.

Valete!

On 19 Apr 2001, at 3:50, novaroma@-------- wrote:

> Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 19:29:23 -0700
> From: "Oppius Flaccus Severus" <oppiusflaccus@-------->
> Subject: Nova Roman Citizenship -Time to get Real.
>
> Salvete Quiritibus!
>
> I've been watching this discussion with keen interest;
> as many of these points are key even though they have
> been brought up in one form or another in previous debates.
>
> In short, I could not agree more that we need to strengthen
> our measures and determinants of citizenship. To synthesize
> my views with some other current posts on the matter:
>
> 1-An absolute and resounding YES to snail mail applications.
> These applications should be at least as thorough as
> the current ones and preferably more so. Anyone, anywhere
> can fill out a generic html form and post it somewhere
> with it meaning next to nothing at all. The act of writing
> something, including funds and a stamp is a much more
> tangible act than posting text in a web form.
>
> 2-Snail mail applications should be accompanied by a facsimile
> of an applicant's macronational ID of record. Depending
> on the country, this could be a driver's license (I would
> think the most common,) state/federal/local/provincial
> ID card, or the good old standby -a passport. While
> birth certificates are a nice secondary form of ID when
> available, I agree that it can be a pain in the podex
> to get one of these in a timely manner. -Have been
> through this exercise for myself, son and wife.
> *Inconvenient* is a polite term for what we dealt with :-)
>
> 3-Applications should be accompanied by an application
> fee. This could be done either via enclosed personal
> check, traveler's check -or on the web, via PayPal.
> If done via PayPal, the application is held in
> 'escrow' until funds have been verified.
>
> 4-In *addition* to the steps above, when an application
> arrives for processing -either the mater/paterfamilias
> of the gens being petitioned and/or the Provincial
> Governor/Legatus performs some physical form of
> verification. Preferably in the form of a face to
> face meeting.
>
> 5-As a slightly different alternative, membership
> drives at public events could be utilized for
> instant 'pre-approval,' by performing all the
> physical verifications and money collection.
>
> I fully agree that provincial officials are key to making
> such a system work. Of course, it also puts more
> responsibility on the pater/materfamilias to assist
> in the verification process. This will require
> some fundamental changes in our infrastructure and
> likely at least one or more leges to be promulgated
> to allow the appropriate officials the appropriate
> powers to conduct business.
>
> Furthermore, the approval process of provincial
> officials and pater/materfamilias will need to be
> more stringent to ensure that they have the ability
> to perform the requirements of verification in their
> particular situation.
>
> While the organization was in the midst of applying
> for NPC status, I could see how it made perfect sense
> to play the raw numbers game and get as many names as
> possible tied to the association. Now that this status
> has been granted, it is time to make the
> citizenship count for something and to ensure that
> we are all in effect who we say we are.
>
> Furthermore, the mater/paterfamilias, provincial
> officials and Censores could conduct an actual census
> to see just who really exists, who is where and whether
> or not they're actually members of the organization
> or not. It seems apparent that we have at least several
> hundred in our midst who either no longer exist, may
> have never been real at all and/or have no interest
> in participation or involvement.
>
> A case in point: a recent provincial 'census' message
> sent to the civis of my Regio returned *2* responses.
> At least one e-mail has bounced and the other six or
> so names I fully expect not to hear from at all.
>
> Before the flames fly, let me tell you as a civis
> that has actually contributed *real* time and perhaps
> even more importantly *real money* to our organization,
> I have little sympathy for those that do not value
> their citizenship. If we're really going to grow
> and become a physical *nation,* then we need to get
> real; make it count and get to know one another
> as people and not keyboard operators.
>
> Bene valete,
> Oppius Flaccus Severus, Legatus America Boreoccidentalis Major


Subject:	[novaroma] human rights as defined by UN
From:	JustiniaCassia@--------
Date:	Thu, 19 Apr 2001 09:53:24 EDT

http://www.unhchr.ch/udhr/index.htm

There seems to be some confusion expressed recently as to what constitutes
human rights. The UN worked out a Universal Declaration of Human Rights in
1948 which was reaffirmed at its 50th anniversary in 1998. At their website
it can be accessed in over 300 languages.

While I know someone is bound to point out that Nova Roma doesn't belong to
the UN, even if we are determined to work out our own version of human
rights, surely a document such as this one, the product of macronational
representatives working together, is an excellent place to start. The UN
Commission on Human Rights continues to monitor and comment upon human rights
in specific parts of the world, and as regards new circumstances that arise.

Justinia Cassia


Subject:	[novaroma] Human Rights as Defined by the UN
From:	"Pompeia Cornelia" <scriba_forum@-------->
Date:	Thu, 19 Apr 2001 14:22:45 -0000

Salve Justina Cassia:

Thanks for this excellent resource link :)

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


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: Rights of Citizens
From:	"Lucius Mauricius Procopious" <procopious@-------->
Date:	Thu, 19 Apr 2001 08:38:54 -0700

Salvete Lucius Sicinius et Omnes,

Thanks for the clarification on your post. I wasn't sure about some of what
you said. I have more clarity now. I'm still not sure if your post was a
rebuttal of my "sacrifice" post, but either way I understand better. If it
was intended as a rebuttal then perhaps I was not clear enough myself.
Yes we must protect the rights of our cives. No one is suggesting otherwise.
However, the kinds of violations listed at the U.N. website are a far cry
from the accusations thrown at our leadership from time to time. I was
suggesting we as individuals look for ways we can help the group. Put the
good of the group above "perceived" abuses.
As for whether or not a group has rights, according to the U.N. declaration
of rights:

Article 29
1. Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full
development of his personality is possible.

Perhaps when I spoke of the rights of a group I would have been better
served to speak of our duties to the group.
Again thanks for clarification. It goes to show that two dissenting views
can be expressed without the rancor that often accompanies it here on the
main list.

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]


Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Digest Number 1350
From:	"Oppius Flaccus Severus" <oppiusflaccus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 19 Apr 2001 08:52:44 -0700

Salvete Formosane et Quiritibus;

Yes, certainly no surprise that you were
the first to build a full-scale treatise
against verification. Comments below:
-----Original Message-----
From: bvm3@-------- [mailto:bvm3@--------]
Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 3:18 AM
To: novaroma@--------
Subject: Re: [novaroma] Digest Number 1350

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

I must admit that I was appalled to read the following set of
suggestions and those of other posters whose mindset has been
similar.

OFS: Yes, I'm sure it was extremely 'appalling' for you.'
Duly recognize as well that others reserve the right to be
appalled as well at your mindset.

Formosanus writes:
Before criticising, let me clarify that this is not an ethical or
human rights issue, but one of simple common sense. Also let it
be clarified that I am against individuals' having duplicate
memberships, as this might skew our democratic processes.

OFS: Common sense according to Formosanus.

Formosanus writes:
However, it is not an *infinitely* serious problem and does not
merit a level of effort and expense and collective self-harassment
that is a still worse nuisance than to suffer from a few duplicate
memberships. We should keep this all in proportion.

OFS: Yes, we *should* keep nation-building in
perspective. I would agree with you that duplication
of citizenship in and of itself is at best a minor
problem if at all. However, there is a broader point,
which is what I was addressing. In fact, if you
go back and read through my 'mind set' more carefully,
I was addressing the citizenship process in general.
It has everything to do with the needs of a nation
to verify its citizenry.

Your country sounds better and better Formosanus.
Apparently, they don't have taxes or require
any form of identification there. Very progressive
indeed!

Formosanus writes:
Nova Roma has been growing by leaps and bounds precisely
because

OFS: Many of us have spoken on this before, including
Draco. Our numbers are not 'accurate,' our numbers are
inflated and with a handful of *very* welcome recent exceptions,
I'm seeing the same people do the work in NR that were
when I started. Raw growth or 'membership stuffing' does
no one any good if there's no substance or validity
behind the numbers.

Formosanus writes:
(1) it makes excellent use of the internet to do things without old-
fashioned snail mail hassle,

OFS: On the technical side, what Marcus Octavius
has done with the Internet side of our nation has
been extraordinary. On the technical side, I
agree with you. I'd even further agree that
snail mail is *obviously* less *convenient*
than an anonymous html form. But that's not
really the point is it?

Formosanus writes:
(2) membership is fundamentally easy to obtain without
complicated documentation and controls, and

OFS: Yes, the old 'membership vs. citizenship'
terminology. You seem to be thinking of NR still
as a generic anonymous Internet-based organization
instead of a NATION.

Formosanus writes:
(3) there are no dues, taxes or registration fees.

OFS: What is the URL to obtain citizenship in
your country? Please forward it to me so that I
can fill out the form and become a citizen. I'd love
to have the benefit of being a multinational and
not having to pay taxes or anything.

Formosanus writes:
If these advantages are thrown away in an over-ambitious
attempt to reduce fraud - which I at least presume to be
exceedingly rare,

OFS: You are missing the point. This is not about
fraud in and of itself; though fraud is certainly
one component. It is about the requirements of a nation to
be able to administer itself properly. We are a
nation, every bit as much as your macronational country
(or at least, we're *trying* to be.)

Formosanus writes:
since there is no special motivation for it, we will
experience:

OFS: You miss the point again.

Formosanus writes:
(1) a dramatic decline in new members,

OFS: An initial decline perhaps. However what will
*increase,* is the inclusion of members that actually
care about the nation, care about being part of a
nation, care about their fellow citizens, recognize
that nations have requirements to exist such as
collection of taxes and to know who its citizens
are. In other words, we will discontinue to continually
add raw numbers to the rolls that do nothing to
contribute and further our goals as a NATION.

Formosanus writes:
(2) a dramatic decline in old members to the extent that it is
made retroactive (taxes in themselves would do this, of course)

OFS: So, you're saying that if citizenship fees
are propagated that you will resign?

Formosanus writes:
(3) a nuisance for everyone involved of considerable proportions.

OFS: Yes Formosanus, life is indeed a nuisance. Being
a citizen of any nation is indeed a nuisance. Having to
do anything more than sit at one's keyboard and pick apart
the efforts of others to build something is indeed
a nuisance.

Formosanus writes:
Now, the rest is a value judgement

OFS: Actually, it's not just the rest but your
entire post. Always comes down to the 'values
according to Formosanus.'

<snipped>

Formosanus writes:
By the way, taxes in themselves would greatly cut down on
casual duplicate members, if they exist. For obvious reasons.

OFS: Yes, taxes indeed will reduce the
numbers of cives who do not wish to contribute
in a productive way.

<snipped>

Bene valete,
Oppius


Subject:	RE: [novaroma] human rights as defined by UN
From:	"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 19 Apr 2001 11:57:07 -0400

Salvete

> -----Original Message-----
> From: JustiniaCassia@-------- [mailto:JustiniaCassia@--------]
> Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 09:53
>
> While I know someone is bound to point out that Nova Roma doesn't belong
to
> the UN, even if we are determined to work out our own version of human
> rights,

We are? Since when?

> surely a document such as this one, the product of macronational
> representatives working together, is an excellent place to start. The UN
> Commission on Human Rights continues to monitor and comment upon human
rights
> in specific parts of the world, and as regards new circumstances that
arise.

I would point out that rights come with responsibilities. I hear several
people talking about rights, but precious few talking about the
responsibilities that do (or should) accompany those rights.

Next year in the Forum!

Valete,

Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
Consul

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


Subject:	[novaroma] citizenship issues
From:	LSergAust@--------
Date:	Thu, 19 Apr 2001 12:31:46 EDT

Salvete Omnes

Sorry to have been unable to participate further yesterday, but I was on
the highway. I am pleasantly surprised at the amount of reasonable
discussion going on here.

I am in accord with L. Equitius and L. Sulla in never having been happy
with the on-line citizenship application. Just because neat things are
possible with technology that doesn't mean that they always are the best
way to accomplish the task. Taking the little bit of extra trouble to
complete and mail in a paper application had enormous advantages to Nova
Roma. For one, it required that extra little bit of effort and bother
that helped weed out the people who join on impulse just because it
sounds "cool" and only requires a few keypecks and a mouse click. These
are the people who do not stand for office and cannot even be bothered to
participate in discussions here, or vote in elections. Do we gain
anything by encouraging such people to sign up, wasting the time of
censores and propraetors who eventually end up trying to locate them?

The mail-in application also gives the censores tangible verification of
where it was mailed from. That in itself might help to weed applicants
with multiple identities.

These on-line impulse joiners give us a nice impressive number for our
population total, but the number means nothing when puffed up by people
who don't participate. These are a large part of the group who, as Marcus
Apollonius rightly points out, will fall away when we ask them to pay
some little token of support for Nova Roma. When they do fall away, those
who never participate, will we have lost anything?

I don't think we should go to great lengths to verify details of an
applicant's life. I suspect - no, I know - that there are localities
where belonging to Nova Roma could actually get someone into trouble with
the authorities. Better we don't have a Praetorian Secret Service
checking people out locally (besides, the acronym would be a disaster).
But I do think we should have more than an email address and some
unverified assertions on-line, to go by.

Now I have to get to work. My life has lately become a constant shuffle
between office and highway - if I don't respond to anyone's post directed
specifically to me, please understand that it is not deliberate neglect.

Valete,

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:	[novaroma] Re: The name-change issue
From:	nous_athanatos@--------
Date:	Thu, 19 Apr 2001 17:09:16 -0000

--- In novaroma@--------, "L. Cornelius Sulla Felix" <alexious@e...>
wrote:
>
> I do not like it. As has been pointed out a number of times on
this list
> people can legally change their names to "President of the United
States of
> America." This whole issue is not just a name change issue..but it
is also
> a gender issue. By changing the Gender on your macronation of
residence you
> are there showing to the world that you value Nova Roman
citizenship equally
> with your macronational citizenship.

Excellent! And while we are at it, we should also require that
everyone who joins Nova Roma change their macronational name to their
official NR name in a further show of support.

Reductio ad absurdum.

T. Clodius Mercurialis


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: duplicated citizenship
From:	Christophe Ferri <nycticorax1@-------->
Date:	Thu, 19 Apr 2001 10:21:44 -0700 (PDT)

Unfortunately, there really isn't that much you can do
to verify if someone is whom they say they are...email
addresses are easily changed, and free email services
further compound the problem.

Likewise, physical addresses are just as easily made
up. There may be a way to cut down on this,
however...If we were to snail mail applicants
"citizenship verifications" (to which they must
respond before being granted citizenship)...that might
be deterrent enough to keep falsified applications to
a minimum.

You may also want to look into setting up a database
of all citizens contact info (by province and local),
and assign a group of people who do nothing more then
compare a new applicant's information with the
information we already have on file.

Note:All of these suggestions may be costly as far
time goes...if the problem is just a rare occurrence,
then there probably isn't a need for such things. If
the problem is enough to raise concern, then perhaps
stricter measures may need to be put in place.

Excuse the haphazard style of this email, I am a bit
rushed today.
-Gauis Cornelius Nycticorax

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] citizenship issues
From:	Kristoffer From <kristoffer.from@-------->
Date:	Thu, 19 Apr 2001 19:23:45 +0200

LSergAust@-------- wrote:
> I am in accord with L. Equitius and L. Sulla in never having been happy
> with the on-line citizenship application. Just because neat things are
> possible with technology that doesn't mean that they always are the best
> way to accomplish the task. Taking the little bit of extra trouble to
> complete and mail in a paper application had enormous advantages to Nova
> Roma. For one, it required that extra little bit of effort and bother
> that helped weed out the people who join on impulse just because it
> sounds "cool" and only requires a few keypecks and a mouse click. These
> are the people who do not stand for office and cannot even be bothered to
> participate in discussions here, or vote in elections. Do we gain
> anything by encouraging such people to sign up, wasting the time of
> censores and propraetors who eventually end up trying to locate them?
>
> I don't think we should go to great lengths to verify details of an
> applicant's life. I suspect - no, I know - that there are localities
> where belonging to Nova Roma could actually get someone into trouble with
> the authorities. Better we don't have a Praetorian Secret Service
> checking people out locally (besides, the acronym would be a disaster).
> But I do think we should have more than an email address and some
> unverified assertions on-line, to go by.

Salve, L.Sergi Aust.

Regarding the "snail-mail" issue, I must disagree with you. It would
have taken me a considerably longer time, and the person who recruited
me would have had to show a whole lot more patience, for me to join by
snail-mail. I admit, I'm not among the most lively participants in the
discussions, but I do participate, and I did vote in the last elections.
My unwillingness to apply by snail-mail has more to do with my lack of
interest in snail-mail, than from any lack of interest in our beloved
Res Publica. I've sent five snail-mails in the last five years, and they
have all been job applications sent by someone on my behalf, and not by
me personally. I do not like snail-mail. I much prefer the electronic
substitute, faster, cheaper and cleaner.

But I agree with your sentiment; we should know more about our
applicants than what their application states. Some kind of "real world"
verification of his/her identity should in some way be required.
Requesting a credit card number would solve this, as well as facilitate
the taxation process. However, demanding this in the application form
would probably be a Bad Idea. Maybe, as several before me has suggested,
a snail-mail to the legate of the Regio, or another suitable official,
with a copy of some form of identification, should be required to
vote/stand for office. Not for participation in discussions, or for
"membership", but to be an actual citizen, one must be able to stand up
and prove who you really are.

Just my own phrasing of an idea I think I've heard elsewhere, feel free
to flame me for my heresy, if you're ready to get flamed back...:)

Vale,

Titus Octavius Pius,
Consiliarius Thules,
Praeco Anarei Thules,
Scriba to the Curator Araneum

AKA Kristoffer From

---

Si hoc signum legere potes,
operis boni in rebus latinis alacribus
et fructuosis potiri potes.

- Not-so-famous quotation


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Fw: Sacrifice
From:	"S. Apollonius Draco" <hendrik.meuleman@-------->
Date:	Thu, 19 Apr 2001 19:18:43 +0200

Salve Luci Maurici,

> Please correct me if I'm wrong (If you don't someone will :-> ) but you
seem
> to think Roma Antiqua lacked adequate civil rights. Yet it seems to have
> "fare(d) pretty well". What do you mean by fared well?

I said that you find debating over civil rights pointless, whilst focusing
on civil duties instead. Idealistic as it may be, this does not work in a
realistic world (cfr communism). By "faring well" I mean that the largest
parts of these countries' citizens does not suffer from famine, don't have
to fear being arrested for merely being different from how the government
views the norm, and won't be mistreated or otherwise emotionally,
financially and/or physically broken by that government.

I did not say Roma Antiqua didn't have civil rights, I just found your
argumentation against the debate over civil rights quite narrow-minded; it
may be my misperception, but saying that we shouldn't debate them because
you think civil rights are a form of egoism is hardly a rational argument.
Deep down inside everyone is concerned with individual survival and to find
means of one's own protection. Civil rights protect all individuals, and
therefore the whole community. Thus, it serves the community.

> It also seems you are saying that it is more important for the state to
care
> for the people than for the people to care for the state. Is this so?

Otherwise the state has no use. A state that does not care for its people
but only vice versa will be subject to decay and corruption very soon. "The
State" is not a wondrous concept or dream. By caring for its people, the
state will care for itself, because the state is composed of... people.

> How
> can you build a nation, a group, if everyone is primarily concerned with
> their own interests? While you're busy arguing amongst yourselves you are
> susceptible to the effects of negative forces be they invasion, financial
> takeover, embezzlement, etc.

Am I? No one has taken any money from me so far, and I'd like to see the
first attempt of barbarians attacking our patria (consisting of a few
servers and dreams) with bludgeons. You also joined NR out of a personal
interest; civil rights has got nothing to do with egoism, but to ensure a
smooth working of the state. Motivated citizens that have their rights
protected will do more for the state than citizens who do not possess these.

> {snipped}
>
> Draco: Is it not arrogant to think that Roma is the best?

> MLP: Yes it is arrogant. I'm Roman, we're the best, what are you? I hope
you
> are Roman and choose to put that first. You have much to offer.
>

I, my dear friend, am a citizen of the world. If you replace the word "Roma"
in your own statement with words like "Italia" or "Deutschland" or "Nippon"
in the '30's, you've got an awfully dangerous nationalistic and natiocentric
view. And if I may, arrogance is �not� something to be proud of. It is a
delusion.

(snipped)

> or, you think
> > institutions such as slavery are good, and that we ought to keep that.

> MLP: Could you please explain what was so bad about the institution of
> slavery as it existed and why you fear it so? We have agreed it is immoral
> and will not be a part of Nova Roma. I knew someone would catch slavery
off
> my "only changes I see necessary list" As for slavery as a modern
> institution I suspect it would have changed as most of us suspect Roman
> gender inequality would have changed. Do you think the thousands killed by
> Dow chemical in India (circa 1980?) were happier dying free? I think Dow
> would have ensured safety measures were in place if those dead were
valuable
> assets rather than easily replaced
> wage earners. I'd rather be a live valued slave than a dead impoverished
> freeman.
>

They were only nominal freemen, but as good as slaves, due to India's severe
social system. So that's not really a valid argument. In reality, these
people were slaves just as well (like many black people were in the US after
they became legally free). Being the "property" of another person is simply
inhuman. Most slaves were treated pretty good in Roma, but that's still no
excuse. They were still regarded as objects by most Romans. And if you think
slavery is ok, then I suggest you become my slave (my property) and we'll
see how fine it works.

(snipped)

> > 21st century definitely has advantages over Roma Anitqua. If you want to
> > have Roma rebirthed, fine; I'll be Dictator and you'll be a death
convict
> in
> > the arena. Cheers!

> MLP:That sounds awfully personal, kind of like a threat. Are you
threatening
> me? Isn't that a violation of my rights?
> The big problem with your plan is that you couldn't drag me into the arena
> alone. You'd have to get some friends and work as a team to do me in.
Could
> you and your friends find enough common ground to work together?

I think you misinterpreted my words. I was not threatening you (doing so
would be incredibly weak). I was using your own statements against you. If
you'd happily live in a nigh fully reconstructed Imperium Romanum, then you
have to accept the fact that there was a very slim chance of being a wealthy
patrician or even an equestrian. Death convicts in the arena were also a
part of your glorious Rome, and since you want Rome to go for a rebirth,
then I suggest you start out there and see how you like it.

Vale bene!
Sextus Apollonius Draco,
Vainqueur, ICQ# 32924725
Darkling_Crawler, Yahoo IM

"Come, fly the teeth of the wind;
share my wings" (FSOL)


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Nova Roman Citizenship -Time to get Real.
From:	"S. Apollonius Draco" <hendrik.meuleman@-------->
Date:	Thu, 19 Apr 2001 19:26:22 +0200

Salve Oppi Flacce,

Allow me to make a small comment.

(snipped)

> 2-Snail mail applications should be accompanied by a facsimile
> of an applicant's macronational ID of record. Depending
> on the country, this could be a driver's license (I would
> think the most common,) state/federal/local/provincial
> ID card, or the good old standby -a passport. While
> birth certificates are a nice secondary form of ID when
> available, I agree that it can be a pain in the podex
> to get one of these in a timely manner. -Have been
> through this exercise for myself, son and wife.
> *Inconvenient* is a polite term for what we dealt with :-)
>

I wonder if this is legal, and ok with macronational laws. However, I find
this overly bureacratical. How on Earth would NR check on my Belgian ID
number, by the way? As a better solution, may I propose that people simply
mail the "proof of their existence" to their propraetor? That's usually
closer home. The propraetor can then send a confirmation to the Censores.

> 3-Applications should be accompanied by an application
> fee. This could be done either via enclosed personal
> check, traveler's check -or on the web, via PayPal.
> If done via PayPal, the application is held in
> 'escrow' until funds have been verified.
>

As Formosanus said, this will deter people from joining.

> 4-In *addition* to the steps above, when an application
> arrives for processing -either the mater/paterfamilias
> of the gens being petitioned and/or the Provincial
> Governor/Legatus performs some physical form of
> verification. Preferably in the form of a face to
> face meeting.
>

This isn't always possible. Many European provinciae are composed of
different macronations, and I don't think that, for example, a Hispanic
propraetor in Cordoba would travel to the borderline with Andorra to see if
a civis of his really exists. Telephone might be a more viable alternative,
especially for legati (who usually live in the region of said civis).

(snipped)

> Before the flames fly, let me tell you as a civis
> that has actually contributed *real* time and perhaps
> even more importantly *real money* to our organization,
> I have little sympathy for those that do not value
> their citizenship. If we're really going to grow
> and become a physical *nation,* then we need to get
> real; make it count and get to know one another
> as people and not keyboard operators.
>

I don't express the value of my citizenship in money, because I simply don't
have it. With the last statement I am in full agreement though.

Vale bene,
Sextus Apollonius Draco,
Vainqueur, ICQ# 32924725
Darkling_Crawler, Yahoo IM

"Come, fly the teeth of the wind;
share my wings" (FSOL)


Subject:	Irony (was Re: [novaroma] Digest Number 1350)
From:	"S. Apollonius Draco" <hendrik.meuleman@-------->
Date:	Thu, 19 Apr 2001 19:38:31 +0200

Salve Oppi Flacce,

(snipped)

> OFS: Yes Formosanus, life is indeed a nuisance. Being
> a citizen of any nation is indeed a nuisance. Having to
> do anything more than sit at one's keyboard and pick apart
> the efforts of others to build something is indeed
> a nuisance.
>

Which you are doing time after time with Formosanus. I've never seen someone
so meticulously tear a part each postings of one man. More often than not
you seem to see things that aren't there, based on a personal and/or
ideological dislike. What you are doing now isn't very constructive either.
If you want to give air to your personal animosity with him, do so
privately. Masking it behind intended or unintended misunderstandings and
arguments doesn't really help.

Vale bene!
Draco


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Tribune's report: Britannia
From:	=?iso-8859-1?B?WWFubiBRdely6Q==?= <yquere@-------->
Date:	Thu, 19 Apr 2001 20:26:00 +0200

Thank you Sulla for pointing out my lack of english vocabulary, which is now
improved by at least one word
but can you bring us more details about that case ?

I.Querius Armoricus
Propraetor Galliae

----- Original Message -----
From: Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix <alexious@-------->
To: <novaroma@-------->
Sent: Monday, April 16, 2001 10:07 PM
Subject: Re: [novaroma] Tribune's report: Britannia

>
>
> Yann Qu�r� wrote:
> >
> > Salvete Quiritibus
> >
> > Does anyone know the exact reason of maintaining the Britannia list for
the
> > "seperatists" if it is just a question of money ?
> > I feel it is not really a question of fund highjacking, but that other
> > matters are motivating the administrators of Brittania ?
> >
> > Can anyone lighten up the situation ?
> >
> > Ianus Querius Armoricus
> > Propraetor Galliae
> >
>
>
> Ave,
>
> This is a question of embezzlement. According to Blacks Law Dictionary
> 5th Ed. it states,
>
> "Embezzlement - To embezzle means willfully to take, or convert to one's
> own, another's money, or property, of which the wrongdoer acquired
> possession lawfully, by reason of some office or employment or position
> of trust.
>
> Respectfully,
>
> Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>


Subject:	RE: Irony (was Re: [novaroma] Digest Number 1350)
From:	"Oppius Flaccus Severus" <oppiusflaccus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 19 Apr 2001 11:29:30 -0700

Salve Draco;
-----Original Message-----
From: S. Apollonius Draco [mailto:hendrik.meuleman@--------]
Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 10:39 AM
To: novaroma@--------
Subject: Irony (was Re: [novaroma] Digest Number 1350)

Salve Oppi Flacce,

<snipped>

Draco writes:
Which you are doing time after time with Formosanus.
I've never seen someone so meticulously tear a part
each postings of one man.

OFS: Honestly Draco, this is likely due to the sheer
length of Formosanus' ad hominem posts that are
continually made to this list. Many people probably
don't take the time to parse them. But to understand
you fully, are you saying that it's ok for your
Pater to take exception with *every single solitary
bit if minutia that he doesn't agree with,* and
not ok for someone else to do the same?

Draco writes:
More often than not
you seem to see things that aren't there, based on a personal and/or
ideological dislike.

OFS: Specifics please.

Since you are being
so frank with me (which I respect, though we
do not agree,) then let me be equally frank.
By your own reasoning, you are also choosing to
see some personal dislike for Formosanus. I have
said repeatedly in this and other forums that it
is quite impossible for me to dislike someone
that I have never met. -I can *disagree* and
perhaps *dislike* a certain *arguments* (or lack
thereof,) of certain people. You and Formosanus
are masters at this type of disagreement.

But having never met your Pater, I could not say
with any certainty whether we would like each
other or not. *This* was part of my point behind
citizen verifications.

Draco writes:
What you are doing now isn't very constructive either.

OFS: Nor are you, mi Draco. But then again, we could
go around and around on this couldn't we? I agree
though that such a thing is pointless.

Draco:
If you want to give air to your personal animosity with him, do so
privately. Masking it behind intended or unintended misunderstandings and
arguments doesn't really help.

OFS: Masking? No, I will not mask anything. Look
at the posts mi Draco. I'm actually one of the most
open cives that you'll hope to find here. I have hid
nothing, nor *will* I hide anything.

You may not like what I have to say, but if you think
there's dishonesty or 'masked hatred' taken place then
you are sorely mistaken. Per your previous posts, you
are admittedly always on the lookout for some sense
of perceived wrong, injustice, corruption or all-around
dastardly acts. Believe it or not, sometimes they're
just not there.

Btw, please don't be offended if I don't respond further
to any redirections of this post that you may have, unless
you wish to address me privately.

Bene vale,
Oppius

<snipped>


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: Duplicated citizenship
From:	=?iso-8859-1?B?WWFubiBRdely6Q==?= <yquere@-------->
Date:	Thu, 19 Apr 2001 20:37:43 +0200

Salvete Omnes

I do agree with the idea of helping the Censors in this control work, but
this requires having access to minimum informations

Ianus Querius Armoricus
Propraetor Galliae

----- Original Message -----
From: <octavianuslucius@-------->
To: <novaroma@-------->
Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 3:43 AM
Subject: [novaroma] Re: Duplicated citizenship

> Salve Luci Maurici Procopioe
>
> I agree with your idea of governors aiding the Censors. Since NR
> becomes bigger and bigger, governors's aid to the censors would be
> very helpful. I do not know how this could be implemented, but I am
> sure that in the future the censors will need some help.
>
> Lucius Pompeius Octavianus
> Propraetor provinciae Argentinae
>


Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Nova Roman Citizenship -Time to get Real.
From:	"Oppius Flaccus Severus" <oppiusflaccus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 19 Apr 2001 11:47:50 -0700

Salve Draco!
-----Original Message-----
From: S. Apollonius Draco [mailto:hendrik.meuleman@--------]
Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 10:26 AM
To: novaroma@--------
Subject: Re: [novaroma] Nova Roman Citizenship -Time to get Real.

Salve Oppi Flacce,

Allow me to make a small comment.

OFS: Sure :-)

(snipped)

<snipped further...>

Draco writes:
I wonder if this is legal, and ok with macronational laws.

OFS: It's certainly a legitimate point to
check the legality. I certainly don't claim
by any stretch of the imagination to have full
awareness of all the macronational laws within
our borders.

Draco writes:
However, I find
this overly bureacratical. How on Earth would NR check on my Belgian ID
number, by the way?
As a better solution, may I propose that people simply
mail the "proof of their existence" to their propraetor? That's usually
closer home. The propraetor can then send a confirmation to the Censores.

OFS: Actually, this is what I was suggesting.
Though you bring up a good point especially
where people are geographically distributed.
This was addressed in one of my later posts
from last night.

Since we are asking that some proof be mailed
anyway, there seems to be no good reason why
it couldn't be mailed to your closest provincial
official who in turn would be tasked with
getting the proper confirmation to the Censores.

However, it also seems reasonable on further
discussion that applicant mails the materials,
has a phone call with his/her closest provincial
official and then is given final approval from
the Censores; *with the express understanding*
that any errors later found must be corrected
via personal identification and that any
misinformation provided on the form constitutes
fraud and subject to the appropriate penalties.
(Whatever those may be.)

<snipped>

As Formosanus said, this will deter people from joining.

OFS: I've responded to this elsewhere.

<snipped>

Draco writes:
This isn't always possible. Many European provinciae are composed of
different macronations, and I don't think that, for example, a Hispanic
propraetor in Cordoba would travel to the borderline with Andorra to see if
a civis of his really exists. Telephone might be a more viable alternative,
especially for legati (who usually live in the region of said civis).

OFS: Telephone could be used as a partial
verification. See above for further thoughts
on the matter.

<snipped>

Bene vale,
Oppius


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: The name-change issue
From:	"M. Apollonius Formosanus" <bvm3@-------->
Date:	Thu, 19 Apr 2001 21:05:46 +0200

Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 15:22:58 -0000
From: "Nick R. Ramos Jr." <nramos@-------->
Subject: Re: The name-change issue

Marius Cornelius Scipio M. Appoloni Formosane S.P.D.

I'd like to ask a couple of questions for my own edification:

MAF: Of course.

---
> personal animosity; I simply want a class of people who have been
made
> to hurt to no longer have to hurt because they will in future be
treated
> fairly and with humanity. In that I see the good of Nova Roma as
well.

This particular statement intrigues me: what class? As far as I know,
this entire debate centers around one citizen that is unhappy with
the way we structure names. One. Perhaps I missed something in the
past few weeks, but this seems to me like political rhetoric design
to elicit a positive response, not like an honest attempt to solve a
real problem.

MAF: A class may consist of one member or even be a null set with no
members. My wording simply stresses my concern that we must not regard
the accidents of only one case and be content with some ad hoc solution.
I am concerned that all persons in the future who have related problems
be systematically protected. Thus I see additional future members in
this class. You will surely admit that the possibility for this exists.
.
>
> As you never tired of pointing out before (but have not respected in
> your own addressing of Marius), Nova Roma citizens already have the
> right of using whatever gender identity they want in their names
> unofficially. The only thing I would like to see is that this be
> recognised in persons' official names as well. If there were still a
> register of gross physical or macronational sexual identity, I do
not
> see that very much would be lost from your point of view, whereas
not
> being forced on certain occasions to use a name gendered in a way
> offensive to them would mean a very great deal personally to any
> transsexual people among us. Forcing them to do so is a humiliation,
> just as it would be if you or I were forced to use female names on
> official occasions because of somebody else's prejudice coupled with
> power.
> _______

EH? Why am I humiliating someone by calling them by their given names
for official purposes?

MAF: Using a name of "the wrong sex" with a person that is only
"official" because it was forced upon the person against his will is not
an act that can defend itself by saying "But the name is official!" That
indeed is the whole problem - making a wrong-gendered form of a name
"offcial" against a person's will. To then use it to him, effectively
demonstrating that he cannot control his social environment enough to
get his right gender respected - yes, that is very humiliating indeed,
and disrespectful.

Let me give you an example that I think may be
applicable here: In my personal journey through life, I had the
occassion to deal with several transgendered individuals. The most
clear-cut case was an individual who had been born male, and his
given name was Luis Angel. He underwent a sex change operation, and
legally changed her name to Angela. However, many of us who had known
him/her prior to the operation continued to call him/her Luis. This
did not offend this individual one whit - in fact, she considered it a
sign of affection, since only her old friends called her that. Luis is
most definitely a masculine name in Spanish, nonne? This issue boils
down to the beliefs and feelings of one person, not a class, not a
group.

MAF: No, the logic of members and groups is getting a bit skewed here, I
fear. My concern is that *every individual in this group* have the right
to determine what *he/she* wants in respect of being named. (And indeed
everyone in the world, but most people do not receive so much trouble
from others.)

If we are to further debate this, let us do so on clear and
level grounds - not playing on voter sympathies. I think it is far
more patronizing to Lucius Marius to say "poor thing, you need us to
defend your KIND from these <insert your favorite hate group here>"
than to say "Lucius, I understand how you particularly feel about
this but I may not agree with you on this issue".

MAF: I indeed wish to play on voter - human - sympathies and encourage
everyone to think compassionately, empathically, sympathetically and
humanely about the issue. I am not addressing Lucius Marius, who does
not need convincing, but people who may not have had to think about this
deeply before and to exercise their imaginations about the problems some
people may have in life, though they themselves may not. Ultimately you,
I, Marius, and others are all the same KIND of creature: human - with a
natural desire for respect from others and to control the way our
personal identity is presented and acknowledged.

>
>
one's
> Nova Roman citizenship!
> ______
>
> Personally, I had no problem with the
> first "gender" and I compromised on the revision that is currently
law
> in
> Nova Roma, and has been for about 10 months now. I do not see a
reason
> to
> change it. Nor to continue to compromise on it now. To do so will
> cheapen
> Nova Roman citizenship to the point where a man can be a man and a
woman
> can
> be a man.
>
> MAF: Since some people are transsexual and some are bisexual, there
> *are* certainly cases where a "woman" (in some sense) can be a
"man" (in some sense) and a "man" (in some sense) can be a "woman" (in
some
> sense). This is just a matter of scientifically-confirmed fact. It
is

Can you please cite which behavioral or sexuality studies support
this statement? As a scientist, I think you're again using science in
the name of political cant here. Bisexuality is an expression of
sexual behavior preference where sexual contact with both one's own
sex and the opposite sex are acceptable and pleasurable. In fact,
most bisexuals will not "roleplay" oppsite sex behaviors, and many will
show a strong gender identification with their "genital" gender (see
Kinsey, et alia). With all due respect, saying that something is
"scientifically proven" requires that you be able to show what
science supports your statement. Otherwise, your argument is one of
assertion of authority and a very weak one at that.

MAF: I think that any elementary textbook of psychology will make this
clear to you. My repetition of "in some sense" certainly makes my
statements very broad, and you would be hard put to disprove them. And I
made them broad on purpose. The only scientific issue that really
matters in this debate is whether you or anyone would like to claim that
the only *real* sexuality is that between genitally-and-mentally-male
persons acting malely and genitally-and-mentally-female persons acting
femalely. And perhaps that any persons feeling or practising anything
different from that are doing so on whim and by free will choosing to
gain wicked and superior plasures or to disgust or make problems for
others. If you do not in this way deny that sexual desire, identity, and
practice do not follow this simple model, but include natural
variations, then I do not see any significant differences between us on
the scientific issue.

The fact that you admit that bisexuals exist seems to show that we
completely agree on anything necessary for this argument in terms of
scientific proof for natural human sexual variation. Below you seem to
imply a belief in the existence of homosexuals and transsexuals, and
even say that their respective sexual responses are "normal" for them.

> not good to ignore facts about the world just because we do not like
> them. I do not like this state of affairs either, but would like all
> people to be "normal" sexually, since I suppose that everyone would
be

Define "normal" - for homosexuals, their sexual personae are normal;
for heterosexuals, the same applies - for transsexuals, such is also
the case. I think you are being inconsistent here, sir.

MAF: "Normal" means the simpleminded formula I just gave above, i.e.:
sexuality between genitally-and-mentally-male persons acting malely and
genitally-and-mentally-female persons acting femalely. I put the term in
quotation marks, as you can see, precisely in order to show I meant
"so-called" normality. Of course the natural sexual response of any
person or animal is "normal" for them as you say, in some sense, as you
say.

> happier that way. But I recognise that denying the facts about the
real
> world will subject real human beings to real frustration, insult,
and
> mental pain and suffering that they do not deserve just because of
not
> fitting our preferences. We owe it to them to refrain from making
their
> problems greater than they are naturally. That is simple courtesy
and
> human decency.
> __________
>
> Our issue in Nova Roma regarding names and gender is intertwined.
It is
> an
> undeniable fact. Pranomens, Nomens, and 99% of the Cognomens
reflect
> this
> identification.
>
> MAF: I completely agree. But intertwining gross physical sexual
> characteristics or some other nation's theoretical legal opinion
about
> some Nova Roma citizen's sex is not necessitated by the simple fact
that
> Latin names have grammatical gender. That additional complication
has
> been artificially introduced, and the introduction has caused
personal
> chagrin and public controversy.
> _________
>
> My question still stands, "Why should Nova Roma cater to people who
are
> not
> willing to do the same things on their macronational citizenship?"
>
> MAF: My counterquestion is this: "What is the real advantage or
> necessity to Nova Roma of forcing people to officially use a gender
they
> do not feel describes their real selves? Or forcing them to
undertake
> legal procedures in the outside world that they feel no necessity to
> undertake on their own merits for life in the outside world?"
> ____________
>

The real necessity may be a legal one, given that we at present are
incorporated as a Non-Profit Corp. in a macronation; and the legal
liabilities that can arise from false personae or from misleading
names can be serious. Look at all the cases of people representing
themselves as that which they are not and dragging their ISP's and
other groups into their legal problems.

MAF: I do not think that everyone with an English name that appears to
be of the opposite sex ("boy named Sue") is doing anything actionable.
Being a transvestite is generally quite legal in the U.S. these days.
And for a person who is in fact male or female in personal identity to
use that persona and not a persona corresponding to misfitting bodily
parts seems to be the opposite of a "false persona". We have to be
careful of the law, but making fundamental policy based on the most
extreme fears would result in bad policy. We are more likely to be sued
for discrimination against sexual minorities as things now stand. Let's
correct that.

That being said - I
personally care not one whit what name any civus of our Res Publica
calls him or her self. That's why I agree on the premise that the name
change edict applies only to the LEGAL ROMAN NAME; everything else is
off limits.

MAF: But even that is galling and unnecessary.

>
> For my part the basic affair is simple: People exist who have a
> difference between their obvious bodily sexual characteristics and
the
> way they naturally feel in terms of their sense of self. This is
> inconvenient, but it is not a crime and not morally significant.

This can stir up a real hornet's nest for some. I agree it is not a
crime, but dismissing it as morally insignificant is a mistake, I
think. I personally have absolutely no problem with it, but there are
those among us who may think differently. To some, this particular
state of affairs may have some very serious moral significance. To
dismiss that lightly would be irresponsible of us, in my opinion.

MAF: I do not dismiss it lightly - to me making it a moral matter is
deeply immoral, since it results in descrimnination against persons
because of what they are by nature, that being something which does no
harm to others. I did not bother to attack that position, because nobody
has put it forward. If someone does, I shall not treat it lightly, but
shall criticise it as it deserves.

>Forcing
> them to treat their bodily gender as the real one against their
will
and
> sense of self causes them mental pain and humiliation. Courtesy and
> humanity demand that we make it as easy as possible to present
> themselves in accordance with their personal sense of identity, and
that
> we do so with as little red tape and as few special conditions as
> humanly possible. By so doing we shall show Nova Roma to be an
> enlightened and fair-minded nation.
>

Quod natura non fecit...
What Nature does not make, I cannot fabricate. We're not forcing
anyone to anything (to date, I still don't see the lictors dragging
off any of us to the Carcer because we disagree on this!).

MAF: I am not completely sure of your intent in this statement. I do see
people forced against their will to use names of the wrong gender from
the standpoint of their sense of natural self identity. Of course they
could leave Nova Roma to avoid this or stay out of Nova Roma, but the
whole point is to have freedom *in* Nova Roma. Thus coercion exists
because the Censors must register names officially without introducing
their own sexual hang-ups, and they have not exercised this objectivity.

All we are
doing is codifying some legal formality to protect our Res Publica
from possible legal liabilities. We have two opposing views, and a
necessity to validate one or the other through votes. Nothing more,
nothing less. In fact, those accused of being narrow-minded and
unfair have been much more restrained and tolerant here than what has
been my experience in my macronation! Perhaps we are a little bit
enlightened after all.

MAF: A moral truth cannot be validated by votes. It can only be
validated by the conscience of morally-concerned and aware individuals.
A vote might move us forward or backward, but I agree with you that it
will soon be time for a vote, and I too am grateful for that fact.

I hope that we can take this to a Comitia, a contio, a Division, or
whatever is necessary to finally decide this matter. Enough debate
has already occurred on this - let us move forward and decide. If I
were Lucius Marius, I think I would like to get this matter resolved
one way or another by now.

Optime vale, et Venus nos ament!
Marius Cornelius Scipio
Aedilis Curulis Nova Romani

Valete!

M. Apollonius Formosanus
Aedilis Plebeius Novae Romae


Subject:	Re: Irony (was Re: [novaroma] Digest Number 1350)
From:	"S. Apollonius Draco" <hendrik.meuleman@-------->
Date:	Thu, 19 Apr 2001 21:09:59 +0200

Salve Oppi Flacce,

I shall have the courtesy to reply to this privately, as I think this
discussion serves no further purpose for the respublica. Ita sit.

Vale bene,
Draco


Subject:	[novaroma] ATTN (Religio Romana): ante diem XIII Kalendas Maias (April 19)
From:	"Antonio Grilo" <amg@-------->
Date:	Thu, 19 Apr 2001 20:43:02 +0100

Salvete omnes

This is a dies nefastus publicus (NP), a day for special religious
observance on which no legal action can take place.

This is the last and culminating day of the festival of Ceres, the Cerialia.
I remind that Ceres is the Goddess of grain Who feeds the people of Roma. To
Ceres we offer the first ears of grain and we sacrifice to Her before the
harvest (see Cato's
sacrifice to Ceres at
http://www.novaroma.org/religio_romana/cato_ceres.html).
Before the festival was extended to begin on April 12, this was the only day
of the festival. Today, public games are held at the Circus Maxumus,
consisting of chariot races presided by the Aediles Plebis. In order to
colour the games, foxes with lighted firebrands attached to their backs are
let
loose in the Circus Maximus.

Also, do not forget that this month is sacred to Venus.

Pax Deorum vobiscum

Antonius Gryllus Graecus
Pontifex


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] human rights as defined by UN
From:	"A. Cato" <a.cato@-------->
Date:	Thu, 19 Apr 2001 16:31:07 -0400

Salve: We have to be very careful how we define "rights". A person said
once, "I have the right to get married if I want to." But then that means
that someone else is obligated to marry them. Just a thought.
Vale, ... A. Cato, ... Rogator
----- Original Message -----
From: "Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@-------->
To: <novaroma@-------->
Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 11:57 AM
Subject: RE: [novaroma] human rights as defined by UN

> Salvete
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: JustiniaCassia@-------- [mailto:JustiniaCassia@--------]
> > Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 09:53
> >
> > While I know someone is bound to point out that Nova Roma doesn't belong
> to
> > the UN, even if we are determined to work out our own version of human
> > rights,
>
> We are? Since when?
>
> > surely a document such as this one, the product of macronational
> > representatives working together, is an excellent place to start. The
UN
> > Commission on Human Rights continues to monitor and comment upon human
> rights
> > in specific parts of the world, and as regards new circumstances that
> arise.
>
> I would point out that rights come with responsibilities. I hear several
> people talking about rights, but precious few talking about the
> responsibilities that do (or should) accompany those rights.
>
> Next year in the Forum!
>
> Valete,
>
> 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/
>
>
>


Subject:	[novaroma] Duplicated citizenship: solutions
From:	Gnaeus Salix Astur <salixastur@-------->
Date:	Thu, 19 Apr 2001 13:55:23 -0700 (PDT)

Salvete romani quirites.

I have been following the various opinions on this issue. As I was the
first to introduce it, I feel I have a moral obligation to express my
own opinions on it.

First of all, I want to make clear that I do NOT support the idea of a
snail mail application process. I think Formosanus is right when
pointing that such a system would provide numerous innecesary
difficulties and would result in an important decline in Nova Roma�s
growth.

I do agree with a dual control system: both on censorial and on
provincial level, but keeping the Internet as the main access for
citizenship applications. Under the system I envision, a prospective
citizen would fill out a form which would then be sent to the censors.
The censors would then contact the governor of the prospective
citizen's province and ask him to verify it. This could be easily done
by several means:

- Checking that the data of the application form are not the same of
other application form (I guess most multiple applications are cause by
error rather than by mischievious intentions).

- Verifying that his/her address, phone number, etc... belong to the
person who applied for citizenship through open information means (such
as the Yellow Pages, which are available on the net on many locales).

- Should that check not be satisfactory, the propraetor could ask the
prospective citizen to fax/scan some form of identification document
(such as a passport or driver's licence).

I think these two procedures would be far more simple and fast than a
snail mail application process, not to mention a "personal
verification" process. Citizenship acceptances could be delayed a day
or two, which I think would be a bearable level of delay. And our
security against multiple applications would improve significantly,
without the negative results a snail mail process would provoke.

I hope you understand that common sense does not allow us to return to
a snail mail application process.

On the issue of taxes, I have already posted many messages. I will do
it again when the situation arises.

Bene Valete!

Gnaeus Salix Astur, civis romanus.

--- bvm3@-------- wrote:
> M. Apollonius Formosanus omnibus Quiritibus S.P.D.
>
> I must admit that I was appalled to read the following set of
> suggestions and those of other posters whose mindset has been
> similar.
>
> Before criticising, let me clarify that this is not an ethical or
> human rights issue, but one of simple common sense. Also let it
> be clarified that I am against individuals' having duplicate
> memberships, as this might skew our democratic processes.
>
> However, it is not an *infinitely* serious problem and does not
> merit a level of effort and expense and collective self-harassment
> that is a still worse nuisance than to suffer from a few duplicate
> memberships. We should keep this all in proportion.
>
> Nova Roma has been growing by leaps and bounds precisely
> because
>
> (1) it makes excellent use of the internet to do things without old-
> fashioned snail mail hassle,
>
> (2) membership is fundamentally easy to obtain without
> complicated documentation and controls, and
>
> (3) there are no dues, taxes or registration fees.
>
> If these advantages are thrown away in an over-ambitious
> attempt to reduce fraud - which I at least presume to be
> exceedingly rare, since there is no special motivation for it, we
> will
> experience:
>
> (1) a dramatic decline in new members,
>
> (2) a dramatic decline in old memebers to the extent that it is
> made retroactive (taxes in themselves would do this, of course)
>
> (3) a nuisance for everyone involved of considerable proportions.
>
> Now, the rest is a value judgement on which people may very
> well disagree. Is it worthwhile suffering from the above
> disadvantages to reduce (prsumably never completely eliminate)
> probably very rare cases of fraud?
>
> I do not doubt that the measures would be quite efficacious, I
> simply think the proposed cure to be infinitely worse than the
> disease. A disease that is hardly even a mild case of the sniffles,
> not something that requires radical chemotherapy and surgical
> dismemberment.
>
> By the way, taxes in themselves would greatly cut down on
> casual duplicate members, if they exist. For obvious reasons.
>
> But I recommend that we not turn into control freaks, and that
> we carefully consider whether the costs of this kind of thinking,
> human as well as financial, are really justified by real benefits.
> Most of us already suffer from a serious excess of red tape in our
> outside lives - do we really want to bring it into Nova Roma to make
> ourselves feel more real? We have so far avoided that sort of thing
> here - let's hang on to that very precious attainment.
>
> Valete!
>
>
>
>
> On 19 Apr 2001, at 3:50, novaroma@-------- wrote:
>
> > Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 19:29:23 -0700
> > From: "Oppius Flaccus Severus" <oppiusflaccus@-------->
> > Subject: Nova Roman Citizenship -Time to get Real.
> >
> > Salvete Quiritibus!
> >
> > I've been watching this discussion with keen interest;
> > as many of these points are key even though they have
> > been brought up in one form or another in previous debates.
> >
> > In short, I could not agree more that we need to strengthen
> > our measures and determinants of citizenship. To synthesize
> > my views with some other current posts on the matter:
> >
> > 1-An absolute and resounding YES to snail mail applications.
> > These applications should be at least as thorough as
> > the current ones and preferably more so. Anyone, anywhere
> > can fill out a generic html form and post it somewhere
> > with it meaning next to nothing at all. The act of writing
> > something, including funds and a stamp is a much more
> > tangible act than posting text in a web form.
> >
> > 2-Snail mail applications should be accompanied by a facsimile
> > of an applicant's macronational ID of record. Depending
> > on the country, this could be a driver's license (I would
> > think the most common,) state/federal/local/provincial
> > ID card, or the good old standby -a passport. While
> > birth certificates are a nice secondary form of ID when
> > available, I agree that it can be a pain in the podex
> > to get one of these in a timely manner. -Have been
> > through this exercise for myself, son and wife.
> > *Inconvenient* is a polite term for what we dealt with :-)
> >
> > 3-Applications should be accompanied by an application
> > fee. This could be done either via enclosed personal
> > check, traveler's check -or on the web, via PayPal.
> > If done via PayPal, the application is held in
> > 'escrow' until funds have been verified.
> >
> > 4-In *addition* to the steps above, when an application
> > arrives for processing -either the mater/paterfamilias
> > of the gens being petitioned and/or the Provincial
> > Governor/Legatus performs some physical form of
> > verification. Preferably in the form of a face to
> > face meeting.
> >
> > 5-As a slightly different alternative, membership
> > drives at public events could be utilized for
> > instant 'pre-approval,' by performing all the
> > physical verifications and money collection.
> >
> > I fully agree that provincial officials are key to making
> > such a system work. Of course, it also puts more
> > responsibility on the pater/materfamilias to assist
> > in the verification process. This will require
> > some fundamental changes in our infrastructure and
> > likely at least one or more leges to be promulgated
> > to allow the appropriate officials the appropriate
> > powers to conduct business.
> >
> > Furthermore, the approval process of provincial
> > officials and pater/materfamilias will need to be
> > more stringent to ensure that they have the ability
> > to perform the requirements of verification in their
> > particular situation.
> >
> > While the organization was in the midst of applying
> > for NPC status, I could see how it made perfect sense
> > to play the raw numbers game and get as many names as
> > possible tied to the association. Now that this status
> > has been granted, it is time to make the
> > citizenship count for something and to ensure that
> > we are all in effect who we say we are.
> >
> > Furthermore, the mater/paterfamilias, provincial
> > officials and Censores could conduct an actual census
> > to see just who really exists, who is where and whether
> > or not they're actually members of the organization
> > or not. It seems apparent that we have at least several
> > hundred in our midst who either no longer exist, may
> > have never been real at all and/or have no interest
> > in participation or involvement.
> >
> > A case in point: a recent provincial 'census' message
> > sent to the civis of my Regio returned *2* responses.
> > At least one e-mail has bounced and the other six or
> > so names I fully expect not to hear from at all.
> >
> > Before the flames fly, let me tell you as a civis
> > that has actually contributed *real* time and perhaps
> > even more importantly *real money* to our organization,
> > I have little sympathy for those that do not value
> > their citizenship. If we're really going to grow
> > and become a physical *nation,* then we need to get
> > real; make it count and get to know one another
> > as people and not keyboard operators.
> >
> > Bene valete,
> > Oppius Flaccus Severus, Legatus America Boreoccidentalis Major
>
>
>

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] human rights as defined by UN
From:	"A. Cato" <a.cato@-------->
Date:	Thu, 19 Apr 2001 16:58:12 -0400

Salve: I just read over the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights. It
looks like an honorable document, but the whole thing is a joke. I doubt
that twenty-five percent of the member nations honor that document. The
rights in that document are routinely violated by most of the member
nations. It is sort of like the former Soviet Union's noble sounding
Constitution and freedoms documents that weren't worth the paper they were
written on. Vale, ... A. Cato, ... Rogator
----- Original Message -----
From: "Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@-------->
To: <novaroma@-------->
Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 11:57 AM
Subject: RE: [novaroma] human rights as defined by UN

> Salvete
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: JustiniaCassia@-------- [mailto:JustiniaCassia@--------]
> > Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 09:53
> >
> > While I know someone is bound to point out that Nova Roma doesn't belong
> to
> > the UN, even if we are determined to work out our own version of human
> > rights,
>
> We are? Since when?
>
> > surely a document such as this one, the product of macronational
> > representatives working together, is an excellent place to start. The
UN
> > Commission on Human Rights continues to monitor and comment upon human
> rights
> > in specific parts of the world, and as regards new circumstances that
> arise.
>
> I would point out that rights come with responsibilities. I hear several
> people talking about rights, but precious few talking about the
> responsibilities that do (or should) accompany those rights.
>
> Next year in the Forum!
>
> Valete,
>
> 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/
>
>
>


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] citizenship issues
From:	Caeso Fabius Quintilianus <tjalens.h@-------->
Date:	Thu, 19 Apr 2001 23:18:58 +0200

Save Omnes!

I work day and night for Nova Roma. Now I don't appear so often on this
mail list as I do some real work for Nova Roma. The Consilium of Thule now
has a 14 days e-mail meeting. We are discussing a conference 2002, starting
a Legio, the budget, an education project and more.

I get a bit frustrated when I take time to turn to this list. I think that
some of the discussion about controlling mechanisms a just a little to
much.

There are easy solutions to some of these probems. Nova Roma IS changing.
Slowly we are meeting more and more often face-to-face, talking on phone
and meeting in other concrete ways. I think the idea with a census, let us
say each five (lustrum) or two years, would slowly fix this problem. The
duplicated citizenship isn't usual, I am sure. Let's not take on measures
that will drive people away. I think that Govenors and Legati can verify
most of our citizens.

Those that we have problems with in Thule are those "old" citizens who
probably became citizens through snail-mail, now we can't get hold of their
snail-mail address. Even this problem is on its way to be fixed. All
Guvenors are appling for the right to see the snail-mail addresses of all
citizens in their Provincia. I hope this will be fixed soon. How shall we
otherwise be able to give those citizens anything?

Let us take away our promise in the citizen application not to give out the
citizens addresses. Why do they seek citizenship in the first place? We
should promise that we never will give away their personal information to:
the state, commercial, political and religios organisations. We should
clearly state that the information will be used within Nova Roma by
officials to give the citizens' citizenship a real worth. Let us not build
a over-bureaucratic control-state.

I must say something about snail-mail. To be honest, I hate snail-mail, I
only use it when I am forced to. I would not be active in any organisation
which based its existance on snail-mail.

Let's not build some over-controll organisation to solve a problem that is
very small. Let us work instead. Let's recruit real people and let's try to
meet. That way Nova Roma will become real enough.

Vale

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
Join the List for the Thule Provincia in Nova Roma
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ThuleNovaRoma/join
************************************************
The homepage of the Nova Roma Provincia Thule:
http://www.acc.umu.se/~kerish/novaroma/main.html
************************************************
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."
************************************************
Caeso, he who also is known as Christer Edling.
************************************************
PRIVATE PHONE: +90 - 10 09 10
DOG BOARDING HOUSE PHONE: +90 - 503 56
MOBILE: +70 - 643 88 80


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Duplicated citizenship: solutions
From:	mansker@--------
Date:	Thu, 19 Apr 2001 21:16:56 -0000

Salve -

Just a few thoughts on your ideas:

<Snipped>
> - Checking that the data of the application form are not the same of
> other application form (I guess most multiple applications are
cause by
> error rather than by mischievious intentions).

Perfect plan, as this would eliminate most (if not all) of the
problems.

>
> - Verifying that his/her address, phone number, etc... belong to the
> person who applied for citizenship through open information means
(such
> as the Yellow Pages, which are available on the net on many
locales).
>
> - Should that check not be satisfactory, the propraetor could ask
the
> prospective citizen to fax/scan some form of identification document
> (such as a passport or driver's licence).
>
I thought this was a much better idea than mine, because you would
only have to have people send in information if you couldn't verify
it manually. In cases such as mine, where I have an unlisted phone
number, you would have to use this check as you could not (I hope)
find me on the web.

All in all, I think that your program is the most workable of the
ones that I have seen presented. It eliminates the majority of the
outside requirements, but allows for those occasions where they would
be needed.

Bene,

Gaia Flacca Severa


Subject:	[novaroma] Situation in Hispania
From:	Gnaeus Salix Astur <salixastur@-------->
Date:	Thu, 19 Apr 2001 14:34:38 -0700 (PDT)

Salvete omnes!

> Salve, Iberian frater,
>
> What is being done in Spain?
>
> Valete,
>
> Lobo Rubro

Well, we are trying to organize our province from scratch. There's a
lot to be done, for the provincial organization is merely nonexistant.
You all should expect to be receiving a report on the situation of
Hispania in a short period of time, either from me or from our
propraetor (should we get to have one).

Thank you, Blond Wolf, for your kind interest.

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

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] human rights as defined by UN
From:	Iasonvs Serenvs Carolvs <iasonvs_serenvs@-------->
Date:	Thu, 19 Apr 2001 15:34:14 -0700 (PDT)

Salve Cato,

Very good point indeed!

Iasonvs Serenvs

--- "A. Cato" <a.cato@--------> wrote:

Salve: We have to be very careful how we define
"rights". A person said once, "I have the right to
get married if I want to." But then that means
that someone else is obligated to marry them. Just a
thought.

=====
Iasonvs Serenvs Carolvs Peregrinvs
(this is a post for which I accept all responsibility)
"The cosmos works by harmony of tensions, like the lyre and the bow."
"Time is a game played beautifully by children."
Heraclitus of Ephesus
HeraclitusFreehold@--------

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: The name-change issue
From:	"Nick R. Ramos Jr." <nramos@-------->
Date:	Thu, 19 Apr 2001 22:38:57 -0000

-
Marius Cornelius Scipio M. Appoloni Formosane S.P.D.

> >
> > MAF: Since some people are transsexual and some are bisexual,
there
> > *are* certainly cases where a "woman" (in some sense) can be a
> "man" (in some sense) and a "man" (in some sense) can be a "woman"
(in
> some
> > sense). This is just a matter of scientifically-confirmed fact. It
> is
>
> Can you please cite which behavioral or sexuality studies support
> this statement? As a scientist, I think you're again using science
in
> the name of political cant here. Bisexuality is an expression of
> sexual behavior preference where sexual contact with both one's own
> sex and the opposite sex are acceptable and pleasurable. In fact,
> most bisexuals will not "roleplay" oppsite sex behaviors, and many
will
> show a strong gender identification with their "genital" gender (see
> Kinsey, et alia). With all due respect, saying that something is
> "scientifically proven" requires that you be able to show what
> science supports your statement. Otherwise, your argument is one of
> assertion of authority and a very weak one at that.
>
> MAF: I think that any elementary textbook of psychology will make
this
> clear to you. My repetition of "in some sense" certainly makes my
> statements very broad, and you would be hard put to disprove them.
And I
> made them broad on purpose. The only scientific issue that really
> matters in this debate is whether you or anyone would like to claim
that
> the only *real* sexuality is that between
genitally-and-mentally-male
> persons acting malely and genitally-and-mentally-female persons
acting
> femalely. And perhaps that any persons feeling or practising
anything
> different from that are doing so on whim and by free will choosing
to
> gain wicked and superior plasures or to disgust or make problems for
> others. If you do not in this way deny that sexual desire,
identity,
and
> practice do not follow this simple model, but include natural
> variations, then I do not see any significant differences between
us
on
> the scientific issue.
>
> The fact that you admit that bisexuals exist seems to show that we
> completely agree on anything necessary for this argument in terms of
> scientific proof for natural human sexual variation. Below you seem
to
> imply a belief in the existence of homosexuals and transsexuals, and
> even say that their respective sexual responses are "normal" for
them.

This is precisely why I have a difference of opinion with you, mi
Formosane - making a very broad statement and then trying to apply it
to a very narrow case. BTW, my comment was made after pulling out
several of my old psych textbooks and doing some summarizing. The
existence of normal human variation on sexual expression is not
disputed, it's your interpretation of what it consists of and of
appropriate responses to it.

Perhaps an argument put forward sometime earlier in this discussion
may clarify things a bit. If I met Lucius Marius in real life, not
knowing anything but his external expression of sexuality (i.e. dress
and body shape) and due to my observation concluded that he is a
female, and addressed him thus, would I be offending him? Now if I
had
further knowledge that Lucius regards himself to be transgendered,
and
prefers to be addressed as a male, that would perhaps be a different
matter; but the arguments I've seen from you to date still seem to
indicate that I or any other observer in fact must somehow magically
know this situation and respond accordingly.

This is being discussed as a matter of human rights - and arguably
some sort of case could be built on that. But to date the discussion
seems to be centered on perhaps the worst point to discuss: the
accomodations that society must make for a member's desires to be
addressed in a manner other than what may be outwardly apparent on
first contact. Yes, we must make accomodations for our members,
otherwise our society cannot be valid - but when these accomodations
become so burdensome that they actually damage the fiber of social
contact, perhaps we need to rethink our approach. As you have seen in
my posts on this matter, I have tried to discuss the issue as much as
I can without involving ad hominem attacks or slighting the
principals. However, a lot of the discussion around this subject
seems
to revolve around how "SULLA is an evil man, and he came up with this
evil plan just to torture poor Lucius!" With all due respect, I think
by now this position has been proven to be patently absurd. I'm
getting a little bit sick and tired of seeing these attacks, and I
think they have no place in our discussions.

This matter is coming to a vote soon enough. As for me, I think I
have
put forward some points that I regarded as germane to the discussion.
I believe that you have put forward your point of view quite
eloquently, and although I may not agree with a lot of what you're
saying, I'm willing to respect it. I will await the outcome of the
vote on this, and I will (more importantly) abide by whatever
decision
our cives come to on this matter - even if I may not personally agree
with it. I think we can all agree that although this method may not
give us the best of all worlds, it can at least give us one we can
all
live in and prosper with.

Optime vale, et Iuppiter nos protegas!
Marius Cornelius Scipio
Aedilis Curulis


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: duplicated citizenship
From:	Iasonvs Serenvs Carolvs <iasonvs_serenvs@-------->
Date:	Thu, 19 Apr 2001 15:51:53 -0700 (PDT)

--- Christophe Ferri <nycticorax1@--------> wrote:

Gaius Cornelius Nycticorax wrote:

(snipped)
You may also want to look into setting up a database
of all citizens contact info (by province and
local), and assign a group of people who do nothing
more then compare a new applicant's information
with the information we already have on file.
______________________________________________

Although I rather like belonging to Nova Roma, I am
very uncomfortable with membership in any database. I
understand the exigencies of modern reality; the
database, and the datanet, and the future evolutes of
these creatures: here to stay, yes. Where the data
gathers, so do the mice who chew at it. The fewer
places my identity collects, the better off am I.
Thank you.

Iasonvs

=====
Iasonvs Serenvs Carolvs Peregrinvs
(this is a post for which I accept all responsibility)
"The cosmos works by harmony of tensions, like the lyre and the bow."
"Time is a game played beautifully by children."
Heraclitus of Ephesus
HeraclitusFreehold@--------

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/


Subject:	[novaroma] New poll for novaroma
From:	novaroma@--------
Date:	19 Apr 2001 23:15:05 -0000

Enter your vote today! A new poll has been created for the
novaroma group:

Do you think that an additional control
system should be implemented for
citizenship applications?

o No, I think it's a waste of time and money.
o Yes, I'd like that provincial bodies helped censores in the control of citizenship applications through electronic means.
o Yes, and I'd rather go back to the snail mail system.
o Yes, but provincial governments should not get involved, in order to keep information in the safe hands of the censores.

To vote, please visit the following web page:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/novaroma/polls

Note: Please do not reply to this message. Poll votes are
not collected via email. To vote, you must go to the Yahoo! Groups
web site listed above.

Thanks!


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: human rights as defined by UN
From:	lsicinius@--------
Date:	Thu, 19 Apr 2001 23:25:03 -0000

--- In novaroma@--------, "A. Cato" <a.cato@s...> wrote:
> Salve: I just read over the United Nations Declaration of Human
Rights. It
> looks like an honorable document, but the whole thing is a joke. I doubt
> that twenty-five percent of the member nations honor that document. The
> rights in that document are routinely violated by most of the member
> nations. It is sort of like the former Soviet Union's noble sounding
> Constitution and freedoms documents that weren't worth the paper
they were
> written on. Vale, ... A. Cato, ... Rogator

Salve Cato,

I agree with you, at least as far as the thing being a joke, but I
don't consider it to be "an honorable document" but rather a
cotradictory mess that should have been named the "Declaration of
Human Rights, Wishes and Whims"

Mixed in with the real rights are absurdities like the "Rights" to
"free" education and Paid Holidays or "The Right to Work" These so
called Rights involve forcing someone to give you something that you
are not entitled to. Take that "Free" education for example. Someone
has to pay the costs of education, and that someone is the taxpayer.
The term "free education" is an outright lie. It's a taxpayer
supported education, and it's not a right, it's a privillage.

Vale,
Drusus


Subject:	[novaroma] Fwd: A new Sodality...?
From:	Iasonvs Serenvs Carolvs <iasonvs_serenvs@-------->
Date:	Thu, 19 Apr 2001 16:27:56 -0700 (PDT)

--- UlysseJace@-------- wrote:
> From: UlysseJace@--------
> Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 19:22:26 EDT
> Subject: A new Sodality...?
> To: iasonvs_serenvs@--------
>
>
> Ave Quiritibus,
>
> I hope the each of you have had an excellent week
> thusfar. I would like to
> take this time to thank Ser Minucius Hadrianus for
> an excellent and rewarding
> conversation at the Nova Britannia chat site last
> evening. I invite others
> to follow his lead in bringing us closer to mutual
> support and understanding.
>
> If it pleases the patience of the assembled
> citizens, I would like to offer a
> proposal for the creation of a new sodality.
>
> In reviewing the accumulated posts of the past few
> weeks a rare and
> unexpected unity of purpose became apparent in the
> larger patterns of our
> conversations. I say unexpected, of course, because
> the Gods rarely have the
> patience or the humor to allow me to make a mess of
> their providential
> epiphanies.
>
> The "novaroma" list seems to function as a central
> plaza. We come to it,
> read the messages gummed to the assorted pillars,
> reply, and go on about our
> business. The larger issues come into play and
> discussion, but are often
> quickly replaced by new additions to our collective
> exchanges. Unlike a
> forum, wherein the gathered would debate the public
> issues to some extent and
> depth, the main list serves more as an introductory
> meetingplace. As such,
> it works well.
>
> I wonder if some of the issues debated might receive
> greater attention and
> deliberation if a more structured sodality was
> consecrated to that end?
>
> I invite latinists of greater maturity and
> experience then I to suggest a
> name under which this sodality will be consecrated.
>
> An illustration: for several days now we have been
> engaged in a refreshingly
> civilized discussion of what it means to be a
> Novaroman. Using this new
> sodality as a forum, the memberships could engage in
> research, debate,
> presentation, and even written "oratory" on this
> issue alone for an allotted
> period of time, draft a report for the appropriate
> magistates, refer
> applicable issues to other sodalities, and prepare a
> body of formal opinions
> for public review. As such, this new sodality would
> serve as both a
> philosophical college (later to be duplicated on
> terra firma?!) and a
> research body for the Senate and People.
>
> To continue the previous example: Once the new
> sodality, with some sort of
> rotating board of governors or prefects, had
> established a schedule, it could
> assign committees research, debate, and present the
> many aspects of modern
> romanitas. These results might just be useful to
> the work of the Egressus
> sodality, the various pater/materfamilias, and res
> publica itself.
>
> Furthermore, this new sodality would be a excellent
> resource for those
> establishing temples, public gymnasia, local fora
> and outreach programs, as
> many of the issues undertaken by it would later be
> encountered by those
> working towards a roman renaissance in the world at
> hand.
>
> To be better equipped to prosper as romans in the
> modern and developing
> world, we need all the common strengths, bonds, and
> practices we can get our
> minds into. With enough common ground established,
> we can each pursue our
> own personal and individual romanitas, thereby
> increasing the flexibility,
> variety and potency of our community.
>
> Enough said for now. Again, thankyou for your time
> and patience.
>
> Humbly,
>
> Iasonvs Serenvs Carolvs Peregrinvs
> Nova Roman
>
>
>

=====
Iasonvs Serenvs Carolvs Peregrinvs
(this is a post for which I accept all responsibility)
"The cosmos works by harmony of tensions, like the lyre and the bow."
"Time is a game played beautifully by children."
Heraclitus of Ephesus
HeraclitusFreehold@--------

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/


Subject:	[novaroma] New Poll
From:	"Oppius Flaccus Severus" <oppiusflaccus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 19 Apr 2001 16:36:03 -0700

Salvete Quiritibus;

Gratias multas Gnaeus Salix for creating
the new citizenship poll. Though I will
be voting momentarily, I would like to mention
to those considering voting on same that
the choices in the polls are being presented
as absolutes, in a very early stage
of discussions.

For instance, the 'snail mail' option, does
not include other options and visa versa.
Though such polls can be an excellent initial
indication of general thought, it's a very
early discussion phase. Personally, I
think that a real 'solution' if you
will, exists in combination approach
to which I'll post later.

My .02 denarii for
what it's worth.

Bene valete,
Oppius

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: NovaRoma citizenship
From:	"Teleri ferch Nyfain" <rckovak@-------->
Date:	Thu, 19 Apr 2001 19:50:44 -0400

Formosanus scripsit:
<<By the way, taxes in themselves would greatly cut down on
casual duplicate members, if they exist. For obvious reasons.>>

Another argument for implementing taxes!

Valete,
Helena Galeria