| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Re: Coins...and cultural ideolgy |
| From: |
Amulius Claudius Petrus <pkkt@--------> |
| Date: |
Tue, 05 Jun 2001 21:31:36 -0400 |
|
Noviodunus Ferriculus wrote:
> Does your sarcasm mean, all people not saying "Aye" to everything
> coming from the higher political spheres should keep their mouth and
> watch?
Gaius Noviodunus Ferriculus,
I think you took the whole jokeg too literally. It is true that we debate
over almost everything. Though none of us in my opinion are saying it is a
bad thing. It was a joke, and supposed to by funny.
In no way do I think that comment was supposed be translated as. "Keeping
ones mouth if you don't have high political power".
L. Cornelius Sardonicus, your comment put a smile on my face. Yes it does
seem we argue over every issue though that's democracy for ya! Without it we
would hardly be Roman, and personally I enjoy most debates we have greatly!
Hinc est mei oratio!
--
Amulius Claudius Petrus
Retarius Officium Canada Orientalis
Canada Orientalis Provincia
www.freehost.nu/members/canorien
--
Gens Claudia Website:
www.freehost.nu/members/gensclaudia/
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] The price of posting |
| From: |
TSardonicus@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 5 Jun 2001 22:11:58 EDT |
|
In a message dated 6/5/01 4:12:12 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
Gaius.Noviodunus@-------- writes:
> Does your sarcasm mean, all people not saying "Aye" to everything
> coming from the higher political spheres should keep their mouth and
> watch?
Salve,
I didn't mean to insult anyone with the joke. I certainly didn't mean that
anyone should shut up. Everyone has the right to voice an opinion. The joke
was just my way of voicing my opinion; that it seems that we take the
critical viewpoint all too often simply for the sake of doing so.
I believe your response to this is indicative that we've come to expect
critical responses to our posts and even see them where none are intended.
Vale Bene,
L. Cornelius Sardonicus
(who really needs to work on his latin)
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Re: Coins...a few questions |
| From: |
tflacco@-------- |
| Date: |
Wed, 6 Jun 2001 00:30:18 EDT |
|
Marcus Cassius Julianus,
You make a good point,, I think I better buy some coins!
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Re: The Age Issue. |
| From: |
CmndrZil@-------- |
| Date: |
Wed, 6 Jun 2001 00:53:32 EDT |
|
In a message dated 6/4/01 10:36:17 AM, lsicinius@-------- writes:
>I would like to be able to accept teens who's parents aren't citizens
>as citizens, but I'm afraid that Macro National laws will make that
>too risky, and we would be better off limiting Minor Citizenship to
>the children of adult citizens.
That strikes me as rather elitist. Children whose parents are citizens might
only be here because their parents are citizens. A 17 year old who came here
by themselves, and signed up and everything, deserves to be a citizen as much
as someone who did something because their parent's made them.
I can just hear the snotty day care now.
A: You're ugly, and and my daddy's a lawyer!
B: Yeah! Well, stupid, my mommy's a citizen of Nova Roma! So there!
Tarquinia Euphemia
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] Photos from the History Channel testudo film shoot |
| From: |
"Sean Sheridan Richards" <legioix@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 06 Jun 2001 05:09:29 -0000 |
|
For the first of many photos of the Testudo film shoot go here and look in the section labeled "Photos".....
http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/testudojune3
Hibernicus
LEG IX HSPA
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] Re: The Age Issue. |
| From: |
bcatfd@-------- |
| Date: |
Wed, 06 Jun 2001 05:38:51 -0000 |
|
--- In novaroma@--------, CmndrZil@a... wrote:
>
> In a message dated 6/4/01 10:36:17 AM, lsicinius@-------- writes:
>
> >I would like to be able to accept teens who's parents aren't
>>citizens as citizens, but I'm afraid that Macro National laws will
>>make that too risky, and we would be better off limiting Minor
>>Citizenship to the children of adult citizens.
>
> That strikes me as rather elitist.
>Children whose parents are citizens might only be here because
>their parents are citizens. A 17 year old who came here by
>themselves, and signed up and everything, deserves to be a citizen
>as much as someone who did something because their parent's made
>them.
Why do they *deserve* it as much as anyone? I think granting full
citizenship to any minors is treading dangerous ground to begin with,
but there are citizens who understandably wish to make their children
part of our society. The promotion of Roman family and community is
one of our key goals and this can be a benefit of citizenship, that
your minor children over a certain age can become full citizens. This
aids Roman families while protecting Nova Roma at the same time from
the accusation of "going after" minors.
Vale,
D. Iunius Palladius Invict.
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Re: The Age Issue. |
| From: |
CmndrZil@-------- |
| Date: |
Wed, 6 Jun 2001 01:43:37 EDT |
|
In a message dated 6/5/01 10:39:20 PM, bcatfd@-------- writes:
>Why do they *deserve* it as much as anyone? I think granting full
>citizenship to any minors is treading dangerous ground to begin with,
>but there are citizens who understandably wish to make their children
>part of our society. The promotion of Roman family and community is
>one of our key goals and this can be a benefit of citizenship, that
>your minor children over a certain age can become full citizens. This
>aids Roman families while protecting Nova Roma at the same time from
>the accusation of "going after" minors.
They deserve it because they took an interest. I would assume that a
teenager who wanted to be here probably studied the classics. It really
isn't a popular thing to do, and a lot of people tend to ask questions like
"Why would you do that?" Because hey, they aren't studying to be engineers.
Don't they deserve some encouragement and support? If the age for everyone
is 18, that's cool, but don't vary it on whether someone's parent's are
already involved. People who would otherwise be interested would feel
unwelcome.
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Re: The Age Issue. |
| From: |
"L. Cornelius Sulla Felix" <alexious@--------> |
| Date: |
Tue, 05 Jun 2001 22:53:16 -0700 |
|
on 6/5/01 10:38 PM, bcatfd@-------- at bcatfd@-------- wrote:
--- In novaroma@--------, CmndrZil@a... wrote:
>
> In a message dated 6/4/01 10:36:17 AM, lsicinius@-------- writes:
>
> >I would like to be able to accept teens who's parents aren't
>>citizens as citizens, but I'm afraid that Macro National laws will
>>make that too risky, and we would be better off limiting Minor
>>Citizenship to the children of adult citizens.
>
> That strikes me as rather elitist.
>Children whose parents are citizens might only be here because
>their parents are citizens. A 17 year old who came here by
>themselves, and signed up and everything, deserves to be a citizen
>as much as someone who did something because their parent's made
>them.
Why do they *deserve* it as much as anyone? I think granting full
citizenship to any minors is treading dangerous ground to begin with,
but there are citizens who understandably wish to make their children
part of our society. The promotion of Roman family and community is
one of our key goals and this can be a benefit of citizenship, that
your minor children over a certain age can become full citizens. This
aids Roman families while protecting Nova Roma at the same time from
the accusation of "going after" minors.
Vale,
D. Iunius Palladius Invict.
Ave,
I just wanted to state that I agree with the noble Senator. And, I just
wanted to add a slightly different perspective. We need to tread very
carefully in this aspect. Because Nova Roma as a Corporation can be held
legally at fault. We, Senators of Nova Roma could be sued under the COPA
and probably a variety of laws that we are probably not aware of yet. The
last thing we want to do is to jeopardize our standing in our macronations
and therefore very existence.
Respectfully,
Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
[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 Age Issue. |
| From: |
CmndrZil@-------- |
| Date: |
Wed, 6 Jun 2001 02:05:14 EDT |
|
I'd just like to add a little bit of clarification to my last post. I said:
>They deserve it because they took an interest. I would assume that a
>teenager who wanted to be here probably studied the classics. It really
>
>isn't a popular thing to do, and a lot of people tend to ask questions
>like
>"Why would you do that?" Because hey, they aren't studying to be engineers.
>
> Don't they deserve some encouragement and support? If the age for everyone
>
>is 18, that's cool, but don't vary it on whether someone's parent's are
>
>already involved. People who would otherwise be interested would feel
>
>unwelcome.
>
I understand that we should be careful of legal issues regarding minors. I
just think that what is done for one should be done for all.
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] Re: The Age Issue. |
| From: |
"Lucius Sicinius Drusus" <lsicinius@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 06 Jun 2001 10:01:56 -0000 |
|
--- In novaroma@--------, CmndrZil@a... wrote:
SNIP
> That strikes me as rather elitist. Children whose parents are
citizens might
> only be here because their parents are citizens. A 17 year old who
came here
> by themselves, and signed up and everything, deserves to be a
citizen as much
> as someone who did something because their parent's made them.
>
> I can just hear the snotty day care now.
> A: You're ugly, and and my daddy's a lawyer!
> B: Yeah! Well, stupid, my mommy's a citizen of Nova Roma! So there!
>
> Tarquinia Euphemia
Salvete
Elitist?
No Realistic.
If we limited ourselves to the study of history, and promoting the
virtues I would have no objection to 13 year olds becoming citizens.
There is more to Nova Roma than promoting Roman History and Morals.
There's the Religio. That is the part of Nova Roma that makes
accepting Minors a risk.
I'm old enough to remember the 1970s smear campaign against "cults".
Things like "deprogramers" who kidnapped people and used psycologial
terrorist tatics to remove the "brainwashing". The campaign was largly
driven by fact that these organizations accepted young members. I
don't want to see Nova Roma become the victim of one of these campaigns.
"Internet Pagan Cult Recruits Children" Do we want this kind of
publicity? After getting it do we want the kind of teens that it would
attract? Are you ready for the kind of smear campaign that the
Unification Church suffered? Thier members are still sneered at as
"Moonies"
Am I happy with the idea of limiting Minor citizenship to the children
of Adult Citizens? No! But I do not want to penalize these children,
to refuse them citizenship simply because it's not safe to allow
others to become citizens at this time. Perhaps at some future date we
will be able to allow any 17 old to become a full citizen, to allow
even younger people to become Minor Citizens. For now let's allow
those whom it's fairly safe to become citizens.
Also a certain ammount of elitism is Roman. In Antiquita a child would
say "My Grandfather was a Consul, Nobody from your family ever reached
higher than Aedile!" ;o)
Valete
L. Sicinius Drusus
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] Re: Photos from the History Channel testudo film shoot |
| From: |
quintus@-------- |
| Date: |
Wed, 06 Jun 2001 11:45:25 -0000 |
|
Sorry, friend....it shows "members only" treying to get to the photos
page....
Q.AVG.
--- In novaroma@--------, "Sean Sheridan Richards" <legioix@p...> wrote:
> For the first of many photos of the Testudo film shoot go here and
look in the section labeled "Photos".....
>
> http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/testudojune3
>
> Hibernicus
> LEG IX HSPA
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] absence............ |
| From: |
"Daniel Place" <danat2000@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 6 Jun 2001 22:24:14 +0930 |
|
Salve,
I will be absent as of tomorrow until the end of June due to work commitments. If I am desperately needed for affairs relating to the Collegium Pontificum or The Australian Provincia please email me at Slore_Gabore@-------- (if it's an emergency :-)
Take care everyone
Marcus Arcadius Pius
Propraetor Australia Provincia
Pontifex, Flamen Portunalis
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] the Age Issue, My two cents |
| From: |
"Cascus Tiberius Rufio Longinus" <kminer_rsg@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 06 Jun 2001 09:46:09 -0400 |
|
I would agree with Sulla and those on the side of full cive-hood for
underage members being not such a good idea...
I have two great kids who are learning what it means to be "Roman" but I
don't know if I would let them have full anything until they are old enough
to make an informed, educated decision on their own.
building the Roman family is very important but, to give the power of the
Vote, etc. to a minor is a mistake.
There is a reason we do not let our children drive, vote, fight our wars,
etc... in our macronations, they need to be children, no little versions
of us!!
I think NR should open her arms to the next generation of cives while they
are still crawling and playing "maxiumus the savior of rome", but lets not
be too quick to hand over the power and might of the nation just yet!!
Cascus Tiberius Rufio Longinus
Praefectus Legionis & Tribuni Militum
Legio VI Victrix Pia Fidelis
Pater, Gens Tiberia of Nova Roma
"Nos Sumus Romae milites, parati stamus ad potestatem et gloriam eius. Roma
est Lux."
"we are soldiers of Rome, for her might and glory we stand ready... She is
the Light"
www.geocities.com/legio_vi
_________________________________________________________________
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] the Age Issue, My two cents |
| From: |
"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 6 Jun 2001 10:05:58 -0400 |
|
Salvete
Just a clarification, since the conversation seems to have drifted away from
the actual text of the proposal...
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cascus Tiberius Rufio Longinus [mailto:kminer_rsg@--------]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2001 9:46 AM
>
> I would agree with Sulla and those on the side of full cive-hood for
> underage members being not such a good idea...
>
> I have two great kids who are learning what it means to be "Roman" but I
> don't know if I would let them have full anything until they are
> old enough
> to make an informed, educated decision on their own.
>
> building the Roman family is very important but, to give the power of the
> Vote, etc. to a minor is a mistake.
The proposed amendment specifically does not allow citizens under 17 (and I
have no objection to changing it to 18, although I really don't think it's
necessary) to vote or join the ordo equester. In fact, they would not be
able to excercise any of the rights accorded to citizens in our Constitution
on their own; such would have to be exercised on their behalf by their
pater.
The whole point of allowing children to be citizens is to give them a
defined place in our society, because many of us believe that young people
are vital to our prosperity. Leaving them out in a "legal limbo" not only
does them a disservice, but ultimately harms us as well. By granting them
Citizenship, but holding off giving them all the rights of Citizens until 17
(or 18), we strike the best compromise and one which mirrors what you said
here:
> There is a reason we do not let our children drive, vote, fight our wars,
> etc... in our macronations, they need to be children, no little versions
> of us!!
The current proposal actually embodies this idea of yours. Please, people;
read and understand the thing before taking off on these flights of
rhetorical fancy. They may be children, but there's no reason they cannot be
Citizens, and accorded the protections and some of the rights attendent
thereto. Nobody is handing the kids the keys to the car, but neither should
we lock the door and keep them out.
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] Light Bulbs |
| From: |
ksterne@-------- |
| Date: |
Wed, 06 Jun 2001 14:05:32 -0000 |
|
Salve Gai Noviodune,
>>What is wrong about discussing some topics? Isn't this the very
goal of this NR Main list?<<
GPL: Nothing. Indeed it is.
>>Does your sarcasm mean, all people not saying "Aye" to everything
coming from the higher political spheres should keep their mouth and
watch? For example watch how a poor quality light bulb has to be
changed every five minutes instead of putting a good one that will
last two years? (just to address your comparison).<<
GPL: I think Sardonicus' comment and my support of it was more on
the lines of "doing something is better than talking about it", and a
comment on the tendency of we Nova Romans to debate everything
endlessly. My comment in no way was intended to say we should
support everything the "higher political spheres" propose without
comment.
>>Actually, if you had read my post, you would have seen that I don't
have anything against coins. I do appreciate the coins we have but
I'd prefer to have them more authentic. Like for example no longer to
mention "I sestertius" since this doesn't really make sense.<<
GPL: My comment was not directed at your post, but at the culture of
all Nova Roma. If I have offended you, please accept my apologies.
Vale,
Gaius Popliilus Laenas
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] Re: the Age Issue, My two cents |
| From: |
"Lucius Sicinius Drusus" <lsicinius@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 06 Jun 2001 15:43:22 -0000 |
|
--- In novaroma@--------, "Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@n...>
wrote:
> Salvete
>
> Just a clarification, since the conversation seems to have drifted
away from
> the actual text of the proposal...
SNIP
> The current proposal actually embodies this idea of yours. Please,
people;
> read and understand the thing before taking off on these flights of
> rhetorical fancy. They may be children, but there's no reason they
cannot be
> Citizens, and accorded the protections and some of the rights
attendent
> thereto. Nobody is handing the kids the keys to the car, but
neither should
> we lock the door and keep them out.
>
> Valete,
>
> Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
> Consul
>
Salvete,
Lets look at some of the sections
II. Paragraph II.A. of the Constitution is hereby altered to read as
follows:
] A. Citizenship
] 1. Any person 17 years old or older may apply for Citizenship.
] 2. Any person under the age of 17 may, with the written
permission
] of their parent or legal guardian according to relevant
] macronational law, apply for Citizenship. Such permission
shall
] be filed with the Censors, who shall maintain such records
] until the Citizen reaches the age of 17.
] 3. Citizens' children under the age of 17 may be granted
] Citizenship themselves, upon application for such by their
] parent or legal guardian, as defined by relevant
macronational
] law.
The way this section currently is written ANY 17 year old can become
a citizen, without seeking the permission of a parent. In most areas
17 year olds are still legally minors, and thier parents can take
legal action on thier behalf. We would be much safer if the ages in
this section were set at 18.
Section 2 allows Minor Children of Non-citizens to become citizens.
If we are going to do this, we shall need some very stringent laws
covering permissions. I think it would be a better idea to have
section 2 grant the comitia populi tributa the power to enact leges
admiting minors whos parents aren't citizens, while section 3 would
insure that the children of citizens would have a constitunal right
to become citizens with the permission of thier parents. This would
allow us to began admiting the children of citizens fairly soon, and
also allow us to look at the problems involved with granting
citizenship to minor children of non-citizens at a later time.
The age changes mentioned above do not mean that these sections needs
to be changed
III. Paragraph II.B. of the Constitution is hereby altered to read as
follows:
] B. The following rights of the Citizens who have reached the age of
] 17 shall be guaranteed, but this enumeration shall not be taken
] to exclude other rights that citizens may possess:
IV. Paragraph II.D.3. of the Constitution is hereby altered to read as
follows:
] 3. Each gens shall, through whatever means it may determine
] appropriate, have a paterfamilias (fem. materfamilias) who
] shall act as the leader of the gens and speak for it when
] necessary. The holder of this position must be registered
] as such with the censors. The paterfamilias may, at his or
] her discretion, expel members of their gens, or accept new
] members into it.
] 1. The paterfamilias may, at his discretion, exercise the
] rights ennumerated in paragraph II.B. of this
Constitution,
] with the exception of the right to vote (paragraph
II.B.3.)
] and the right to join the Ordo Equester (paragraph
II.B.8.).
] 2. No one under the age of 17 may become paterfamilias of a
] gens
Leaving the age at 17 in these sections will allow us to keep the
historic age WITHIN Nova Roma. The higher age in the first section
would only apply to becoming a citizen, NOT the rights you had once
you became a citizen.
Valete,
L. Sicinius Drusus
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Re: Coins...and cultural ideolgy |
| From: |
"G. Noviodunus Ferriculus" <Gaius.Noviodunus@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 06 Jun 2001 19:21:03 +0200 |
|
Amulius Claudius Petrus wrote:
> Noviodunus Ferriculus wrote:
>>Does your sarcasm mean, all people not saying "Aye" to everything
>>coming from the higher political spheres should keep their mouth and
>>watch?
>>
> I think you took the whole jokeg too literally. It is true that we debate
> over almost everything. Though none of us in my opinion are saying it is a
> bad thing. It was a joke, and supposed to by funny.
Salve Amuli Claudi Petre,
Thanks for this clarification. OK, I over-reacted and I apologise. Maybe
I could take some classes in "schola facetiarum"...
Vale bene
--
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: |
RE: [novaroma] Re: the Age Issue, My two cents |
| From: |
"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 6 Jun 2001 14:10:30 -0400 |
|
Salve
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lucius Sicinius Drusus [mailto:lsicinius@--------]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2001 11:43 AM
>
> II. Paragraph II.A. of the Constitution is hereby altered to read as
> follows:
>
> ] A. Citizenship
> ] 1. Any person 17 years old or older may apply for Citizenship.
> ] 2. Any person under the age of 17 may, with the written
> permission
> ] of their parent or legal guardian according to relevant
> ] macronational law, apply for Citizenship. Such permission
> shall
> ] be filed with the Censors, who shall maintain such records
> ] until the Citizen reaches the age of 17.
> ] 3. Citizens' children under the age of 17 may be granted
> ] Citizenship themselves, upon application for such by their
> ] parent or legal guardian, as defined by relevant
> macronational
> ] law.
>
> The way this section currently is written ANY 17 year old can become
> a citizen, without seeking the permission of a parent.
At the risk of repeating myself, I had also said in the same email you were
responding to (but which passage you somehow chose not to quote, for
whatever reason):
> (and I
> have no objection to changing it to 18, although I really don't think it's
> necessary)
So..... what's the problem?
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: |
Re: [novaroma] Re: the Age Issue, My two cents |
| From: |
Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix <alexious@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 06 Jun 2001 11:12:37 -0700 |
|
Ave,
Consul, I believe he was pointing out the issues he had if it remained
17. I for one am pleased that you are willing to compromise on this!
Respectfully,
Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
Flavius Vedius Germanicus wrote:
>
> Salve
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Lucius Sicinius Drusus [mailto:lsicinius@--------]
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2001 11:43 AM
> >
> > II. Paragraph II.A. of the Constitution is hereby altered to read as
> > follows:
> >
> > ] A. Citizenship
> > ] 1. Any person 17 years old or older may apply for Citizenship.
> > ] 2. Any person under the age of 17 may, with the written
> > permission
> > ] of their parent or legal guardian according to relevant
> > ] macronational law, apply for Citizenship. Such permission
> > shall
> > ] be filed with the Censors, who shall maintain such records
> > ] until the Citizen reaches the age of 17.
> > ] 3. Citizens' children under the age of 17 may be granted
> > ] Citizenship themselves, upon application for such by their
> > ] parent or legal guardian, as defined by relevant
> > macronational
> > ] law.
> >
> > The way this section currently is written ANY 17 year old can become
> > a citizen, without seeking the permission of a parent.
>
> At the risk of repeating myself, I had also said in the same email you
> were
> responding to (but which passage you somehow chose not to quote, for
> whatever reason):
>
> > (and I
> > have no objection to changing it to 18, although I really don't
> think it's
> > necessary)
>
> So..... what's the problem?
>
> Vale,
>
> Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
> Consul
>
> email: germanicus@--------
> AIM: Flavius Vedius
> www: http://mediatlantica.novaroma.org
>
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> [Check out great fares at Orbitz!]
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
RE: [novaroma] Re: the Age Issue, My two cents |
| From: |
labienus@-------- |
| Date: |
Wed, 6 Jun 2001 13:29:52 US/Central |
|
Salvete
After some reflection, it seems to me that the best way to handle this issue is
to use macronational standards for people joining Nova Roma, and our own
standards for internal matters.
Therefore, I would suggest:
1. Allow only those people who are sui iuris in their macronation to join
without parental permission.
2. Allow people who are not yet sui iuris to join with parental permission,
through whatever reasonable means are necessary to satisfy most macronational
jurisdictions. I believe Q Fabius is probably correct when he says that all we
must do to protect ourselves legally is require some proof of parental
approval, without having to ensure that said proof is not fraudulent.
3. Allow cives who are 17 or older to participate as full cives, regardless of
the method by which they joined.
Valete
T Labienus Fortunatus
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
RE: [novaroma] Re: the Age Issue, My two cents |
| From: |
Gnaeus Salix Astur <salixastur@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 6 Jun 2001 11:40:06 -0700 (PDT) |
|
Salvete omnes.
--- labienus@-------- wrote:
> Salvete
>
> After some reflection, it seems to me that the best way to handle
> this issue is
> to use macronational standards for people joining Nova Roma, and our
> own
> standards for internal matters.
>
> Therefore, I would suggest:
> 1. Allow only those people who are sui iuris in their macronation to
> join
> without parental permission.
>
> 2. Allow people who are not yet sui iuris to join with parental
> permission,
> through whatever reasonable means are necessary to satisfy most
> macronational
> jurisdictions. I believe Q Fabius is probably correct when he says
> that all we
> must do to protect ourselves legally is require some proof of
> parental
> approval, without having to ensure that said proof is not fraudulent.
>
> 3. Allow cives who are 17 or older to participate as full cives,
> regardless of
> the method by which they joined.
>
> Valete
> T Labienus Fortunatus
I agree. Besides, having full citizenship at 17 would be more according
to Roman tradition, and I think we have to lean closer to it in many
aspects.
I think that Q. Fabius Maximus made a good point when he asked for
parental permission. Besides, there is not much difference between
allowing 17 years old to vote and having the same voters some months
later.
=====
Bene Valete in Pace Deorum!
Gnaeus Salix Astur.
Scriba ad Res Externas Academiae Thules.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] Re: the Age Issue, My two cents |
| From: |
"Lucius Sicinius Drusus" <lsicinius@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 06 Jun 2001 19:08:10 -0000 |
|
--- In novaroma@--------, "Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@n...>
wrote:
> Salve
>
>
> At the risk of repeating myself, I had also said in the same email
you were
> responding to (but which passage you somehow chose not to quote, for
> whatever reason):
The Reason was a Request from the List Mommy that I trm my posts.
( Catch-22) ;o)
>
> > (and I
> > have no objection to changing it to 18, although I really don't
think it's
> > necessary)
>
> So..... what's the problem?
>
I stated some reasons that I thought it was necessary to change the
age only in some sections, NOT all of it.
Also there was the aditional matter of only giving citizenship to
children of citizens at this time, and deciding on citizenship for
the children of non-citizens at a later date.
Vale
L. Sicinius Drusus
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
RE: [novaroma] Re: the Age Issue, My two cents |
| From: |
"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 6 Jun 2001 16:55:44 -0400 |
|
Salve
> -----Original Message-----
> From: labienus@-------- [mailto:labienus@--------]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2001 9:30 AM
>
> Therefore, I would suggest:
> 1. Allow only those people who are sui iuris in their macronation to join
> without parental permission.
One of the problems with this (the same as our current system) is a
practical one. How do we identify what the various sui juris ages are in all
the different macronations from which people apply? That was one reason for
the suggested change; nobody could figure out what sui juris was in, say,
Botswana.
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: |
RE: [novaroma] Re: the Age Issue, My two cents |
| From: |
labienus@-------- |
| Date: |
Wed, 6 Jun 2001 16:00:52 US/Central |
|
Salvete
> One of the problems with this (the same as our current system) is a
> practical one. How do we identify what the various sui juris ages are in all
> the different macronations from which people apply? That was one reason for
> the suggested change; nobody could figure out what sui juris was in, say,
> Botswana.
That's a good point. It might be prudent to have some sort of statement on our
application that potential cives need to agree to, to the effect of, "I assert
that I am sui iuris in my macronation, and legally capable of joining
organizations like Nova Roma without a guardian's permission." In this way,
we'd have an equal degree of legal protection as with parental permission for
underage cives. Assuming Q Fabius is correct, and we're not responsible for
verifying such information, that should suffice.
Valete
T Labienus Fortunatus
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] Re: Photos from the History Channel testudo film shoot |
| From: |
"Sean Sheridan Richards" <legioix@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 06 Jun 2001 21:10:45 -0000 |
|
--- In novaroma@--------, quintus@o... wrote:
> Sorry, friend....it shows "members only" treying to get to the photos
> page....
>
> Q.AVG.
One must join to get a look at teh photo albums
Hibernicus
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Re: the Age Issue, My two cents |
| From: |
TSardonicus@-------- |
| Date: |
Wed, 6 Jun 2001 17:23:03 EDT |
|
In a message dated 6/6/01 1:57:05 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
germanicus@-------- writes:
> That was one reason for
> the suggested change; nobody could figure out what sui juris was in, say,
> Botswana.
Salve Consul,
There's the rub...and a matter for the Censores, public debate and quite a
bit of concern. We must remain within the laws of our respective
macronations or we open ourselves to lawsuits which we cannot afford.
If a twelve year old from say, Botswana, has the resources to get on the
Internet, said individual should also have the resources to prove to the
Censores that a twelve year old (or this particular twelve year old) is sui
juris in Botswana via legal documents.
Anything less than that and we open ourselves to all sorts of legal
complications. For instance, if Nick (who is 17 and lives with his
grandparents next door) told everyone that he'd joined a Pagan group, NR
would have a lawsuit on its hands within hours....and, quite possibly, I'd be
in jail awaiting bail which the NR treasury can't afford either.
Vale,
L. Cornelius Sardonicus
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] Raina Cornelia Iulia Caesaria Aeternia |
| From: |
VMoeller@-------- |
| Date: |
Wed, 06 Jun 2001 22:07:17 -0000 |
|
Salvete Quirites!
It is with great pride and happiness that I Secunda Cornelia
Valeria state under the presence of the Gods and Goddesses of Roma,
to my forebears, and my honored departed family members that I hereby
formally adopt Raina Cornelia Iulia Caesaria Aeternia as my daughter.
I ask for the blessings of our Gods to guide me in providing the
mentorship and guidance to a superlative cive who has already
contributed greatly to the reestablishment of Romanitas through her
activity in artistic and cultural sodalitae.
From this date, and in accordance with the Censors she is known
as Raina Cornelia Valeria Aeternia. Welcome home daughter!
Valete,
---Secunda Cornelia Valeria
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] Back from Provinciae Argentina |
| From: |
"C. Minucius Hadrianus" <shinjikun@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 6 Jun 2001 18:19:33 -0400 |
|
Valete,
Well, I'm back from my Argentine adventure (with a slight side trip to Texas
last week) and it's obvious I've missed quite a bit of the goings on back
here in NR. Anyone care to sum up exactly what's happened?? I'm trying to
wade through the 1400 or so emails in my box, and it's hard coming up with a
coherent picture!! O_o In any case, Argentina was absolutely amazing, and
I'm sorry I couldn't have seen more of it. I highly recommend that anyone
who has the opportunity to travel there, take it! I sadly wasn't able to get
the picture of myself in the Andes with the NR flag (like an idiot I left
the flag in the wrong bag when we went to El Calafate) but I will post a few
pics of the trip on the Nova Britannia website (on the off chance anyone is
interested ~_^). On to more (semi) official business.... the regular
Wednesday Nova Britannia chats are back up starting to night, same bat time,
same bat channel (9:00 pm EST at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nova
Britannia/chat). Hope to see some of you there!
Valete!
C. Minucius Hadrianus
Legatus of Massachusetts
ICQ# 28924742
"Qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum." - Vegetius
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] Re: the Age Issue, My two cents |
| From: |
bcatfd@-------- |
| Date: |
Wed, 06 Jun 2001 22:10:23 -0000 |
|
--- In novaroma@--------, "Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@n...>
wrote:
> Salvete
Salve Consul,
> Just a clarification, since the conversation seems to have drifted
>away from the actual text of the proposal...
I'm not sure I would say drifted but rather a general consensus
formed that there are some flaws in the broad concept of citizenship
for minors proposed, but that perhaps some part of the proposal was
workable.
> The proposed amendment specifically does not allow citizens under
>17 (and I have no objection to changing it to 18, although I really
>don't think it's necessary) to vote or join the ordo equester. In
>fact, they would not be able to excercise any of the rights accorded
>to citizens in our Constitution on their own; such would have to be
>exercised on their behalf by their pater.
Well, one of the the key problems for many is the proposed idea that
17 year olds can vote and become full citizens by the text of this
amendment and join Nova Roma without parental consent. I don't think
any 17 year old should be able to join without express parental
consent (and the best thing would be for them to be citizens
themsleves) though I can see granting full citizenship to such people
once permission has been granted. You have said you are amenable to
making this requirement 18, however, and I am glad.
I had been focusing on full citizenship for 17 year olds while not
touching too much the even more controversial issue of non-voting
citizenship for minors *under* 17. This is a thorny, thorny issue. If
we must grant citizenship to the underage, I think the safest thing
to do is grant citizenship *only* to children of citizens, especially
children under 17. That way they know what their children are
involved in, rather than some have 12 year old asking Mom and Dad if
he can join some cool Roman history group, and then have those
parents find out later it is a Roman *pagan* group and give us bad
press. The danger has already been discussed. Do we want minors well
under the age of 17 involved outside of parental guidance anyway? We
are encouraging Roman families, this is a good way to do it.
In a nutshell, I think that the safest and best proposal would say
something to the effect of :
Anyone under the age of 18 whose parents or primary legal guardian
are citizens of Nova Roma can apply for citizenship.
17 year olds whose parents are citizens will receive the full rights
of citizenship, including the right to vote.
Vale,
Decius Iunius Palladius Invictus,
Senator
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] The Age Issue and Internet Law |
| From: |
Amulius Claudius Petrus <pkkt@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 06 Jun 2001 18:23:04 -0400 |
|
Salve civis et amicus,
I started doing a bit of research on the topic of letting minors join
internet organisations and came up with the following. You may find it
interesting. Please not it has been summarised.
The Federal Trade Commission issued the Children's Online Protection Rule
("Rules") under the Children's Online Protection Act of 1998 (the "Act"), to
regulate the collection of private information on the Internet from children
12 and younger. The Rules were issued on November 3rd, 1999, and became
effective on April 21, 2000. If any portion of your web site or online
service is directed to children under 13 and you collect personally
identifiable information such as mailing addresses, you need to comply with
this new Federal law.
If obtaining any information from children 12 and under you must do the
fallowing:
1. Provide notice on the web site or online service detailing the
information it collects from children, how it uses such information, and its
disclosure practices for such information;
2. Obtain verifiable parental consent prior to any collection, use and/or
disclosure of children's personal information (with limited exceptions for
the collection of online contact information, e.g. an e-mail address);
3. Provide parents with a reasonable means of reviewing the personal
information collected from a child and to refuse to permit its further use;
4. Not condition a child's participation in a game, the offering of a
prize, or other activity on the child disclosing more personal information
than is reasonably necessary to participate in such activity; and
5. Establish and maintain reasonable procedures to protect the
confidentiality, security, and integrity of personal information collected
from children.
"Hinc est mei oratio!"
--
Amulius Claudius Petrus
Retarius Officium Canada Orientalis
Canada Orientalis Provincia
www.freehost.nu/members/canorien
--
Gens Claudia Website:
www.freehost.nu/members/gensclaudia/
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
