Forum Romanum


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: The Missing Vestal
From:	jmath669642reng@--------
Date:	Sun, 6 May 2001 21:22:58 -0400 (EDT)

Citizen Gaius Cassus Nerva;

Sir;

I remember your discussing your plans for the Virtual Temple. I am
pleased to learn that you have completed your project to the extent that
it is ready to be announced. I have visited one other virtual temple on
the internet and was very impressed with the views and the obvious work
involved.

I am not very technically minded in this medium, I am afraid , but the
other temple was quite beautiful, and I think that I am sophisticated
enough to appreciate what I see (Grin!!!!!!!!!!!).

I am sorry that the "Vestal" is out of action for awhile, but there are
several reasons, I suppose, (vacation, sudden illness in the family,
sudden illness relapse, computer crash, storm damage, severe accident,
etc.) any one of which would account for her delay in returning her
E-Mail messages.

I plan to work my way around such a possible and probable delay, until I
hear from the lady once again. I am, of course, interested in what the
problem may be, but I also know that if the problem is a sudden and
serious one, I must trust the person to whom I have given my confidence
to work things out as best she can, if she can, or to otherwise take
steps to cover her absence while still maintaining her dignity and
friendship.

I suppose, her absence could be construed in another light under
different circumstances, and in that circumstance, there is, I suppose,
a chance that she might even make a fool of me for my faith in her
silence, but I do not think that it is possible for any individual to
make a fool of me for them not following up an agreement freely given
with me, and in any event, I have the time and patience to wait a bit to
see if my faith is well or poorly placed. Personnally, I hope for the
best. I have done so before and have never really regretted my
decision. Meanwhile I will take suitable alternate procedures and will
hope that you are able to do so as well. Perhaps a message to the
Pontifex Maximus explaining your situation, will yield some assistance
-- He is quite a clever fellow you know!!!

Best of luck, in your endeavors!!!!!

Respectfully;
Marcus Audens

Fair Winds and Following Seas!!!

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

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


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Census: was Tidying up the Constitution
From:	Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix <alexious@-------->
Date:	Sun, 06 May 2001 20:01:37 -0700

<SNIP>
>
> Ave Luci Corneli,
>
> I think that these Paters/Maters who are failing to respond are a
> symptom of a larger problem. An inflated Census. We don't really have
> the 849 citizens that our home page mentions. What we have is a list
> that is inflated with the names of citizens who left without bothering
> to resign. Perhaps they joined on a whim, and didn't find what they
> were looking for. Perhaps they left in anger over one of the disputes
> that came up in the past. Perhaps they found another persuit that they
> found more fullfilling to thier needs than Nova Roma. The reason
> doesn't matter, They have left us and only exist as names on a list now.

Sulla: Oh I agree....it is a symptom of a larger issue. As I stated in
another email a while ago, I would say about 80-90% of the people on our
main list are citizens. This means about 50% of our citizens are not on
the NR main list. I know that as Proconsul I tried unsuccessfully to
promulgate a mandatory subscription to a Provincia email list. That
failed because many citizens did not want to be forcibly put on a
list....and I understand that completely. However, the result of not
"compelling" people to join a list is the fact that there will be people
who do not want to be on any lists..and hence will become inactive.
Part of the nature of the internet is anonymity (sp.) Many people have
no desire to be on lists...or even really to be involved.

> I think it's time for Nova Roma to hold a Census. We need to know just
> how many citizens we really have. In Antiquita the Census was closely
> tied to taxiation, and since we are about to apply taxes, now seems to
> be an excellent time to hold a Census.

Sulla: Well this is something I wanted for a LONG time. However, I
have not the time to call everyone who fails to respond to emails. My
few scribes are either limited in their time as well or busy doing other
projects for me.

> We could start by looking at the records from the December elections.
> Citizens who voted then would be considered to active. Next would be
> the Citizens who have joined since then, who would also be considered
> active. If my memory is correct about 200 citizens voted last December
> and about 200 new citizens have enrolled since then. This leaves us
> with roughly 450 citizens to account for.

Sulla: True. But we must also keep in mind that there might be many in
Nova Roma who do not care so much for the political climate. Just
because we have 200 voters we probably have another 200 on various email
lists. So we should always keep in mind that just because some one
doesn't vote doesn't mean they are not interested in NR.

> I would suggest that each of these 450 citizens be sent an e-mail 3
> times at one week intervals. One week after the last attempt to
> contact these citizens, we should publish a list of those citizens who
> failed to respond. If any Citizen knows the reason why we were unable
> to contact the inactive citizens they could contact the Censors
> regarding this. The remainder would be declared legally dead, and
> thier names removed from the Album Civium. For those who were the
> Pater/Mater of a Gens, The active citizen who had held membership the
> longest would be declared the new Pater/Mater of that Gens. Gens with
> no "living" Citizens would be striken from the Album Gentium.
>
> I think that this would solve most of the problems that we are having
> with Paters/Maters that fail to respond. Since some of these inactive
> citizens are the Pater/Mater of Gens with illustrous names it will
> allow us to have new Citizens adpot these names so they will play a
> role in our new republic as they did in the ancient republic. It would
> also be of some help to the Senate when they debate on what the tax
> rate is going to be. Knowing how many citizens we really have will
> allow the Senate to make a closer estimate of how much revenue a given
> tax rate will generate.
>
> It may be a blow to our pride to see the number of Citizens fall by
> several hundred, but at least we will know how many real citizens we
> have instead of wondering how many of that 849 are "ghosts"

Sulla: Well I believe first we need to define what is legally dead. I
know that I spoke with Consul Flavius Vedius about this a while ago, and
I gave my thought that if someone does not vote in 3 yearly elections we
should consider that person legally dead. The reason I hold that
thought would be its not a quick fix. It give someone, even if they are
not politically motivated ample opportunity to contact the Censors
regarding their non desire to vote or vote in at least one major
election within 3 years.

Sulla: While in the past I used to be very eager to remove citizens
from the roles for inactivity, and I was criticized for having that
opinion. I still have the opinion that inactive citizens should be
removed to have a more proper reflection of the true membership of Nova
Roma, this part of my view has changed. I think we should take this
slow, we should not move in haste to clean the roles of inactive
citizens. So, if we decide to legislate this, let the law be lenient in
recognition that many Nova Romans might be here for various reasons, and
politics might not be one of them.

Respectfully,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
Censor

> Vale
> Lucius Sicinius Drusus
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: The Missing Vestal
From:	Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix <alexious@-------->
Date:	Sun, 06 May 2001 20:19:23 -0700

Ave Citizens of Nova Roma

I just wanted to inform everyone that I have just gotten off the phone
with Vesta Maxima Prima Lucilla Cornelia Fortunata. She had surgery 3
days ago and is recovering though she cannot be online for a while
longer. She apologizes for any inconvenience. However she did want me
to comment on the Temple project for Vesta. She stated, that any
publication about it is currently not official. She was working on the
project with Pontiff Quintus Fabius Maximus and when she is able to
return she will continue that project and will, when the project is
completed make her official announcement.

Respectfully,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
Paterfamilias of the Gens Cornelia

jmath669642reng@-------- wrote:
>
> Citizen Gaius Cassus Nerva;
>
> Sir;

<Snip>

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


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Census: was Tidying up the Constitution
From:	lsicinius@--------
Date:	Mon, 07 May 2001 04:01:28 -0000

--- In novaroma@--------, Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix <alexious@e...> wrote:
SNIP
> Sulla: Oh I agree....it is a symptom of a larger issue. As I stated in
> another email a while ago, I would say about 80-90% of the people on our
> main list are citizens. This means about 50% of our citizens are not on
> the NR main list. I know that as Proconsul I tried unsuccessfully to
> promulgate a mandatory subscription to a Provincia email list. That
> failed because many citizens did not want to be forcibly put on a
> list....and I understand that completely. However, the result of not
> "compelling" people to join a list is the fact that there will be people
> who do not want to be on any lists..and hence will become inactive.
> Part of the nature of the internet is anonymity (sp.) Many people have
> no desire to be on lists...or even really to be involved.
>

Drusus: I can understand why someone might not want to be compelled to
join a list, However I don't see any way they take part in Nova Roma
if they fail to subscribe to one of the lists. Any citizen who fails
to sign up for a list will probelly become inactive fairly quickly.

> > I think it's time for Nova Roma to hold a Census. We need to know just
> > how many citizens we really have. In Antiquita the Census was closely
> > tied to taxiation, and since we are about to apply taxes, now seems to
> > be an excellent time to hold a Census.
>
> Sulla: Well this is something I wanted for a LONG time. However, I
> have not the time to call everyone who fails to respond to emails. My
> few scribes are either limited in their time as well or busy doing other
> projects for me.

Drusus:Perhaps we need a Lex that calls for a Census to held at
certain intervails, much like the USA requires a Census every 10
years. In Antiquita the Lustrum was 5 years so I think requiring a
Census every 5 years would both fill our modern needs, and perserve
our history. For the years a Census was to be held the Lex could
provide for extra scribes assigned to the Censors to assist in this
major undertaking.

>
> > We could start by looking at the records from the December elections.
> > Citizens who voted then would be considered to active. Next would be
> > the Citizens who have joined since then, who would also be considered
> > active. If my memory is correct about 200 citizens voted last December
> > and about 200 new citizens have enrolled since then. This leaves us
> > with roughly 450 citizens to account for.
>
> Sulla: True. But we must also keep in mind that there might be many in
> Nova Roma who do not care so much for the political climate. Just
> because we have 200 voters we probably have another 200 on various email
> lists. So we should always keep in mind that just because some one
> doesn't vote doesn't mean they are not interested in NR.
>

Drusus: I don't think that Citizens should be required to vote. I do
think that saying citizens who did vote are considered active is a
good method to cut down on the work involved in holding a Census.
Using the Election method allows the Censors to verify a large group
of citizens without any need to contact them.

> > I would suggest that each of these 450 citizens be sent an e-mail 3
> > times at one week intervals. One week after the last attempt to
> > contact these citizens, we should publish a list of those citizens who
> > failed to respond. If any Citizen knows the reason why we were unable
> > to contact the inactive citizens they could contact the Censors
> > regarding this. The remainder would be declared legally dead, and
> > thier names removed from the Album Civium. For those who were the
> > Pater/Mater of a Gens, The active citizen who had held membership the
> > longest would be declared the new Pater/Mater of that Gens. Gens with
> > no "living" Citizens would be striken from the Album Gentium.
> >
> > I think that this would solve most of the problems that we are having
> > with Paters/Maters that fail to respond. Since some of these inactive
> > citizens are the Pater/Mater of Gens with illustrous names it will
> > allow us to have new Citizens adpot these names so they will play a
> > role in our new republic as they did in the ancient republic. It would
> > also be of some help to the Senate when they debate on what the tax
> > rate is going to be. Knowing how many citizens we really have will
> > allow the Senate to make a closer estimate of how much revenue a given
> > tax rate will generate.
> >
> > It may be a blow to our pride to see the number of Citizens fall by
> > several hundred, but at least we will know how many real citizens we
> > have instead of wondering how many of that 849 are "ghosts"
>
> Sulla: Well I believe first we need to define what is legally dead. I
> know that I spoke with Consul Flavius Vedius about this a while ago, and
> I gave my thought that if someone does not vote in 3 yearly elections we
> should consider that person legally dead. The reason I hold that
> thought would be its not a quick fix. It give someone, even if they are
> not politically motivated ample opportunity to contact the Censors
> regarding their non desire to vote or vote in at least one major
> election within 3 years.
>
> Sulla: While in the past I used to be very eager to remove citizens
> from the roles for inactivity, and I was criticized for having that
> opinion. I still have the opinion that inactive citizens should be
> removed to have a more proper reflection of the true membership of Nova
> Roma, this part of my view has changed. I think we should take this
> slow, we should not move in haste to clean the roles of inactive
> citizens. So, if we decide to legislate this, let the law be lenient in
> recognition that many Nova Romans might be here for various reasons, and
> politics might not be one of them.

Drusus: I'm sure we have citizens who are only intrested in the
Religio to give an example, and who don't give a damn who the Consul
is. That's why I don't think that voting should be the only criteria
for determining if a citizen is active or not. Once the Taxes are
approved that gives us a second way of determing if a citizen is
active. A third might be checking the subscriptions of selected lists,
like this one. This isn't 100% accurate however, because of people
like me. I don't want all the mail from the lists I'm a member of
clogging my main mailbox, so I have a Yahoo box just for mail from the
lists.

Drusus: What I'm sugessting is that there be a list of criteria that a
citizen could meet, and as long as they met one of these criteria they
would be considered active. This is only to cut back on the work of
holding a Census, and citizens who failed to meet any of the criteria
would still be given a chance to contact the Censors. Legal death
would come when a citizen failed to meet any of the criteria, or to
communicate thier status to the Censors. Legal death is something we
need to debate and enact into law.

Vale
Lucius Sicinius Drusus


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: The Missing Vestal
From:	lsicinius@--------
Date:	Mon, 07 May 2001 04:05:07 -0000

--- In novaroma@--------, Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix <alexious@e...> wrote:
> Ave Citizens of Nova Roma
>
> I just wanted to inform everyone that I have just gotten off the phone
> with Vesta Maxima Prima Lucilla Cornelia Fortunata. She had surgery 3
> days ago and is recovering though she cannot be online for a while
> longer. She apologizes for any inconvenience. However she did want me
> to comment on the Temple project for Vesta. She stated, that any
> publication about it is currently not official. She was working on the
> project with Pontiff Quintus Fabius Maximus and when she is able to
> return she will continue that project and will, when the project is
> completed make her official announcement.
>
> Respectfully,
>
> Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
> Paterfamilias of the Gens Cornelia

This is excellent news, I thank the Gods for answering my prayers, and
ask them to speed her recovery.
Drusus


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Age
From:	Kristoffer From <kristoffer.from@-------->
Date:	Mon, 07 May 2001 07:53:39 +0200

Raina Faolan wrote:
> Excuse me for interupting what seems to be a good discussion. But could
> someone tell me who are you referring to as "children" is there a specific
> age range? And just what if the "children" are able to pay taxes surely
> these "kids" should have the right to vote.
>
> >From: Kristoffer From <kristoffer.from@-------->
> >Why not make this official, just saying that if "children" want
> >to donate money to our beloved Res Publica, they may do so, and
> >if not, they don't have to, because they are, after all, children?

Salve, Aeternia.

Please note the quotation marks ("") around my first use of the word
"children". This was meant to indicate that I used the word children for
a convenient way of addressing all those below the age of majority, in
my proposal 21.

And I don't agree with your opinion that anyone able to pay taxes would
have the right to vote. Children (Now my personal idea of children, i.e.
anyone below 18) are not mature enough to decide upon the future of a
nation, no matter what kind of funds they have at their disposal. I paid
my taxes for three years before becoming old enough to vote in Sweden,
and I fully comprehend why this was required of me. Your voting right
isn't something that is sold to you for money, it is a right you have as
an adult citizen of a democracy. Admittedly, some people are influenced
to sell it for "bread and shows", but it's value is beyond mere temporal
wealth.

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

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GCS d- s:++> a-- C++>$ ULS++ P+ L++ E- W++(--) N
o-- K- w--- !O M-- V-- PS->$ PE- Y+ PGP- t+@ 5- X-
R+++>$ !tv- b+++>$ DI++++ D+ G e h! !r-->r+++ !x-
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

---- BEGIN RP CODE BLOCK ----
RPaWfC R+++ H+++/--- I+++ M+++/- C- A+++ S+ G+ P+++/--- XPG
---- END RP CODE BLOCK ----

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


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Census: was Tidying up the Constitution
From:	Gnaeus Salix Astur <salixastur@-------->
Date:	Mon, 7 May 2001 04:14:43 -0700 (PDT)

Salvete omnes.

I think that the idea of holding a census every five years is a very
good one, for it would allow us to accomplish two feats:

1.- We could handle the issue of getting rid of "ghosts" and citizens
who really don't want to belong to Nova Roma anymore.

2.- We would be reliving the tradition of the ancient Roman "lustrum",
that would be a step ahead in our reconstruction effort. I would like
to suggest the citizens most interested in religion to start discussing
which ceremonies would be appropriate to celebtrate the lustrum, which
should be held next year (2755, 5 years after the Second Founding).

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

__________________________________________________
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] Census: was Tidying up the Constitution
From:	Gnaeus Salix Astur <salixastur@-------->
Date:	Mon, 7 May 2001 04:14:48 -0700 (PDT)


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Census: was Tidying up the Constitution
From:	Gnaeus Salix Astur <salixastur@-------->
Date:	Mon, 7 May 2001 04:15:08 -0700 (PDT)


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Census: was Tidying up the Constitution
From:	Michel <loos@-------->
Date:	Mon, 07 May 2001 08:46:26 -0300

Salve,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix wrote:
>
> <SNIP>
> >
> > Ave Luci Corneli,
> >
> > I think that these Paters/Maters who are failing to respond are a
> > symptom of a larger problem. An inflated Census. We don't really have
> > the 849 citizens that our home page mentions. What we have is a list
> > that is inflated with the names of citizens who left without bothering
> > to resign. Perhaps they joined on a whim, and didn't find what they
> > were looking for. Perhaps they left in anger over one of the disputes
> > that came up in the past. Perhaps they found another persuit that they
> > found more fullfilling to thier needs than Nova Roma. The reason
> > doesn't matter, They have left us and only exist as names on a list now.
>
> Sulla: Oh I agree....it is a symptom of a larger issue. As I stated in
> another email a while ago, I would say about 80-90% of the people on our
> main list are citizens. This means about 50% of our citizens are not on
> the NR main list. I know that as Proconsul I tried unsuccessfully to
> promulgate a mandatory subscription to a Provincia email list. That
> failed because many citizens did not want to be forcibly put on a
> list....and I understand that completely. However, the result of not
> "compelling" people to join a list is the fact that there will be people
> who do not want to be on any lists..and hence will become inactive.
> Part of the nature of the internet is anonymity (sp.) Many people have
> no desire to be on lists...or even really to be involved.
>

Mmm,could the language be an issue ? Any difference between the
proportion of citizen subscribed to the list ine english speaking
provinces with the proportion for non-english speaking provinces ?

Vale,

Manius Villius Limitanus

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


Subject:	[novaroma] The Comitia Populi Tributa is convened
From:	"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@-------->
Date:	Mon, 7 May 2001 08:52:46 -0400

Flavius Vedius Germanicus novaromanis S.P.D.

By the authority vested in me by the Constitution of Nova Roma, and
according to the procedures of the Lex Vedia de Ratione Comitiorum Populi
Tributorum, the Comitia Populi Tributa is hereby convened.

The Contio (official debate) on the matters before the Comitia is now begun.
It shall continue until Saturday May 12th at 6:00 PM (noon AM Eastern time),
at which time the Cista shall be opened and voting shall commence. Voting
shall continue until Sunday May 20th at 6:00 PM (noon Eastern time).
Individuals who do not have their voter code should contact the censors
(censors@--------) immediately.

The items for consideration by the Comitia are as follow:

-----

Item I. Election of quaestor

The following individuals have presented themselves as candidates for the
single vacant position:

* Oppius Flaccus Severus
* Titus Curius Dannicus

-----

Item II. Lex Cornelia et Maria de Mutandis Nominibus

I. Introduction

A. This lex is set forth to define the procedures by which a citizen may
apply to add, alter, or substitute any portion of his or her Roman name, and
to state the guidelines by which such an application may be judged. This is
done in order to attain a measure of conformity with ancient Roman naming
conventions and tradition. Note that this lex, and its procedures and
guidelines, apply to changes sought by citizens after the publication of
this edictum, and do not apply to citizens' existing names, although the
information herein will certainly be of use to new citizens choosing a Roman
name.

B. This edict has no impact on chatroom handles, signatures to private or
casual e-mail messages, or any other alias that any citizen may choose to
use. Rather, 'Roman name' for the purposes of this edict refers to the name
used by the citizen in public oaths, applications to sodalitates and in
other official contexts; this Roman name is the one recorded in the
censorial album civium.

C. Note that the use of the male gender throughout this document is done
solely for clarity, and is not meant to imply any disparity between the
sexes before the law.

D. Also note that this document uses the word sex to describe the physical
sex of a person and the word gender to refer to linguistic gender only.

E. It is not the intent of this edictum to discriminate against or to make
any judgment about homosexuality, transgenderedness, or any other sexual
identity. No such discrimination should be inferred from any part of this
document. Nor should it be used as a precedent for any law, magisterial act,
edictum, or other action that interferes with the rights of any citizen on
the basis of that citizen's sexual identity.

F. The Edictum Censoriale de Mutandis Nominibus is hereby rescinded in
favor of this lex.

II. Definition of a Roman Name

A. A Roman name consists of a praenomen, nomen, (optionally) cognomen, and
(possibly) an agnomen, and, in rare cases, several agnomina.

B. The praenomen is a citizen's given name, and is used to distinguish
between members of a particular gens. Since there are very few historical
praenomina, and since the praenomen's role is almost entirely secondary, a
citizen is almost never referred to by praenomen alone.

C. The nomen identifies a citizen's gens. Since a change in the stem of a
citizen's nomen would necessitate a change in gens-- a case of either
adoptio or the founding of a new gens-- it is beyond the scope of this
edictum.

D. The cognomen was originally a nickname. It is used to further identify
members within a gens, who could easily be identically named due to the
paucity of praenomina. Over time, the cognomen became inherited, and was
used to identify specific family lines within a single gens. Changes to
adopt certain names as cognomina are restricted, as set forth in paragraphs
E and F below. Note that these restrictions do not apply whatsoever to
cognomina under which citizens have already received citizenship.

E. An agnomen is an additional form of nickname that is commonly bestowed
upon a citizen by others, often to commemorate significant accomplishments
or important events in the citizen's life. While it is possible for a
citizen to add a new agnomen or change an existing one by request, agnomina
of distinction must be awarded by a senator, curule magistrate, or pontifex
in recognition of service to Nova Roma. Official recognition of such awarded
agnomina of distinction is completed by the censors' entering the agnomina
in the album civium. Following each such entry by the censores, the latter
will provide the curator araneae with the full Roman name of the
distinguished citizen and an explanation of the circumstances and reasons
surrounding the award of the agnomen, that the curator araneae may publish
this information to the Nova Roma website as he sees fit.

F. Agnomina of distinction include, but are not limited to, the following:
Augur, Augustus, Felix, Invictus, Magnus, Maximus, Optimus, Pius, Superbus,
Victor. Note that these restrictions do not apply whatsoever to agnomina
under which citizens have already received citizenship.

G. EXAMPLE: Quintus Caecilius Metellus Nepos would be Quintus of the
Metellus branch of gens Caecilia. His family would be referred to as the
Caecilii Metelli, in order to distinguish them from the other families
within gens Caecilia. His agnomen, Nepos, distinguishes him from any other
Quintus of the Caecilii Metelli. As nepos means grandson, it also most
likely distinguishes him as the third in a line of like-named people.

III. Procedures

A. A citizen wishing to change his name shall first contact his
paterfamilias and present his reasons for desiring a name change, as well as
the desired name. The paterfamilias will in turn contact the censores should
he approve of the name change, or should he find that he requires help in
determining whether or not to approve the change.

B. Patresfamiliae are instructed to work cooperatively with members of
their gens who desire to change their names in order to help them conform to
the letter and spirit of this document.

C. Should a paterfamilias disapprove of a citizen's desired name change,
refusing to present it to the censores, said citizen may appeal to the
censores within ninety (90) days of the refusal.

D. A paterfamilias who wishes to change his name shall apply to the
censores directly.

E. Should an applicant fail to obtain a name change from the censores, he
may, within ninety (90) days of the refusal, appeal to a consul or praetor
to bring the matter before the people through a vote in the Comitia Populi
Tributa.

1. Note that such an action requires the citizen who desires the change
to temporarily waive his rights of confidentiality as defined in Lex
Cornelia de Privatis Rebus, in order that evidence for and against the
application may be presented to the populace.

2. Also note that the decision to convene the Comitia Populi Tributa,
along with the schedule for doing so, is the purview of the consules and
praetores, and is therefore beyond the scope of this edict.

IV. Guidelines

A. An application for a name change is confidential. The requested name,
along with any and all evidence presented with it, is considered
confidential information as covered by the Lex Cornelia de Privatis Rebus.
Censores, patresfamiliae, and anyone called to provide testimony by any
party in the procedure are not to divulge any information applicable to the
name change to anyone without the applicant's written permission, except as
directed by this edict. Such exceptions include the following:

1. A paterfamilias providing relevant information upon referring a
request for a new name to the censores.

2. A paterfamilias or other citizen providing relevant information upon
a censor, consul, or praetor's request, as in the case of an appeal of
a denied application.

3. A citizen presenting evidence before the Comitia Populi Tributa in
the case of an appeal to those comitia.

B. The guiding principle in considering name changes is to be conformity
with ancient Roman tradition.

1. New praenomina should be historically attested ones.

2. As previously stated, agnomina of distinction (Maximus, Felix, et
cetera) are not to be granted to citizens on request, but can be awarded to
any citizen by any senator, curule magistrate, or pontifex in recognition of
any special service to the Republic. It is up to the patresfamiliae and
censores to determine what is and is not an agnomen of distinction on a
case-by-case basis.

3. Cognomina and agnomina can be new coinages, but must be conducive to
Latin declension, and must have a clear meaning-- both semantically and in
specific relation to the citizen requesting the added or changed name.

4. The gender of the name is to be consistent. Each part is to agree
with all others in gender, and with the sex of the citizen requesting the
name change.

B. A citizen who wishes to change the gender of his name counter to that
dictated by his sex must present, in support of his application, proof of
acceptance of the contrary sex by an authority of a macronation, state, or
municipality. In other words, if the applicant is physically a man and has a
form of macronational or municipal identification listing his sex as female,
or is officially recognized as a woman in his country of macronational
citizenship, then he may use a feminine name in Nova Roma.

1. An exception to this rule is allowed in the case of transsexual
citizens who are discussing surgical sex alteration with a health care
provider or undergoing other medical and psychological treatment in
preparation for such an operation. In these instances, documentation
pertaining to health care provider(s) may be required of the applicant.

2. Post-operative transsexual citizens shall be named according to their
current sex.

3. Hermaphrodites shall be named according to the sex in which they are
recognized by their country of macronational citizenship.

-----

Item III. Lex Cornelia et Maria de civitate eiuranda

I. Resignation of citizenship from Nova Roma, as stated in paragraph II.A.4.
of the constitution of Nova Roma, is effected by notification to the
censores, or by declaration before three or more witnesses. Messages posted
to e-mail lists or to electronic message boards, or statements of intent to
resign citizenship made "live" meet the requirement for three witnesses to a
resignation if and only if three witnesses to the resignation notify the
Censors thereof within 72 hours of the initial proclamation. Individuals
wishing to resign their citizenship may contact the censors directly and
obviate the need for witnesses.

II. When a citizen resigns citizenship in Nova Roma, the resignation will
not take effect for nine days from the date of the censors being notified,
counting inclusively of the date of the notification. If, during this
nundina, the citizen desires to withdraw his or her resignation and remain a
citizen, that citizen may freely do so without penalty, except as defined in
the next
paragraph. The citizen can withdraw the resignation by notifying the
censores of his/her desire to withdraw the resignation, by at least the same
channel that he/she used to submit the resignation. For example, if a
citizen submits a message to the e-mail address of the censores, currently
censors@--------, stating that he/she resigns, then the citizen must
e-mail the Censores by the same address to withdraw the resignation.

III. If a currently serving magistrate submits and withdraws multiple
resignations of citizenship within the same calendar year, the censores will
have grounds, after a closed hearing at which the magistrate will have
opportunity to present reasoning for his/her actions, to issue an edictum
against the magistrate rendering him/her ineligible to run for elected
office for one year. Should the magistrate believe that he/she has a case
for appeal of such an edictum, he/she can appeal to a Tribunus Plebis,
Praetor or Consul within 30 days of issuance of the edictum as follows:

A. If Plebeian, either to a Tribunus Plebis to bring the appeal to the
Comitia Plebis Tributa or to a Praetor or Consul to bring the appeal to the
Comitia Populi Tributa.

B. If Patrician, to a Praetor or Consul to bring the appeal to the Comitia
Populi Tributa.

C. Note that the decision to convene these comitia, along with the
schedule for doing so, is the purview of the tribuni, consules and
praetores, and is therefore beyond the scope of this edict.

IV. When a citizen resigns citizenship in Nova Roma, and the resignation
becomes official after nine days, the ex-citizen is barred from
reapplication and reinstatement for a period of six months, effective from
the date his or her resignation became official. EXAMPLE: A citizen resigned
on May 1 2000, and his resignation became official on May 9, 2000, he could
not be reinstated until November 9, 2000.

V. The ex-citizen, in the event that he desires to reacquire citizenship,
must apply in the same fashion as any other person desirous of citizenship
would, with the exception that he/she is directed to state in his/her
application the reasons behind his/her resignation and decision to reverse
the resignation and come back. His/her Roman name may be resumed if no other
citizen of Nova Roma has taken it up in his/her absence. No public offices,
titles or century points carry over to the returning citizen, with the
exception of any religious title and corresponding century points that may
be specified by the Collegium Pontificum. Senatorial status may be resumed
at the discretion of both the Senate and of the censores collegially. Gens
affiliation in all instances remains at the discretion of the pater or
materfamilias.

VI. If a citizen resigns, is subsequently reinstated, and resigns a second
time, that ex-citizen is barred for two years from reinstatement. Such a
citizen is furthermore barred from running for any elected public office for
two years following re-admission, with no recourse.

VII. If a citizen resigns, is subsequently reinstated, and resigns a second
time, is subsequently reinstated, and resigns a third time, that ex-citizen
is barred forever from reinstatement. The ex-citizen has despised his
citizenship and shown contempt for the state: he may never be reinstated
thereafter.

VIII. The Censors will note the dates of submitted and withdrawn
resignations in the censorial album civium.

-----

Item IV. Lex Vedia de assidui et capiti censi

I. This Lex Vedia de assidui et capiti censi is hereby enacted to define the
classifications of taxpayers and non-taxpayers, and put in place special
conditions on those who are unable or unwilling to support the financial
welfare of the Republic through payment of those taxes which may be enacted
by the Senate.

II. Citizens who pay taxes in such amount and in such manner as may be
defined by the Senate shall be considered assidui. No special conditions
shall be placed on assidui in regards to their placement in centuries and
tribes or their ability to run for or hold office.

III. Citizens who do not pay taxes in such amount and in such manner as may
be defined by the Senate shall be considered capiti censi. The following
special conditions shall apply to capiti censi:

A. The Censors shall place all capiti censi in the last century in
Class V as defined in the Lex Vedia Centuriata and those leges which may
amend it, and no other Citizens shall be enrolled therein.

B. The Censors shall place all capiti censi in the urban tribes as
defined in the Lex Vedia Tributorum and those leges which may amend it.

C. No member of the capiti censi may run for or hold office as one of
the ordinarii (including the apparitores), nor be appointed to or hold
office as provincial governor. Members of the capiti censi may hold
provincial or local offices at the discretion of the governor of the
province in question.

-----

May the Gods grant us wisdom in our deliberations and shine Their grace upon
us.

Valete,

Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
Consul

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


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: The Missing Vestal
From:	"A. Cato" <a.cato@-------->
Date:	Mon, 7 May 2001 12:22:56 -0400

Salve: I am happy to hear that our Priestess is soon to return to us, and
extend my prayers for a quick and total recovery. Her talents are much
appreciated here in Nova Roma, and I hope that she will soon be back and at
the peak of health. May the Gods and Goddesses watch over her. Vale, ...
A. Cato

----- Original Message -----
From: "Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix" <alexious@-------->
To: <novaroma@-------->
Sent: Sunday, May 06, 2001 11:19 PM
Subject: Re: [novaroma] Re: The Missing Vestal

> Ave Citizens of Nova Roma
>
> I just wanted to inform everyone that I have just gotten off the phone
> with Vesta Maxima Prima Lucilla Cornelia Fortunata. She had surgery 3
> days ago and is recovering though she cannot be online for a while
> longer. She apologizes for any inconvenience. However she did want me
> to comment on the Temple project for Vesta. She stated, that any
> publication about it is currently not official. She was working on the
> project with Pontiff Quintus Fabius Maximus and when she is able to
> return she will continue that project and will, when the project is
> completed make her official announcement.
>
> Respectfully,
>
> Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
> Paterfamilias of the Gens Cornelia
>
> jmath669642reng@-------- wrote:
> >
> > Citizen Gaius Cassus Nerva;
> >
> > Sir;
>
> <Snip>
>
>
>
> 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] Virtual Temples
From:	Marilyn Traber <margali@-------->
Date:	Mon, 07 May 2001 12:31:21 -0400

Can you folks please send me URLs for virtual temples? I am
curious, and would like to find out more - and possibly putting
one up on my web site. I already have a Nova Roma page with some
decent roman links on it, but this would be a great improvement
to what little participation I am currently doing. I am also
checking into the idea of making women's clothing and military
tunics for sale ;-)
margali
Hyapatia Asinia


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Virtual Temples
From:	QFabiusMax@--------
Date:	Mon, 7 May 2001 13:25:23 EDT

In a message dated 5/7/2001 9:32:37 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
margali@-------- writes:

<< Can you folks please send me URLs for virtual temples? >>
Iuppiter
http://www.angelfire.com/ca3/OLYMPUS/
Apollo
http://pagan.drak.net/lolandrea/entrance_temple_apollo.htm
Dionysos
ttp://pagan.drak.net/lolandrea/entrance_temple_dionysos.htm

Q F M

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


Subject:	[novaroma] site URL's
From:	"Lucius Equitius" <vze23hw7@-------->
Date:	Mon, 7 May 2001 13:49:37 -0400

Salvete, Quirites

http://www.geocities.com/westhollywood/heights/4617/asclep.html
Aesculapius

http://pagan.drak.net/lolandrea/entrance_temple_apollo.htm
Apollo

http://pagan.drak.net/lolandrea/entrance_temple_dionysos.htm
Bacchus

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Sparta/7249/Temple.html
Castor and Pollux

http://home.earthlink.net/~domusludus/temple/
Juno

http://www.angelfire.com/ca3/OLYMPUS/
Jupiter

http://members.nbci.com/mars_ultor/culture/myth/mars/marsfrm.htm
Mars

http://www.geocities.com/westhollywood/heights/4617/mercury.html
Mercury

http://www.geocities.com/westhollywood/heights/4617/pomotemp.html
Pomona and Vertumnus

Bene omnibus nobis
Valete, Flamen Martialis L Equitius Cincinnatus


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Census: was Tidying up the Constitution
From:	Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix <alexious@-------->
Date:	Mon, 07 May 2001 11:25:29 -0700

Michel wrote:
>
> Salve,
>
> Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix wrote:
> >
> > <SNIP>
> > >
> > > Ave Luci Corneli,
> > >
> > > I think that these Paters/Maters who are failing to respond are a
> > > symptom of a larger problem. An inflated Census. We don't really have
> > > the 849 citizens that our home page mentions. What we have is a list
> > > that is inflated with the names of citizens who left without bothering
> > > to resign. Perhaps they joined on a whim, and didn't find what they
> > > were looking for. Perhaps they left in anger over one of the disputes
> > > that came up in the past. Perhaps they found another persuit that they
> > > found more fullfilling to thier needs than Nova Roma. The reason
> > > doesn't matter, They have left us and only exist as names on a list now.
> >
> > Sulla: Oh I agree....it is a symptom of a larger issue. As I stated in
> > another email a while ago, I would say about 80-90% of the people on our
> > main list are citizens. This means about 50% of our citizens are not on
> > the NR main list. I know that as Proconsul I tried unsuccessfully to
> > promulgate a mandatory subscription to a Provincia email list. That
> > failed because many citizens did not want to be forcibly put on a
> > list....and I understand that completely. However, the result of not
> > "compelling" people to join a list is the fact that there will be people
> > who do not want to be on any lists..and hence will become inactive.
> > Part of the nature of the internet is anonymity (sp.) Many people have
> > no desire to be on lists...or even really to be involved.
> >
>
> Mmm,could the language be an issue ? Any difference between the
> proportion of citizen subscribed to the list ine english speaking
> provinces with the proportion for non-english speaking provinces ?

Ave,

Nope I do not think that is an issue at all. I have a very
international gens. I think that the Paters/Maters should have a much
larger role in this. If Paters and Maters are not going to be that
active...then it is very easy for citizens who are not in active Gentes
to drift to the point they become inactive as well.

Respectfully,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix

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


Subject:	[novaroma] Edictum de Nominibus Mutandis
From:	"M. Apollonius Formosanus" <bvm3@-------->
Date:	Mon, 7 May 2001 19:04:40 +0200

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

I found the question of Draco the other day very much to the point:

He wrote:

At a given moment a few weeks ago there were three versions
of the Gender Edict circulating here, and it was said all of them, or
one of them, would be put up for a vote with the original one. On the
vote presented, however, these alternatives of both Marius and Vedius
are absent. Why is that? They seemed like good alternatives to me,
and the people would have a choice between a few versions, instead of
only one to either approve or disapprove of.
_______________

Indeed, Consul Vedius not so long ago explicitly said on this list
that he thought his own compromise proposal more reasonable than the
requirements of the original. And that compromise proposal was
indeed his own initiative.

He responds to Draco:

I must ask, who said that? I certainly didn't. Alternatives were
offered, but nothing regarding which versions would be offered for a
vote was mentioned, as far as I am aware.

MAF: This is rather disingenuous language, I believe. It was the
obvious intent to offer an alternative to be voted upon, otherwise
the whole initiative of the Consul would have been pointless.

> On the vote presented, however, these
> alternatives of both Marius and Vedius are absent. Why is that?

I mentioned my reasons for this when I published the proposed text of
the upcoming vote (look in the brackets after the text of the lex in
question). But, to go into a tad more detail...

Maria's (aka "Marius")

MAF: More properly - "Marius (also *offensively* called by some rude
individuals "Maria")"

version is not offered for two reasons; not only had she abandoned
her own alternative in favor of my own compromise version, but
she had also resigned her Citizenship subsequent to the appearance of
both her alternative and my own.
_________
MAF: I had heard that he was privately told that there would not be a
vote on an alternative - which might very well be a good reason for
resigning due to loss of hope for fair treatment, after hopes were
raised by Vedius' having made so good a start.
_________

As far as my own version of the lex goes, it was intended to foster
some sort of compromise between the competing versions. One of the
people who was responsible for the need to compromise in the first
place is now gone. Can one have a compromise between one point of
view and no others?

MAF: The Consul has overlooked the fact that this is not a personal
matter, but a matter of general policy which will affect future (or
perhaps unrecognised present) transsexuals here. And there is still
another point of view here on the matter, which I and several other
quite *present* and concerned citizens have been fighting and working
for during more than a year.

Consul Vedius indeed produced a better version than the original,
although not by any means perfect. By reneging on his at least
implied offer of giving the People a choice, he has deprived us of a
realistic chance to choose. If there are no altenatives, almost
anything submitted by the magistrates will pass, as we know from
experience. Having to make a choice based on considering the
differences between two differing versions would have given a real
choice without sacrificing the many good parts of the original law.

When the law is passed, there will be no settlement or
reconcilliation, because those of us who believe that discrimination
based on a person's sexuality is wrong believe that on moral grounds,
not on the basis of votes, magisterial decisions or other
irrelevancies. And our consciences will still force us to react to
the further entrenchment of such immoral and unequitable policies and
practices if voted into place. The issue will not be "settled" by
using a majority to force it down our throat.

By reneging on his at least implied promise to give the People an
alternative, the Consul has given up a chance for compromise and
reconciliation, as well as a chance to simply do the decent thing.

We cannot afford to have an organisation/nation which insists on
mistreating its sexual minorities. This is going to be dealt with in
a New Hampshire or U.S. Federal court one day if things are allowed
to go on like this. Common sense and basic fairness would prevent
that for Nova Roma. I urge everyone to exhibit those virtues.

Since Consul Vedius does not wish to give us any alternative,
despite the alternatives readily available, I can only counsel you,
Quirites, to vote NO for the Name Change bill. There is much
technical in it that is good, but it deliberately flies in the face
of equity and equality for some people, and that is something that
must be changed. Send it back so that it will be changed. Let us have
a fair nation here.

Valete!

_________________________________________________
Marcus Apollonius Formosanus, Aedilis Plebeius Novae Romae
Amicus Dignitatis; Scriba Censorius
Paterfamilias Gentis Apolloniae (http://www.crosswinds.net/~bvm3/)
Moderator et Praeceptor Sodalitatis Latinitatis
Magister Scholae Latinae
Moderator Indicis protoprovincialis NR_Venediae
ICQ# 61698049 AIM: MAFormosanus MSN: Formosanus
Civis Novae Romae in Silesia, Polonia
Minervium Virtuale: http://www.crosswinds.net/~bvm3/Minervium.htm
The Gens Apollonia is open to new members.
Ave nostra Respublica Libera - Nova Roma!
____________________________________________________
Memento Idus Martias - Remember the Ides of March.
____________________________________________________

All that is needed for the forces of evil to triumph in the world is for
enough good men to do nothing. - Edmund Burke
___________________________________________________

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


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Edictum de Nominibus Mutandis
From:	gcassiusnerva@--------
Date:	Mon, 7 May 2001 14:36:00 EDT

Formosanus: <<The issue will not be "settled" by using a majority to force
it down our throat.>>

And we thought you were Nova Roma's self-appointed champion of democracy!

Nerva

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


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Edictum de Nominibus Mutandis
From:	gcassiusnerva@--------
Date:	Mon, 7 May 2001 15:08:41 EDT

In a message dated 5/7/01 11:26:40 AM Pacific Daylight Time, bvm3@--------
writes:

> The issue will not be "settled"....

Formosanus, does this mean you intend to violate your oath of office? You
know, the oath about upholding the law, etc etc. If it passes, will you
implement it?

Nerva

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

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


Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Edictum de Nominibus Mutandis
From:	"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@-------->
Date:	Mon, 7 May 2001 15:26:18 -0400

Salve

> -----Original Message-----
> From: M. Apollonius Formosanus [mailto:bvm3@--------]
> Sent: Monday, May 07, 2001 1:05 PM
> _________
> MAF: I had heard that he was privately told that there would not be a
> vote on an alternative - which might very well be a good reason for
> resigning due to loss of hope for fair treatment, after hopes were
> raised by Vedius' having made so good a start.
> _________

This is untrue, although I have no doubt that the circle of friends with
whom you hang out in cyberspace (notably those individuals who share your
belief that Nova Roma is a "disaster" but who actually had the guts to leave
a month and a half ago, rather than stay behind just to snipe and complain)
would propagate such a lie. Such ugly rumor-mongering was the order of the
day last winter, and it hardly surprises me that it continues even after the
muck-rakers and Nova Roma have parted company.

My decision to offer only the original Censors' version of the lex was made
_because_ of her leaving, not the other way 'round. Let us not mince words;
she was the whole reason for that section of the lex, and I was willing to
offer a modified version of it solely in deference to her. Now that she is
gone, that reason has gone with it. Should anyone else in a similar
situation ever come to Nova Roma (and I find the prospect exceedingly rare),
they will do so with the foreknowledge of what, precisely, the procedures
are in such cases regarding name and gender.

I believe the lex as it currently stands is perfectly fine. The 99% of it
that doesn't deal with
people-who-want-to-be-known-by-a-different-gender-here-but-not-in-the-real-w
orld is excellent, and the remaining 1% deals with the issue in a fair,
reasonable, and objective manner.

You, Formosanus, won't be satisfied as long as any sort of objective
standard is in place for anything; gender, age, civic contribution,
language. Rome was not the egalitarian Utopia you seem to crave, and neither
will Nova Roma be one as long as I have anything to say about it. I am sure
your ultra-Politically Correct-- nearly anarchistic-- rantings will fall on
deaf ears as they have in the past; but how reassuring it must be to you to
be the only person who is "morally right" in a nation of nearly a thousand!

Vale,

Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
Consul

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

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


Subject:	[novaroma] Comitia Vote - Lex Cornelia et Maria de Mutandis Nominibus
From:	Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix <alexious@-------->
Date:	Mon, 07 May 2001 12:31:04 -0700

Ave!

As you probably are aware, or were not, this election is focused on the
promulgation of some laws. The reason I am writing this email to you,
is because the Name Change Edict (Edictum Censoriale de Mutandis
Nominibus) is both fair and legal. Despite what you might have read on
the Nova Roma email list (novaroma@--------), this is a very good law
for Nova Roma. As co-author of this, I would like to point out and
clear up several misconceptions that have been aired about this edict.

This law serves to gain increased credibility for Nova Roma by
establishing a set pattern for Roman names. In essence, this is just
giving the People the opportunity to ratify what already is policy.
Listed below are some items covered in the Lex.

1. It defines and explains a correct and proper Roman name.
2. Describes the importance of the Nomen in the Roman Name.
3. Explains the concept of Agnomen of Distinction.
4. Documents the process a citizen would go through in changing their
Roman Name.
5. Name changes for other reasons. (Gender change, Gens Change, etc.)

The most controversial aspect of this edict is the Gender portion. Let
me assure you, that the Censors of Nova Roma have taken great pains to
write this as flexible as possible, with due consideration give to both
the needs of the individual and the needs of Nova Roma. We believe that
we have arrived at a reasonable solution. It is listed in item XX of
the Edict. Which is quoted below:

XX. - A citizen who wishes to change the gender of his name counter to
that dictated by his sex must present, in support of his application,
proof of acceptance of the contrary sex by an authority of a
macronation, state, or municipality. In other words, if the applicant
is physically a man and has a form of macronational or municipal
identification listing his sex as female, or is officially recognized as
a woman in his country of macronational citizenship, then he may use a
feminine name in Nova Roma.
i) - An exception to this rule is allowed in the case of transsexual
citizens who are discussing surgical sex alteration with a health care
provider or undergoing other medical and psychological treatment in
preparation for such an operation. In these instances, documentation
pertaining to health care provider(s) may be required of the applicant.
ii) - Post-operative transsexual citizens shall be named according to
their current sex.
iii) - Hermaphrodites shall be named according to the sex in which they
are recognized by their country of macronational citizenship.

Basically, it states, that if you live in the United States, and in your
drivers license it states you are a man, then in Nova Roma you will be
considered a man.

I hope that my post will explain much of the concerns you might have
about this edict. And, if you have any further questions, inquires or
comments, please feel free to contact me at
mailto:alexious@-------- I will be pleased to answer any
questions or concerns you might have. Also, if you would like to read
the exact Edict, please click on this link
http://www.novaroma.org/tabularium/edicts00290601.html.

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
Censor of Nova Roma

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


Subject:	[novaroma] To the citizen M. Apollonius Formosanus
From:	QFabiusMax@--------
Date:	Mon, 7 May 2001 16:16:10 EDT

POSTED IN THE FORUM:
I ask this of the individual known as M. Apollonius Formosanus:
Since you have become the champion of our citizens' rights, you should make
your objections known, which you have, then let them decide if de Nominibus
should pass or fail. However if it does pass, you as a Magistrate of Rome
must see that the provisions be carried out. If, you cannot do so, you would
have to resign of course, just like I or any other magistrate would if we
would not fullfill our oath.

Q. Fabius Maximus

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


Subject:	[novaroma] The Nature of Democracy....
From:	"Adrian Gunn" <shinjikun@-------->
Date:	Mon, 07 May 2001 20:41:37 -0000

Salvete,

With the upcoming election, let's not forget that in any Democracy
that follows the principle of "majority rules" there is always going
to be an unhappy minority. We saw that here in the USA last November
with our Presidential Elections. When you have a polarized citizenry
with (for example) 45% of the people supporting "viewpoint A" and 55%
supporting "viewpoint B", when viewpoint "B" wins, 45% of your
population is going to be unhappy about it. It's the downside of
democracy, but we just have to live with it. No one yet has devised a
system of government where everyone gets his or her own way, and
everyone gets to be happy. As the saying goes: "Democracy is the
worst form of government, except for all the other ones." My point
is, whenever the Senate adopts any Lex, be it for Taxes or Name
Change Rules, someone's not going to like it. When the majority of
your peers disagree with you however, it's not necessarily injustice �
sometimes its just life. Obviously this doesn't mean a person should
abandon their convictions simply because the majority disagrees with
them, but it does mean they may have to learn to compromise, or
simply agree to disagree and get on with life.

Valete,

C. Minucius Hadrianus
Legatus of Massachusetts

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


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Comitia Vote - Lex Cornelia et Maria de Mutandis Nominibus
From:	QFabiusMax@--------
Date:	Mon, 7 May 2001 16:46:10 EDT

In a message dated 5/7/2001 1:42:08 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
labienus@-------- writes:

<< I would most likely vote for the compromise version. I will
definitely vote against the version currently presented. >>
Which is your choice, Tribune. Thank you for sharing your views
Vale
Q. Fabius Maximus

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


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Comitia Vote - Lex Cornelia et Maria de Mutandis Nominibus
From:	labienus@--------
Date:	Mon, 7 May 2001 15:40:27 US/Central

T Labienus Quiritibus SPD

It is unfortunate that Consul Vedius has decided not to promulgate his so-
called compromise version of the Lex Cornelia et Maria de Nominibus Mutandis.
I say this because the compromise law is a superior law. It is both simpler
and more in line with what is, ostensibly, the intent behind the LCMdNM.

Focusing on the controversial portion of the lex, the version put forth says,
essentially, that one may have a name whose linguistic gender is contrary to
one's genitalia only if one's macronation recognizes one's *actual sex* as
contrary to one's genitalia. In other words, we will only allow a man to have
a feminine name if his macronation accepts him as a woman. In this version,
the macronation is held to a more stringent standard than Nova Roma is, thereby
making it harder to obtain a cross-gender name-change in Nova Roma than in
one's macronation.

The compromise version says that one may have a name whose linguistic gender is
contrary to one's genitalia if one's macronation allows one the same freedom.
In this version, the standard to which the name-change applicant is held has
parity with the macronational standard.

Both versions, of course, suffer from three major problems. They both
needlessly abrogate Nova Roma's sovreignty in favor of macronational standards,
they both apply differently to different cives because they rely on
macronational standards which differ from country to country, and they both put
the government in the business of looking down its cives' pants. Despite these
problems, I would most likely vote for the compromise version. I will
definitely vote against the version currently presented.

Valete


Subject:	[novaroma] Who is Titus Curius Dannicus? (was: Re: The Comitia Populi Tributa is convened)
From:	"G. Noviodunus Ferriculus" <Gaius.Noviodunus@-------->
Date:	Mon, 07 May 2001 22:58:36 +0200

> Item I. Election of quaestor
>
> The following individuals have presented themselves as candidates for the
> single vacant position:
>
> * Oppius Flaccus Severus
> * Titus Curius Dannicus

Salvete omnes,

I've just gone through the archives of the main mailing list in order to
get more information on both candidates. While I could find a lot of
political opinions of Oppius, I found only a short biography of T.
Curius. So Tite, if you are reading this, could you please post your
point of view on the topics discussed lately?

I am aware that you might have done many other things, things that
didn't get through on this list. If it is the case, please tell us more
about your novaroman activity.

Gratias maximas tibi ago

--
Gaius Noviodunus Ferriculus
Civis Provinciae Germaniae, Regionis Superioris
Friburgii Helvetiorum

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


Subject:	[novaroma] Comitia Vote
From:	"S. Apollonius Draco" <hendrik.meuleman@-------->
Date:	Mon, 7 May 2001 23:20:46 +0200

Salvete, Citizens of Nova Roma;

Before us today are three lex models. One of them will impact our further Roman life greatly if it gets voted in, and the other two will have a great impact on a minority. My personal views on the laws, summarized as shortly as possible:

1) Lex Cornelia de Nominibus Mutandis

Why have the majority vote on a law that was, admit it, intended for a very small minority? Why put forth legislation for a group with no people (anymore) in it? This would be a good law with �that clause� was cut out from it, or altered into something less difficult. Don't say you made this law for Marius (and that's a man for you -- addressing him differently is pestering and slander), because I don't believe he asked for it. As Senator Australicus powerfully said, the government has no business in our pants.

2) Lex Cornelia de Eiurandio

A non-solution for a non-problem. Citizens who love Roma and want to return are hereby punished, and citizens who don't care won't care for this law either. You desigend this law to keep people you don't like out of the door as long as possible, in my opinion, because until now few people have resigned from protest and then returned. And one of those people was... Marius. How peculiar. Nobody has ever used protest resignations and then came back over and over again. And it probably won't happen, either.

3) Lex Vedia de Assidui et Capiti Censi

I suppose everyone knows my views on this lex. It deprives the able yet financially troubled to sever Nova Roma in a position that doesn't require money at all, and deals not enough with exceptions that will arise.

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

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

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

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


Subject:	So much for the Virtues (was Re: [novaroma] Edictum de Nominibus Mutandis)
From:	"S. Apollonius Draco" <hendrik.meuleman@-------->
Date:	Mon, 7 May 2001 23:30:51 +0200

Salvete Consul Vedi et alii,

> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: M. Apollonius Formosanus [mailto:bvm3@--------]
> > Sent: Monday, May 07, 2001 1:05 PM
> > _________
> > MAF: I had heard that he was privately told that there would not be a
> > vote on an alternative - which might very well be a good reason for
> > resigning due to loss of hope for fair treatment, after hopes were
> > raised by Vedius' having made so good a start.
> > _________
>
> This is untrue, although I have no doubt that the circle of friends with
> whom you hang out in cyberspace (notably those individuals who share your
> belief that Nova Roma is a "disaster" but who actually had the guts to
leave
> a month and a half ago, rather than stay behind just to snipe and
complain)
> would propagate such a lie. Such ugly rumor-mongering was the order of the
> day last winter, and it hardly surprises me that it continues even after
the
> muck-rakers and Nova Roma have parted company.
>

If I may note so, you are not a victim here (or, not the only victim). Don't
pretend that the "circle of friends" you are referring to (and which I am
probably being counted to, too) has never been the target of such rumour
mongering. I can remember the pointless mass hysteria about we being "the
destroyers of the state", which was even more baseless than the complaints
brought forth here today.

(snipped)
> You, Formosanus, won't be satisfied as long as any sort of objective
> standard is in place for anything; gender, age, civic contribution,
> language. Rome was not the egalitarian Utopia you seem to crave, and
neither
> will Nova Roma be one as long as I have anything to say about it. I am
sure
> your ultra-Politically Correct-- nearly anarchistic-- rantings will fall
on
> deaf ears as they have in the past; but how reassuring it must be to you
to
> be the only person who is "morally right" in a nation of nearly a
thousand!
>

Sometimes a crusade against political correctness is a guise for a good old
slander, or even better, an expression of equally extreme views. I'm not a
great fan of political correctness either, but this has got nothing to do
with it, and is just producing unnecessary heat. And what is so against
objective standards? Insulting people is no way of trying to make a point
other than a personal one which has nothing to do with Nova Roma.

Valete 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] Comitia Vote
From:	Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix <alexious@-------->
Date:	Mon, 07 May 2001 14:41:32 -0700

Ave,

My comments below:

"S. Apollonius Draco" wrote:
>
> Salvete, Citizens of Nova Roma;
>
> Before us today are three lex models. One of them will impact our further Roman life greatly if it gets voted in, and the other two will have a great impact on a minority. My personal views on the laws, summarized as shortly as possible:
>
> 1) Lex Cornelia de Nominibus Mutandis
>
> Why have the majority vote on a law that was, admit it, intended for a very small minority? Why put forth legislation for a group with no people (anymore) in it? This would be a good law with �that clause� was cut out from it, or altered into something less difficult. Don't say you made this law for Marius (and that's a man for you -- addressing him differently is pestering and slander), because I don't believe he asked for it. As Senator Australicus powerfully said, the government has no business in our pants.

Sulla: So what you are saying now is that you feel the majority of the
Citizens of Nova Roma should not have a voice? I am shocked that you
would imply such, given your previous statements. And, Lucia Maria, who
was a citizen of Nova Roma, before her resigantion, IS a woman. Have
you met her physically Sextus Apollonius. Til you have, I beg you to
cease your inaccurate information. Those of us who have met her face to
face, as I have....can draw those conclusions. And your reiteration of
Senator Australicus statement shows just how little of the law you have
read....I suggest you go back and read the proposed Lex. The Lex
included the very suggestions your own Pater wanted in back in May of
last year. Do you need me to repost that message to the NR main
list....Sextus?

>
> 2) Lex Cornelia de Eiurandio
>
> A non-solution for a non-problem. Citizens who love Roma and want to return are hereby punished, and citizens who don't care won't care for this law either. You desigend this law to keep people you don't like out of the door as long as possible, in my opinion, because until now few people have resigned from protest and then returned. And one of those people was... Marius. How peculiar. Nobody has ever used protest resignations and then came back over and over again. And it probably won't happen, either.

Sulla: Oh yes..this is a non-problem considering that we had a number
of people resign on the Ides of March..and some of them magistrates who
ended up embezzling funds from Nova Roma....Sure...a non-problem...I
suggest you rethink your position in this matter.

> 3) Lex Vedia de Assidui et Capiti Censi
>
> I suppose everyone knows my views on this lex. It deprives the able yet financially troubled to sever Nova Roma in a position that doesn't require money at all, and deals not enough with exceptions that will arise.

Sulla: Well I respectfully disagree in your opinion on this law. I
think this is a sound piece of legislation that helps begin to form a
proper framework between those citizens who pay and those citizens who
do not pay. My only statement in regards to this is that the
magistrates cannot be the only individuals who have a vested interest in
NR. The financial burden should be held by all citizens. It is
interesting to me that in the name change edict you do not want the
government to interfere in the lives of the citzens but in this aspect
you are actually trying to promote governmental bureaucracy by trying to
differentiate between those who cannot pay and those who can. (Even
though the name change edict does not interfere in that aspect that you
seem to proclaim it does.)

Respectfully,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix

> Valete bene!
> Sextus Apollonius Draco,
> Vainqueur, ICQ# 32924725
> Darkling_Crawler, Yahoo IM
>
> "Come, fly the teeth of the wind;
> share my wings" (FSOL)
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: The Missing Vestal
From:	"Raina Faolan" <GuruPoet@-------->
Date:	Mon, 07 May 2001 15:48:01 -0400

Salvete,

My best wishes sent to Vesta Maxima Prima Lucilla Cornelia, may she have a
speedy recovery.

Bene Valete,
Aeternia

>From: Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix <alexious@-------->
>Reply-To: novaroma@--------
>To: novaroma@--------
>Subject: Re: [novaroma] Re: The Missing Vestal
>Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 20:19:23 -0700
>
>Ave Citizens of Nova Roma
>
>I just wanted to inform everyone that I have just gotten off the phone
>with Vesta Maxima Prima Lucilla Cornelia Fortunata. She had surgery 3
>days ago and is recovering though she cannot be online for a while
>longer. She apologizes for any inconvenience. However she did want me
>to comment on the Temple project for Vesta. She stated, that any
>publication about it is currently not official. She was working on the
>project with Pontiff Quintus Fabius Maximus and when she is able to
>return she will continue that project and will, when the project is
>completed make her official announcement.
>
>Respectfully,
>
>Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
>Paterfamilias of the Gens Cornelia
>
>jmath669642reng@-------- wrote:
> >
> > Citizen Gaius Cassus Nerva;
> >
> > Sir;
>
><Snip>

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

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


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Age
From:	"Raina Faolan" <GuruPoet@-------->
Date:	Mon, 07 May 2001 15:58:13 -0400

Salve,

How about I start over. I am glad you corrected me, I really do appreciate
it. Now that I know what you meant about "children" I am taking it does not
apply to those my age (under 25). Using myself as an example, I am under the
age of 21 and blessed to be able to pay taxes.
Since I am able to pay the taxes the Senate is proposing, why should my vote
be taken away since I am underage. That was the original point I was trying
to make which failed yet again.

Vale,
Aeternia

>From: Kristoffer From <kristoffer.from@-------->
>Reply-To: novaroma@--------
>To: novaroma@--------
>Subject: Re: [novaroma] Age
>Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 07:53:39 +0200
>
>Raina Faolan wrote:
> > Excuse me for interupting what seems to be a good discussion. But could
> > someone tell me who are you referring to as "children" is there a
>specific
> > age range? And just what if the "children" are able to pay taxes surely
> > these "kids" should have the right to vote.
> >
> > >From: Kristoffer From <kristoffer.from@-------->
> > >Why not make this official, just saying that if "children" want
> > >to donate money to our beloved Res Publica, they may do so, and
> > >if not, they don't have to, because they are, after all, children?
>
>Salve, Aeternia.
>
>Please note the quotation marks ("") around my first use of the word
>"children". This was meant to indicate that I used the word children for
>a convenient way of addressing all those below the age of majority, in
>my proposal 21.
>
>And I don't agree with your opinion that anyone able to pay taxes would
>have the right to vote. Children (Now my personal idea of children, i.e.
>anyone below 18) are not mature enough to decide upon the future of a
>nation, no matter what kind of funds they have at their disposal. I paid
>my taxes for three years before becoming old enough to vote in Sweden,
>and I fully comprehend why this was required of me. Your voting right
>isn't something that is sold to you for money, it is a right you have as
>an adult citizen of a democracy. Admittedly, some people are influenced
>to sell it for "bread and shows", but it's value is beyond mere temporal
>wealth.
>
>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
>
>
>-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
>Version: 3.1
>GCS d- s:++> a-- C++>$ ULS++ P+ L++ E- W++(--) N
>o-- K- w--- !O M-- V-- PS->$ PE- Y+ PGP- t+@ 5- X-
>R+++>$ !tv- b+++>$ DI++++ D+ G e h! !r-->r+++ !x-
>------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
>
>---- BEGIN RP CODE BLOCK ----
>RPaWfC R+++ H+++/--- I+++ M+++/- C- A+++ S+ G+ P+++/--- XPG
>---- END RP CODE BLOCK ----

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

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


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Comitia Vote
From:	gcassiusnerva@--------
Date:	Mon, 7 May 2001 17:48:02 EDT

Draco said, "Why have the majority vote on a law that was, admit it, intended
for a very small minority?"

Answer: Because you wanted it so. Last year Formosanus and your crew were
complaining that there there was no popular vote on the matter. Your people
made Censor Sulla out to be some tyrannical petty magistrate, using edicta to
impose his will on everyone. Well, now there is to be a vote, and now you do
not want one. Have you considered joining the army. You are already very
good at doing the "about face".

Draco said, "Citizens who love Roma and want to return are hereby punished..."

Answer. No, if they were being punished, they would not be allowed to
return, period.

Nerva

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

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