| Subject: |
[novaroma] New List Policies-Proposals for discussion |
| From: |
"JusticeCMO" <justicecmo@--------> |
| Date: |
Tue, 3 Jul 2001 20:19:38 -0400 |
|
Salve,
I would like to address some concerns that have been brought to my attention
in recent weeks and solicit opinions. We do have an issue with the amount
of traffic our List sees on a monthly basis, and some of the policies below
would address the high volume of posts. Other proposals are more in the
"housekeeping" area and would simply serve to make the functioning of the
List a bit smoother. Please note that none of the following policies are
being made official at this time. I am merely interested in hearing what
the List members think, so please feel free to chime in and discuss the
issues. This is your List and your choices and opinions determine how this
List will function.
1. Signatures: the new policy would require that all posts are signed. This
has been a rather small problem but one which a number of people have
approached me about. Considering that all members receive the "welcome"
text containing our policies, even non-citizens would know to sign posts
with their mundane name.
2. Posting of Policies: the new policy would require that I post the entire
"welcome/policy" text to the Main List on a monthly basis. Some feel this
would be beneficial as a reminder to members as to how they are to behave,
while others feel it is unnecessary repetition, as the file is available
24/7 on the website for personal review.
3.Number of messages: a point has been raised that a small number of members
make the vast majority of posts. For the sake of discussion, let us say the
new policy would limit all members to a maximum of three posts per day.
Obviously, there will be some excellent arguments for and against this one,
so I am eager to hear what people think. Monthly traffic on the List *is*
averaging 1000 posts, but on the other hand this is currently our *main*
forum.
4. Politics: an argument has been made that the intense focus on politics
here on the Main List drowns out all other interests. For the sake of
discussion, let us say the new policy would require that all political
discussion would be moved to a new official list for that express purpose.
Needless to say, this will also bring many good arguments on both sides. On
the one hand, it would allow those interested in detailed political debate
to do so, but election time could get interesting, as could determining what
is and is not a political post.
5. E-mail addresses: the new policy would require all citizens to use their
official (listed with the Censors) e-mail address for the Main List. This
would make it very simple to verify whether a poster is a citizen or not.
It would also eliminate the ability for some, and I will admit this is a
small but bothersome bunch, to have multiple accounts/personas under which
they post.
Well, there they are. These are just rough ideas at this point, and I am
sure between the debates and discussions they will likely change a bit
before reaching their final state. I look forward to your participation in
making this List a smoother-running and more pleasant place to post.
Vale,
Priscilla Vedia Serena
Curatrix Sermonis
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] New List Policies-Proposals for discussion |
| From: |
"Julie & Lawrence Brooks" <anubis@--------> |
| Date: |
Tue, 3 Jul 2001 20:32:11 -0400 |
|
Alot of this is just common sense. I agree with the majority of it. We have some of these same rules on a couple of other lists I am on. Although I'd like to say that don't think limiting the number of e-mails a person can post will change who posts and who doesn't. You'll find on most lists there are some people who are very involved and express their opinion on just about everything. Then there are those who just prefer to lurk most of the time unless there is something that interests them. Stopping people from posting will not necessarily equate into the lurkers posting.
I, for one, don't have time to post on every single subject. I do read all the posts.
Regards,
Varia Cassia
----- Original Message -----
From: JusticeCMO
To: novaroma@--------
Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 8:19 PM
Subject: [novaroma] New List Policies-Proposals for discussion
Salve,
I would like to address some concerns that have been brought to my attention
in recent weeks and solicit opinions. We do have an issue with the amount
of traffic our List sees on a monthly basis, and some of the policies below
would address the high volume of posts. Other proposals are more in the
"housekeeping" area and would simply serve to make the functioning of the
List a bit smoother. Please note that none of the following policies are
being made official at this time. I am merely interested in hearing what
the List members think, so please feel free to chime in and discuss the
issues. This is your List and your choices and opinions determine how this
List will function.
1. Signatures: the new policy would require that all posts are signed. This
has been a rather small problem but one which a number of people have
approached me about. Considering that all members receive the "welcome"
text containing our policies, even non-citizens would know to sign posts
with their mundane name.
2. Posting of Policies: the new policy would require that I post the entire
"welcome/policy" text to the Main List on a monthly basis. Some feel this
would be beneficial as a reminder to members as to how they are to behave,
while others feel it is unnecessary repetition, as the file is available
24/7 on the website for personal review.
3.Number of messages: a point has been raised that a small number of members
make the vast majority of posts. For the sake of discussion, let us say the
new policy would limit all members to a maximum of three posts per day.
Obviously, there will be some excellent arguments for and against this one,
so I am eager to hear what people think. Monthly traffic on the List *is*
averaging 1000 posts, but on the other hand this is currently our *main*
forum.
4. Politics: an argument has been made that the intense focus on politics
here on the Main List drowns out all other interests. For the sake of
discussion, let us say the new policy would require that all political
discussion would be moved to a new official list for that express purpose.
Needless to say, this will also bring many good arguments on both sides. On
the one hand, it would allow those interested in detailed political debate
to do so, but election time could get interesting, as could determining what
is and is not a political post.
5. E-mail addresses: the new policy would require all citizens to use their
official (listed with the Censors) e-mail address for the Main List. This
would make it very simple to verify whether a poster is a citizen or not.
It would also eliminate the ability for some, and I will admit this is a
small but bothersome bunch, to have multiple accounts/personas under which
they post.
Well, there they are. These are just rough ideas at this point, and I am
sure between the debates and discussions they will likely change a bit
before reaching their final state. I look forward to your participation in
making this List a smoother-running and more pleasant place to post.
Vale,
Priscilla Vedia Serena
Curatrix Sermonis
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
[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] Nova Britannia Chat Tonight |
| From: |
"Julie & Lawrence Brooks" <anubis@--------> |
| Date: |
Tue, 3 Jul 2001 20:37:12 -0400 |
|
Aw, too bad that's right in the middle of WitchBlade. Sorry guys.
Varia Cassia
----- Original Message -----
From: C. Minucius Hadrianus
To: Aurelius Tiberius ; Bronson Conlin ; Frank Garcia Jr. ; Robin-Fitch McCullough ; NovaBritannia ; Novaroma
Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 6:20 PM
Subject: [novaroma] Nova Britannia Chat Tonight
Salvete omnes,
Just a reminder that the weekly Nova Britannia chat will be held tonight
from 21:00 - 22:00 (EST or GMT -5:00) in the Nova Britannia mailing list
chat room at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NovaBritannia/chat I encourage
all Nova Britanniae to stop in and say hello (any other interested cives are
welcome, of course!).
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 the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
[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] New List Policies-Proposals for discussion |
| From: |
Kristoffer From <from@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 04 Jul 2001 03:24:05 +0200 |
|
JusticeCMO wrote:
> 4. Politics: an argument has been made that the intense focus on politics
> here on the Main List drowns out all other interests. For the sake of
> discussion, let us say the new policy would require that all political
> discussion would be moved to a new official list for that express purpose.
> Needless to say, this will also bring many good arguments on both sides. On
> the one hand, it would allow those interested in detailed political debate
> to do so, but election time could get interesting, as could determining what
> is and is not a political post.
Salve, Curatrix Sermonis.
I'll do this one step at a time.
First, regarding signatures. I agree that no one should be allowed to
post to the main list unless he/she is willing to acknowledge his/her
posting. Some kind of signature, yes. PGP signature, or something along
those lines, I hope we can avoid, at least for all "unofficial" posts.
Maybe for edicts and/or legislation, but not for ordinary discussion.
Just my opinion, since that's what you asked for...;)
Second, the posting of the policy. I belong to the cathegory of people
who would consider it meaningless repetition, and just delete it as soon
as I saw it, without actually looking at it. Maybe posting it every time
it's changed, highlighting whatever changes have been made, but I'd
rather not see the list rules on a monthly basis.
Third, the number of posts allowed on any given day. Maybe a limitation
on the number of new threads a citizen may delve into in one day might
be in order, but I believe responses must always be allowed. Or else it
may take days, or several VERY long e-mails, for me to answer all
replies to my original post. Although this would definitely clear up the
main list somewhat, it would also impair our communications, and deny us
the right of free speech...which admittedly isn't a human right, but
which I believe is dear to many of us, nonetheless.
And then a jump to point five, requiring citizens to use official e-mail
addresses. This would, in my opinion, cripple communications for
citizens during periods of change in their internet profile. If the
censors are very busy, you might be kept from posting to the list for
several days, if not weeks, before your official e-mail has been
changed. And, it wouldn't make it easier to verify whether a poster is a
citizen or not, since it's REALLY easy to change the "From" field of a
mail. The only way to be sure a mail is from the person the signature
proclaims it to be from, is to ask him/her in real life. For e-mail
purposes, PGP signatures would most likely do the trick. But that's, in
my opinion, somewhat overkill on this list.
Little trouble so far...now on to the point on which my opinion might be
a tad stronger than regarding the other, whereas I consider it to alter
the very foundations of this list, and it's purpose.
First, let me explain my view on this list. I've considered this list to
be the common denominator of Nova Roma, the thing which binds us into a
micronation, instead of "just" a lot of historically inclined people
discussing their views on ages past.
This list, in my opinion, is the cerebral cortex of our micronation, and
deals directly with the paths Nova Roma should travel through time.
Here, we discuss what Nova Roma is, where she is headed, and what we
want to change. There are various sublists, for the actual subjects we
as Nova Romans are interested in, but this list is where our future is
decided. And our choice of leaders, and legislation, are an important
part of that. Politics, as much as, or more than, any other subject, is
what decides where we are headed. Therefore, if any list is to be called
the main list, it must by definition include politics.
In my opinion, that is. This is not a valid, logical argument, just me
expressing my sentiments on the subject.
And the same can be said for any and all parts of this mail, it's just
me expressing my opinions, and as always I'm not here to make enemies.
Even though some of my countrymen believe differently, I don't partake
of their message that "Making Enemies Is Good". (Backyard Babies, swedes
with an attitude...nice song, though.)
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------
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] New List Policies-Proposals for discussion |
| From: |
"Domna Claudia Auspicata" <comptess@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 4 Jul 2001 13:34:39 +1200 |
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Salve Curatrix Sermonis!
Just thought I'd get the ball rolling on these ideas and offer my own
opinion as a reader of the vast quantity of email traffic here.
1. Signatures: the new policy would require that all posts are
signed. This
has been a rather small problem but one which a number of people have
approached me about. Considering that all members receive the
"welcome"
text containing our policies, even non-citizens would know to sign
posts
with their mundane name.
Domna: I have no problem with asking everyone to 'sign' a name but I
am not sure why this was an issue to start with. Is it to
distinguish citizens from non-citizens? Is it to prevent anonymous
posts? Couldn't an 'anonymous' poster just make up any old name
anyway?
2. Posting of Policies: the new policy would require that I post the
entire
"welcome/policy" text to the Main List on a monthly basis. Some feel
this
would be beneficial as a reminder to members as to how they are to
behave,
while others feel it is unnecessary repetition, as the file is
available
24/7 on the website for personal review.
Domna: I would welcome a "welcome/policy" reminder every month no
problem, one more post a month would not make much difference to me.
3.Number of messages: a point has been raised that a small number of
members
make the vast majority of posts. For the sake of discussion, let us
say the
new policy would limit all members to a maximum of three posts per
day.
Obviously, there will be some excellent arguments for and against
this one,
so I am eager to hear what people think. Monthly traffic on the List
*is*
averaging 1000 posts, but on the other hand this is currently our
*main*
forum.
Domna: I am not too keen on this one, I agree with Varia Cassia
that this would not necessarily encourage 'quieter' posters to post
more even if this was not the intent of the proposed policy. I can
also see problems with 'policing' this counting policy and for
citizens whose 'days' do not end when others do (time-line problems).
Let those who love the look of their own compositions keep posting.
I personally have a greater problem with people who won't trim
unnessary parts of their emails. How lazy.
4. Politics: an argument has been made that the intense focus on
politics
here on the Main List drowns out all other interests. For the sake
of
discussion, let us say the new policy would require that all
political
discussion would be moved to a new official list for that express
purpose.
Needless to say, this will also bring many good arguments on both
sides. On
the one hand, it would allow those interested in detailed political
debate
to do so, but election time could get interesting, as could
determining what
is and is not a political post.
Domna: Don't like this one either. I can understand why drawn out
political discussions can irritate readers, I have deleted a few once
they got to the repititious, name-calling stage, but you make a very
good point about the definition of what is a political post. While
NR is growing and changing I believe we require as many citizens as
possible to be bombarded even with the heart of these debates. The
outcome of these 'political discussions'' very often can affect the
whole citizenship. It seems that those citizens who have deeper
interests in other areas of Nova Roma have helped form the various
other groups and email lists. Perhaps if someone could post a list
of those lists and Sodalitates periodically then newer citizens
bewildered by the political torrents would have other channels for
their interests.
5. E-mail addresses: the new policy would require all citizens to use
their
official (listed with the Censors) e-mail address for the Main List.
This
would make it very simple to verify whether a poster is a citizen or
not.
It would also eliminate the ability for some, and I will admit this
is a
small but bothersome bunch, to have multiple accounts/personas under
which
they post.
Domna: Not sure about this one... What difference does it make to
know whether a poster is a citizen or not? What stops anyone from
posting using a citizen address and posting as a non-citizen as well?
Vale
Domna Claudia Auspicata
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 7.0.3 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>
iQA/AwUBO0JyqIq7vhC1EO9bEQK/wwCfXh31VW6WnngQ1lBra5Z9TuUEkbgAoK7g
Ke5YrizGvywm8OY7inR9IHTr
=GOfl
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
[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] land |
| From: |
"william wheeler" <holyconelia@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 04 Jul 2001 01:47:06 -0000 |
|
Salve in the lettle in part quoted below .
you talk about property taxes, if NR buys it there will be no property taxes
we are a NFP corp ( 503(c)thats One of the way we are a NFP corp...
This touches on the main problem with the land purchase. Before we spend
any
money, we should all be firmly aware of the purpose of the land, and how it
will be used to fulfill that purpose. If it's to provide a campground
and "show forum" like some Renaissance festival fairgrounds, then we will
need
someplace that is both accessible and attractive. If it's simply to
actually
own land, then anywhere in a country that doesn't charge ruinous property
taxes
will do.
>I don't mean to drop a turd in the punchbowl, but this talk of islands and
>forums is way too premature, isn't it?
No. One of Nova Roma's stated objectives is to own land, in order to create
a
Mecca of sorts for practitioners of the religio. We should, therefore, talk
about this until such time as we manage to come up with both a viable plan
of
action and the collective will to make it happen. Otherwise, we'll just
keep
putting it off in perpetuity.
Valete
T Labienus Fortunatus
Marcus Cornelius Felix
Pontitff
Legate America Boreoccidentalis Minore
Sacerdos Primus America Boreoccidentalis
Gens Sacerdos Cornelia
_________________________________________________________________
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] New List Policies-Proposals for discussion |
| From: |
Amulius Claudius Petrus <pkkt@--------> |
| Date: |
Tue, 03 Jul 2001 21:45:09 -0400 |
|
Salve Priscilla Vedia Serena,
I believe about half of your proposals are good ideas. I shall start off
first by commenting on these.
Signatures should be a must. Mysterious posters usually have a reason for
being mysterious. This anonymous is bad because it does not let citizens
connect opinions with names. This is necessary because in the future one for
these unknown posters may run for a position in public office.
Posting the rules up on a monthly bases is a good reminder. It will keep the
rules fresh in all our minds. It is repetitive I know, then again you don't
have to read it.
All citizens should be encouraged to use there email address they signed up
with. Although I think this as a rule may be challenging to enforce. There
are too many variables where one would need to use a second email.
Limiting posts is a very very very very very and very bad idea. Posts here
are the blood and spirit of this nation. I enjoy reading many posts, and
enjoy writing many posts. I don't fallow your reasoning ether on the
benefits of this idea. Foolish just about sums it up.
Politics is a huge part of Roman society. By limiting this you are limiting
our culture. If you don't like the politics then don't read the posts having
anything to do with it. Even better why don't you write a post having
nothing to do with this topic.
That's all my opinions so far on this matter. I really like some of your
proposals and really dislike others. I give you my full support in pushing
forward with the good ones.
Vale,
"Quamquam cupido sis delictum ab sui crebro suum mater ab vitualis"
"Though ambition may be a fault in itself it is often the mother of virtues"
--
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] Proposed List Policies |
| From: |
gcassiusnerva@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 3 Jul 2001 21:53:12 EDT |
|
Salvete,
Several of these proposals I have no problem with. But there are a few
that should be rejected entirely.
The NR Constitution is explicit: There is to be no restrictions on
posts and exchanges on this list, except when they present a "clear and
present danger" to the republic. Nothing is said about whether or not topics
being discussed are "off topic" or not---if there is no "clear and present
danger", there is to be no restirction, period.
I have held my peace for a long time. But today I will say that the
practice of the list moderator of announcing that some threads are
inappropriate and must therefore be taken off-list {and there are to be no
replies to the announcement even} is flatly unconstitutional. Under this
Constituion, civs may discuss the Super Bowl or Beanie Babies. Boring, yes.
Un-Roman? Yes. "Clear and present danger"? Not a chance. The phrase.
"Make it Roman or take it off list" do NOT appear anywhere in the
Constituion.
Now a few people are fed up at too much politics? Well, let them be
fed up. The Forum was THE place in Ancient Rome for political argument.
There is absolutely no reason to further divide our main avenue of
communication into separate lists. A list for virtues, a list for politics,
a list for religion, a list for what-ever-else-you-can-think-of. Is this a
forum, or a dissection lab?
Three posts a day? Why more unconstituional regulation? Bored with a
topic? Too much "junk" in your email box? Learn to use the DELETE BUTTON
people!!!! ANd change your subscription to reading posts in the archives if
you like.
Has this not not been regulated enough? Conversations are terminated,
no public replies to the termination permitted, a *single* dork makes a
stupid joke "poll" and the whole poll option is taken away from
*everyone*......
Any people want this? Fine. Amend the Constitution and regulate and
restrict to your hearts content.
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: |
[novaroma] Totalitarism |
| From: |
Michel Loos <loos@--------> |
| Date: |
Tue, 03 Jul 2001 22:30:27 -0300 |
|
Salve Quirites,
More or less a year ago, agroup tried to form a de facto political party
in NovaRoma. The leading oligarchy used the classical trick of
denouncing the weakening of the state by division. The arguments used by
all monoparty dictarial regimes specially in Africa.
Six monthes ago, the new list censor edicted a rule by which citizen
could no more express themselves in the language of their choice in this
public place. Effectively excluding a large number of citizens from this
forum, mostly the non-US citizens which were mnost opposed to her views
of politics. Another widely used method of silencing opposition in
multilingual countries.
Shortly after a great number of citizens were driven out of NovaRoma by
constant harrasment and "Love it or leave it" arguments. The exact lemma
of many south-american dictatures of the 20th century.
The senior consul expressed on this forum this exact point while asking
for
the remainder of the opponents to leave.
The list censor decreted that talking of secession as a way of doing
politics
(a common fact in the early republic) was "a clear threat to the state"
and censored it. Just like Saddam Hussein does not allow the Kurds to
speak about secession.
The list censor decided that stating that some magistrates should be
removed from charge because they are harming our state was a personnal
attack against those magistrate and censored the posts asking for it.
Just like in other dictatures it is forbidden in NovaRoma to speak
against the head of the state and to ask for their removal.
A senator stated that he was very sorry but since the population of
NovaRoma was not yet educated enough it was impossible to give them the
right of free speech. Therefore he justified the censor imposed on the
forum under the the name of "moderation". Another argument heard a lot
in all "temporary" dictatures around the world : "we are educating our
people and when time comes we will give the power to them"
And now we have a new "proposition" of the list censor: It should be
forbidden to speak of politics on the forum (this list). Politics should
be reserved to politicians in her mind. Obviously another very
democratical proposition.
Somebody else was stating that we should need an external thread in
order to join our ranks, or perhaps an internal ennemy? Just like all
dictatures found their ennemies internal or externals in order to shut
the mouth of their co-citizens (Cf. Hitler, Stalin, anti-communist
dictatures, communist dictatures)
Is this still a democracy ? If we want to continue to leave in peace and
in a democratic state we need to remove the deleterious element from
charge the fastest possible, or at least fight them on a continuous
base, if not this country will become totalitarian in a very short time.
Manius Villius Limitanus.
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
CLarification <RE: [novaroma] New List Policies-Proposals for discussion> |
| From: |
"JusticeCMO" <justicecmo@--------> |
| Date: |
Tue, 3 Jul 2001 22:09:28 -0400 |
|
Salve,
Just a quick note about the proposed List policy changes. I have offered
the 5 proposals because they have been brought to me by List members. I am
more than willing to share *my* personal opinion on each of them, but I have
not yet done so.
In the meantime, please do not mistake my offering these for discussion as
ideas *I* personally agree wholeheartedly with. In at least one case that
is far from true. I would remind the List that (baseless accusations aside)
I govern this List *for* you, and even when I disagree with ideas put forth
here, free speech rules and the ideas must be presented.
Vale,
Priscilla Vedia Serena
Curatrix Sermonis
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] Example of Unconstitutional Regulation |
| From: |
gcassiusnerva@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 3 Jul 2001 22:29:32 EDT |
|
Forgive another post from me on this. I had already mentioned before that
the NR Constituion forbids restriction of posts unless there is a 'clear and
present' danger to the Republic. While some topics may be dull for many,
and have little if anything to do with Rome, they cannot be banned.
Here is an example of an unconstitutional action from April 17 of this year,
when Consul Germanicus, speaking on behalf of the list moderator, did just
that.
<<...the whole discussion of animal rights is veering way off-topic, having
little if anything to do with Rome, ancient or modern.On behalf of our
curatrix sermonem and with her permission (since she is atthe moment
indisposed), the general topic of animal rights in any other than
specifically ancient or Nova Roman context is hereby declared closed. Anyone
continuing the discussion here on the main list will be subject to suitable
disciplinary action.
Valete,Flavius Vedius Germa--------s,Co--------email: <A HREF="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/--------roma/post?protectID=123056091213158116036102228219114090078005196136183041114150048002051">germa--------s@--------</A>AIM: Flavius>>
This is not the only time this has happened.
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: |
[novaroma] Re: Islands? |
| From: |
"Marcus Cassius Julianus" <cassius622@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 04 Jul 2001 02:32:33 -0000 |
|
--- In novaroma@--------, labienus@t... wrote:
> It has been amply shown that $500K US would be more than enough to
buy some islands. We also seem to have come to the reasonable
conclusion that it would be better to buy property inland, due to the
increase in construction costs that an island involves.
Cassius respondit:
The idea has certainly been raised that it might be more expensive to
do construction on an island. However, nothing is certain at this
time. It seems very likely that our first land purchase will be in a
remote area so that it will be affordable. Would it really be more
expensive to boat in supplies than to truck them to an area with no
real road? It's something we'll have to look into further before we
can speak in absolutes.
> Obtaining the funds for the land is quite possible. Construction
costs will be a little harder, but the land won't go anywhere. Given
five or ten years of saving and wise investment, three or four
hundred people could quite easily get together enough money for the
equivalent of a large farmhouse on a reasonably- sized piece of
land. All it requires is the collective will to do it, which we
> have not had to date.
>
Cassius:
I personally think we're a good deal closer to property than five or
ten years. I could almost afford to buy that Texas land myself, right
now.
> This touches on the main problem with the land purchase. Before we
spend any money, we should all be firmly aware of the purpose of the
land, and how it will be used to fulfill that purpose. If it's to
provide a campground and "show forum" like some Renaissance festival
fairgrounds, then we will need someplace that is both accessible and
attractive. If it's simply to actually own land, then anywhere in a
country that doesn't charge ruinous property taxes will do.
>
Cassius:
Well said! I do want to reinforce idea that it is possible to "show
off" property that isn't easily accessable. So long as some of us can
get there at some times, and can do "publicity" stuff there, we can
much more easily promote the fact that we are a "real world"
organization and not just an Internet talk group.
> No. One of Nova Roma's stated objectives is to own land, in order
to create a Mecca of sorts for practitioners of the religio. We
should, therefore, talk about this until such time as we manage to
come up with both a viable plan of action and the collective will to
make it happen. Otherwise, we'll just keep putting it off in
perpetuity.
Cassius:
Again, well said! The idea of land is not a purely religious center
however... it is to be a physical "real world" manifestation of
Romanitas. The "ultimate" idea at the founding was to build a Roman
Forum, which would indeed include temple space, but also a basilica
for governmental/legal activities, a Rostra, and even shops and
entertainment.
Valete,
Marcus Cassius Julianus
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] Re: Island for Sale... |
| From: |
"Marcus Cassius Julianus" <cassius622@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 04 Jul 2001 02:36:01 -0000 |
|
Salvete,
I would certainly prefer land in a place warm and pleasant myself!
However, one must remember that the more "desirable" a location is,
the more others will want it, and the higher the price. So what if
our first piece of land is someplace that most of us wouldn't want to
be in for eight months out of the year? At least we'd be "on the map"
and have established ourselves as an organization capable of actually
owning property. As I've said before, (and will no doubt be saying
again and again throughout this discussion)I'll take land wherever
its possible for us to get it! :)
Valete,
Marcus Cassius Julianus
--- In novaroma@--------, ksterne@b... wrote:
> --- In novaroma@--------, "Lucius Sicinius Drusus" <lsicinius@-------->
wrote:
> >>Salvete Omnes,
>
> While I love the idea of buying an island, I would prefer one with a
> milder climate than a Northern Island. Toga's and Canadian winters
> don't seem like a good match<<
>
> Salvete,
>
> Hahahahah! My Brother from the "South of the USA" echos the first
> thing I thought when I read Marcus Cassius' post. I'm all for
> chipping in, but something a little warmer, please.
>
> (No offense to our Canadian cives the the "Great White North"
> Brrrrrrrrrrrrrr!!!)
>
> Valete,
> Gaius Popillius Laenas
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
RE: [novaroma] Proposed List Policies |
| From: |
"JusticeCMO" <justicecmo@--------> |
| Date: |
Tue, 3 Jul 2001 22:34:42 -0400 |
|
Salve,
Let me start by saying that I am *shocked* that you, Nerva <Festus, Apollo,
Deforosanus, etc etc> are so disingenuous. You have been one of the precise
reasons for the need to moderate new posters to this List. At one time you
had no less than 5 "known" aliases by which you were attempting to post to
this List. Now you complain that antics such as yours have led to new
regulations <for example the poll restriction>? How very interesting. Now,
for some specifics:
>The NR Constitution is explicit: There is to be no restrictions on posts
and exchanges on this list, except when they present a "clear and present
danger" to the republic. Nothing is said about whether or not topics being
discussed are "off topic" or not---if there is no "clear and present
danger", there is to be no restriction, period.>>
I always find it interesting that people leave out the portion of my job
that entails keeping this list "civil". I also find it interesting that
folks forget the mandate to keep "on-topic" as outlined in the List Policies
which every member has received. I suppose, Nerva, that under your view the
four pornographic advertisements that attempted to post here ought to have
been allowed since, in your view, there ought to be no moderation unless it
is a danger.
>>I have held my peace for a long time. But today I will say that the
practice of the list moderator of announcing that some threads are
inappropriate and must therefore be taken off-list {and there are to be no
replies to the announcement even} is flatly unconstitutional.>>
It clearly is not unconstitutional. Or perhaps I just have a lot more faith
in our Tribunes than you do. Also, replies to an ended thread are *more*
than welcome off-list. Given that you delighted in throwing this list into
a frenzy over Fascism back when you went by the name of Festus, I don't
doubt that you would relish the chaos caused by the off-topic posts. Or,
perhaps, were you enjoying the Falkland Islands fight that was getting
uglier by the minute?
>>Under this Constituion, civs may discuss the Super Bowl or Beanie Babies.
Boring, yes. Un-Roman? Yes. "Clear and present danger"? Not a chance.
The phrase. "Make it Roman or take it off list" do NOT appear anywhere in
the Constituion.>>
As long as they do so in a civil manner there is no problem. If you peruse
the archives you will find that even such off-topic threads such as the one
about the Falkland Islands was not moderated until it became clear that it
was degenerating into a personal fight. At that point it met the criteria
of being "uncivil" as outlined in my job description and was ended.
>Has this not not been regulated enough? Conversations are terminated, no
public replies to the termination permitted, a *single* dork makes a stupid
joke "poll" and the whole poll option is taken away from *everyone*......>>
Take a bow Festus......excuse me, Nerva. *You* played a central role in the
necessity to moderate this List more carefully. As for conversations being
terminated, yes....when adults can no longer discuss, and have degraded
themselves to the level of name-calling yes, I will stop the thread. It is
well within my purview to do so.
>>Any people want this? Fine. Amend the Constitution and regulate and
restrict to your hearts content.>>
Again, all moderation to date has been constitutional and/or vetoed by the
Tribune. I would strongly suggest, Nerva, that you take a step back and
look carefully at your own part in all of this before you have the nerve to
complain about the fruits you so carefully sowed here.
Vale,
Priscilla Vedia Serena
Curatrix Sermonis
> Nerva
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] New List Policies-Proposals for discussion |
| From: |
"L. Sicinius Drusus" <lsicinius@--------> |
| Date: |
Tue, 3 Jul 2001 19:40:38 -0700 (PDT) |
|
--- JusticeCMO <justicecmo@--------> wrote:
> Salve,
>
> I would like to address some concerns that have been
> brought to my attention
> in recent weeks and solicit opinions. We do have an
> issue with the amount
> of traffic our List sees on a monthly basis, and
> some of the policies below
> would address the high volume of posts. Other
> proposals are more in the
> "housekeeping" area and would simply serve to make
> the functioning of the
> List a bit smoother. Please note that none of the
> following policies are
> being made official at this time. I am merely
> interested in hearing what
> the List members think, so please feel free to chime
> in and discuss the
> issues. This is your List and your choices and
> opinions determine how this
> List will function.
>
> 1. Signatures: the new policy would require that all
> posts are signed. This
> has been a rather small problem but one which a
> number of people have
> approached me about. Considering that all members
> receive the "welcome"
> text containing our policies, even non-citizens
> would know to sign posts
> with their mundane name.
DRUSUS: I have no problem with this policy. I have
little use for cowards who won't include thier name
with thier posts.
>
> 2. Posting of Policies: the new policy would require
> that I post the entire
> "welcome/policy" text to the Main List on a monthly
> basis. Some feel this
> would be beneficial as a reminder to members as to
> how they are to behave,
> while others feel it is unnecessary repetition, as
> the file is available
> 24/7 on the website for personal review.
DRUSUS:Most would view this as "Spam" and delete it
without bothering to read it. The attitude "I Know
what it says" would prevail.
>
> 3.Number of messages: a point has been raised that a
> small number of members
> make the vast majority of posts. For the sake of
> discussion, let us say the
> new policy would limit all members to a maximum of
> three posts per day.
> Obviously, there will be some excellent arguments
> for and against this one,
> so I am eager to hear what people think. Monthly
> traffic on the List *is*
> averaging 1000 posts, but on the other hand this is
> currently our *main*
> forum.
>
> 4. Politics: an argument has been made that the
> intense focus on politics
> here on the Main List drowns out all other
> interests. For the sake of
> discussion, let us say the new policy would require
> that all political
> discussion would be moved to a new official list for
> that express purpose.
> Needless to say, this will also bring many good
> arguments on both sides. On
> the one hand, it would allow those interested in
> detailed political debate
> to do so, but election time could get interesting,
> as could determining what
> is and is not a political post.
DRUSUS: Any attempt to limit the topic or number of
posts violates section II B 4 of Nova Roma's
Constitution, and should be vetoed by the Tribunes.
>
> 5. E-mail addresses: the new policy would require
> all citizens to use their
> official (listed with the Censors) e-mail address
> for the Main List. This
> would make it very simple to verify whether a poster
> is a citizen or not.
> It would also eliminate the ability for some, and I
> will admit this is a
> small but bothersome bunch, to have multiple
> accounts/personas under which
> they post.
DRUSUS: In order to handle problems with a small group
this will have the effect of prohibiting most citizens
from posting when they are away from thier home
computer.
With the exception of the first item, I consider all
these proposals to be bad ideas, and the last three to
be aimed at limiting the freedom of speach of our
citizens.
I would like to make a counter proposal, To those who
find that you can't handle others freedom of speach,
UNSUBSCRIBE !!
The Mainlist is our Rostra in the Forum, and I
consider any attempt to limit speach from the Rostra
an attack on our Repubilc. If you don't wish to hear
what others have to say, then subscribe to lists that
aren't have no policital content.
Valete,
L. Sicinius Drusus
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] Re: Islands, lands and housing. |
| From: |
"Marcus Cassius Julianus" <cassius622@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 04 Jul 2001 02:42:50 -0000 |
|
Salvete,
I'm still behind with this thread, so I don't know if my reply to
yours was one of the ones you say was "flippant". If so, my
apologies.
Yet I again state, the real discussion here is about property
affordable in the near future, not someting where millions of
hypothetical dollars get invested. I now regret that I ever posted
about that huge island in Australia. (Even if it IS a neat place!)
The land so far discussed in Texas or in Canda are both amazingly
inexpensive. Less than $100 an acre seems a good possibility! In such
a case a couple thousand dollars would provide a downpayment that
would yield an affordable regular payment. One that could be taken up
by even a single individual in a pinch! I'm guessing that NR could
afford say, $150 a month even at this stage, and if it couldn't for a
month or two, hell, I could carry that myself. I believe in the
benefits of land so strongly I'd certainly be willing to do it.
Valete,
Marcus Cassius Julianus
--- In novaroma@--------, gcassiusnerva@c... wrote:
> Salve Doctus,
>
> So, in other words, NR is to invest a few million so you can
make like
> Thoreau and "take to the woods?"
>
> Sorry if this seems flippant. I try to remain rooted on terra
firma,
> and it is somewhat distressing to see that the two posts which so
far respond
> to mine ignore the main point of my previous post, and focus on one
minor
> point about the residents of this hypothetical island.
>
> The main point was that NR is nowehere near ready to even
think about
> this. Everyone else may fantasize if they like, but I will not
spend so much
> as one sesterce in such an endeavor which shows no sign of yeilding
any
> return. A couple of million so that a few families can sit on an
island and
> pray to the gods? My money will be safter in the stock market.
>
> 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: |
[novaroma] Re: New List Policies-Proposals for discussion |
| From: |
"Marcus Cassius Julianus" <cassius622@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 04 Jul 2001 03:05:26 -0000 |
|
Salvete,
I personally am not in favor of most of the new proposed list
policies. However, rather than declaring that all of Nova Roma is
corrupt and trampling the rights of the people, I'll instead simply
discuss the issues directly. (It's worth a try folks, really!)
--- In novaroma@--------, "JusticeCMO" <justicecmo@g...> wrote:
> 1. Signatures: the new policy would require that all posts are
signed. This has been a rather small problem but one which a number
of people have approached me about. Considering that all members
receive the "welcome" text containing our policies, even non-citizens
would know to sign posts with their mundane name.
Cassius:
While "unsigned" posts can be a little irritating, I am not sure this
is worth creating an official policy over. Often if a post is
unsigned its simply because the writer forgot, or had a problem such
as accidentally pressing the "send" button before finishing a
message. Not worth tracking those folks down to issue warnings, or
to "cancel" their posts because they weren't signed. Those that
simply are too lazy to sign are usually asked to by others, so again
no need for new policy. No need to make rules more complex if they
don't have to be.
>
> 2. Posting of Policies: the new policy would require that I post
the entire "welcome/policy" text to the Main List on a monthly
basis. Some feel this would be beneficial as a reminder to members
as to how they are to behave, while others feel it is unnecessary
repetition, as the file is available 24/7 on the website for personal
review.
Cassius:
I am for this one. One repeated message every month is no huge deal.
I'm on a few lists that do this, and it seems to be very helpful for
new folks. (And sometimes a reminder of policies for the regulars!)
>
> 3.Number of messages: a point has been raised that a small number
of members make the vast majority of posts. For the sake of
discussion, let us say the new policy would limit all members to a
maximum of three posts per day. Obviously, there will be some
excellent arguments for and against this one, so I am eager to hear
what people think. Monthly traffic on the List *is* averaging 1000
posts, but on the other hand this is currently our *main* forum.
Cassius:
I am *extremely* against this proposed policy. As a Citizen, it is
very unusual for me to post more than three times in a day. But when
I need to, I NEED to. I've already posted more than three times today
because I am involved in a lively discussion about land aquisition. A
discussion means that I *must* have the right to respond. If a dozen
people bring up issues that I must answer, how could I possibly with
a three email a day limit? Not everyone may like what I post, but I
DO write sincere messages. No off topic stuff, or "me too" posts. As
long as I'm posting sincere content that I feel is necessary, there
should be no limit to my access.
>
> 4. Politics: an argument has been made that the intense focus on
politics here on the Main List drowns out all other interests. For
the sake of discussion, let us say the new policy would require that
all political discussion would be moved to a new official list for
that express purpose. Needless to say, this will also bring many good
arguments on both sides. On the one hand, it would allow those
interested in detailed political debate to do so, but election time
could get interesting, as could determining what is and is not a
political post.
Cassius:
I feel this idea is unworkable. While there are constant complaints
about "too much politics" in Nova Roma, trying to limit political
posts would create far worse problems. The largest of those is trying
to figure out what is political and what is not. Almost *everything*
here has a political aspect to it... from my current discussion about
land, to discussions about live events and reenacting. At the very
least this would place a huge burden on anyone trying to monitor the
list. No reason to make your job any harder, Priscilla Vedia! :P
>
> 5. E-mail addresses: the new policy would require all citizens to
use their official (listed with the Censors) e-mail address for the
Main List. This would make it very simple to verify whether a poster
is a citizen or not. It would also eliminate the ability for some,
and I will admit this is a small but bothersome bunch, to have
multiple accounts/personas under which they post.
Cassius:
I believe I am against this policy as well. While I do not care for
the possibility of "multiple personas", I DO care about
accessability. Suppose someone goes on vacation, and wants to post
from a temporary Yahoo or Hotmail account? Or their computer breaks
down, and they want to post from a friends house? Of if they change
their internet provider occasionally to save money when deals are
offered? The extra "list security" is not worth the extra work for
the Censors, and for the List Moderator.
Valete,
Marcus Cassius Julianus
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] LAND PURSUITS: ADDRESS FROM PROPRAETRIX CANADA ORIENTALIS |
| From: |
"L. Sicinius Drusus" <lsicinius@--------> |
| Date: |
Tue, 3 Jul 2001 20:05:41 -0700 (PDT) |
|
--- In novaroma@--------, "Pompeia Cornelia Strabo"
<scriba_forum@--------> wrote:
> Propraetrix Canada Orientalis Pompeia Cornelia
Strabo Senate et Populus
> Novae Romae S.P.D.
SNIP
>
> Regarding the geographical location, key factors
which must be entertained.
> To wit:
>
> The cost of course. And this is relative. Sometimes
spending a few extra
> dollars on land that is accessible to a good
majority of our citizens and
> potential paying visitors is a more viable
investment than buying dirt-cheap
> land which is inaccessible and undesirable
climate-wise. The latter is a
> waste of money.
DRUSUS: It depends on what we intend to do with our
inital purchase. If we just want some land fairly soon
for symbolic value, the Texas site can simply become
part of Nova Roma's Ager Publis, and offered foe
lease. Due to the lack of public land open to hunting
in Texas the custom is to offer hunting leases on
private land, giving someone the exclusive right to
hunt there, and followung the Roman Custom of leasing
the Ager Publis.
>
> Let us not forget property taxes, and in some cases,
applicable school taxes
> (yes!) . Let us also not close our eyes to the
thousand and one engineers
> fees, survey, and permits to build structures on
this land.
>
> Another factor: How well will we be received by our
macronational
> neighbours? There is no sense buying in a location
where there are those
> surrounding us who would not cope well with the
religious aspects of the
> Religio. It is pointless to buy in the Bible belt of
the U.S., and even in
> some of the more southern states, we would be rather
unwelcomed. We do not
> need the harassment of protests, and possible
violence contesting us. With
> the greatest of respect to those residing in Texas,
from what I had read
> regarding the general social and judicial milieu in
this state, I am dubious
> about how well we would be received there.
DRUSUS: The "Bible Belt" dosen't cover all of the
Southern States. Large parts of South and West Texas
are predominatly Mexican-American (Catholic). Many
areas of Louisinia are mainly Cajun (Catholic). South
Floridia has a very diverse mixture of faiths,
including one county (Palm Beach) that boasts having a
majority of it's household of the Jewish faith.
Atlanta has a very large Asian Indian population, who
recently built a Hindu Temple (Pagan to the
Fundementalists) without incedent.
We do have more than our fair share of bible thumping
bigots, but bear in mind that these loud mouths a a
minority, even in the fundementilist community. They
just get most of the attention because someone who is
content to live his life and attend his church isn't
very "newsworthy"
The Baptists are the predominant protastant faith in
this area, and few people realize what a wide scope
that entails. The sect's main tenents are a refusal to
accept infant Baptism, restricting it to adults (Hence
the name) and a belief that each member should read
the Bible and decide for themselves what it means.
This second tenent has resulted in a sect with
tremondus differences, and enourmous diversity between
Bapstist churches. The extremists recive most of the
attention, but thier viewpoint is NOT universaly held,
or even accepted by the majority of those who call
themselves Baptists. The majority of the southern
cival rights leaders were also Baptist Ministers, most
notably Dr Martin Luther King Jr. Most people think of
someone like Jerry Falwell as the typical Baptist
Minister, But Jessie Jackson is also a Baptist
Minister.
>
> Another factor, a region beseiged with violence
between warring macronations
> and communities within macronations is a factor in
the consideration of
> buying any land in certain sections of the world
(trying to think of all the
> basics here)
>
> Another factor: Accessibility by its citizens. Any
central venue in the
> U.S. to me is accessible by citizens in the U.S. and
Canada.
> Pontifex et Consul Cassius has suggested a potential
island in eastern
> Canada. Well, an eastern location in Canada or the
U.S. would be more
> easily accessible to our citizens from Europe, who
will be paying a higher
> cost to come abroad. Food for thought.
DRUSUS: For many citizens accesibility will mean being
near an International airport, rather than mere
physical distance. For a European there is little
difference in time between flying into any Eastern
Airport. We do have a growing population in South
America though and and they would find a Southern US
airport more accesible than a Northern airport. As for
land transportation, judging by the number of Ontario
tags I see on Autos heading down Interstate 75 for
Florida, the South dosen't seem out of reach to many
Canadians. ;o)
>
> Another factor: How many active citizens in the land
location. An active
> governor? Would these individuals be willing to help
out with the initial
> red tape and administration of this property? Is the
governor bondable?
>
> Another factor: It is dangerous to buy a parcel of
land, sight unseen. It
> will have to be professionally inspected for
suitability as a building site.
>
> In time..we could perhaps purchase two or three more
parcels of land,
> distributed throughout the world for the enjoyments
of our citizens.
> At this time, at our wee age of 3 years, we should
first concentrate on one.
>
DRUSUS: I fully agree that we should concetrate on one
parcel at a time and if our first parcel is to be
anything more than a symbolic land purchase it should
be for the Nova Roman Forum. This means a site that is
conductive to year round use. I think that the most
important building in our Forum will be a Temple for
the ceremonies of the Religio, and we have rites that
have to be performed OUTSIDE during the winter months.
Our Altars are located in front of the Temple, not
inside a heated building. For this reason we require a
Forum site that has mild winters. If our Forum is in
North America then it needs to be in the Southern part
of the US. If it's in Europe then it needs to be in
the south of Europe.
Vale,
L. Sicinius Drusus
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
RE: [novaroma] Example of Unconstitutional Regulation |
| From: |
"JusticeCMO" <justicecmo@--------> |
| Date: |
Tue, 3 Jul 2001 23:11:33 -0400 |
|
Salve,
No Nerva, it is not the first time a thread was closed that had veered
completely off-topic. I am certain that if my action had been
unconstitutional Fortunatus would have been quick to veto me. Any future
posts that degenerate into off-topic fights will also be stopped. That is
all part of keeping this List civil.
I will say, again,that YOU, of all people, having the nerve to complain is
pretty interesting. In the meantime I sugest you go and read the List
policies again. You may find them quite an eye-opener.
Vale,
Priscilla Vedia Serena
Curatrix Sermonis
> -----Original Message-----
> From: gcassiusnerva@-------- [mailto:gcassiusnerva@--------]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 10:30 PM
> To: novaroma@--------
> Subject: [novaroma] Example of Unconstitutional Regulation
>
>
> Forgive another post from me on this. I had already mentioned
> before that
> the NR Constituion forbids restriction of posts unless there is a
> 'clear and
> present' danger to the Republic. While some topics may be dull
> for many,
> and have little if anything to do with Rome, they cannot be banned.
>
> Here is an example of an unconstitutional action from April 17 of
> this year,
> when Consul Germanicus, speaking on behalf of the list moderator,
> did just
> that.
>
> <<...the whole discussion of animal rights is veering way
> off-topic, having
> little if anything to do with Rome, ancient or modern.On behalf of our
> curatrix sermonem and with her permission (since she is atthe moment
> indisposed), the general topic of animal rights in any other than
> specifically ancient or Nova Roman context is hereby declared
> closed. Anyone
> continuing the discussion here on the main list will be subject
> to suitable
> disciplinary action.
>
> Valete,Flavius Vedius Germanicus,Consulemail: <A
> HREF="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/novaroma/post?protectID=123056
091213158116036102228219114090078005196136183041114150048002051">germanicus@
n...</A>AIM: > Flavius>>
>
> This is not the only time this has happened.
>
> Nerva
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] Residancy and Land |
| From: |
"L. Sicinius Drusus" <lsicinius@--------> |
| Date: |
Tue, 3 Jul 2001 20:34:02 -0700 (PDT) |
|
Salvete Quirites,
There is an aspect of US laws regarding legal
residancy that we may be able to use if we acquire
land in the USA.
For those of you who followed last year's US
Presidental election, a suit was filed regarding Vice
President Cheeny's canidacy. The US Constitution has a
clause that prohibits a state from voting for both a
President and a Vice President from that state. It was
argued that Cheeny was a resident of Texas (where he
has a home and spends most of his time) rather than a
resident of Wyoming (His legal home). The Courts ruled
that he has the right to claim Wyoming as his legal
home, even though he was in his Texas house most of
the time.
We can use this ruling to our advantage. If we acquire
land in a rural US area, then we can encourage our
citizens who also hold US citizenship to become legal
residents of the county where our land is. This will
allow then to Vote by absentee ballots. Since there
are rural counties with populations under 2 to 3
thousand, this would make Nova Roman voters a very
important policital force in that county, and perhaps
one day the controling policital force.
Valete,
L. Sicinius Drusus
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
RE: [novaroma] Totalitarism |
| From: |
"JusticeCMO" <justicecmo@--------> |
| Date: |
Tue, 3 Jul 2001 23:38:15 -0400 |
|
Salve,
>The arguments used by all monoparty dictarial regimes specially in
Africa.>>
I won't comment here except to caution you. Comparing *anyone* in NR to the
atrocities taking place in such hell-holes as Sierra Leone is completely
beyond reason. No matter how poorly you feel a magistrate is doing here in
NR, they are unlikely to hack off your child's legs with a machete for
disagreeing with them. Let's keep a little perspective here, shall we?
>>Six monthes ago, the new list censor edicted a rule by which citizen could
no more express themselves in the language of their choice in this public
place.>>
Sigh. Once *again* I refer you to the actual facts of the matter:
"XI. All posts to the list should be accompanied by an English translation
if they are written in another language. If you are unable to write in
English, or uncomfortable posting in English, please let me know and I will
be more than happy to facilitate your pairing with a translator who can help
you to do so. Posts in multiple languages are MORE than welcome, as long as
an English translation is included somewhere therein. Please note there is
no penalty for violating this policy on a "first time" basis, as it is
assumed that anyone doing so is simply in need of assistance and not
consciously choosing to violate list policy."
As is "clearly" stated in the official List policy, anyone is free to write
in ANY language they choose. All that is required is an accompanying
English translation. I am not quite sure why you have so much trouble
grasping this, but you repeatedly assert lies about this Policy, so I must
assume the problem lies on your end.
>>Effectively excluding a large number of citizens from this forum, mostly
the non-US citizens which were mnost opposed to her views of politics.
Another widely used method of silencing opposition in multilingual
countries.>
Not to put too fine a point on it, but if I were intent on "silencing" my
critics, please remind me why *you* are still here? LOL Your complete lack
of rational thought here borders on the absurd. In the past six months we
have had many international posters, and...in fact....a small number who do
post in multiple languages on a routine basis. Check the archives and I
think you'll be pleasantly deprived of your delusions that I am banning
non-English speakers.
> Shortly after a great number of citizens were driven out of NovaRoma by
constant harrasment and "Love it or leave it" arguments. The exact lemma of
many south-american dictatures of the 20th century.>>
As I drove no one out of NR, and I firmly believe that those who left did so
in an attempt to make a point, I have no comment here.
>The senior consul expressed on this forum this exact point while asking for
the remainder of the opponents to leave.>>
Far as *I* remember, the only person he challenged to leave was Formosanus.
And that was done after Formosanus mistakenly let us all know he was
considered NR a "disaster". Other than that I believe the Senior Consul can
speak for himself in this matter.
> The list censor decreted that talking of secession as a way of doing
politics (a common fact in the early republic) was "a clear threat to the
state" and censored it. Just like Saddam Hussein does not allow the Kurds to
speak about secession.>
If you'd like *some* of the truth to be known, let's let it *all* be known.
On 5/9 you were warned for being insulting and degrading to other posters.
You told me you had no plans to change. When you, on 5/28, called for
secession, you were told you were being put on moderated status (warning
already having been given less than a month earlier). You told me to "do
what you feel you have to", that you would not change your behavior. So,
please don't cloak yourself in the garb of the martyr so quickly, when you
were indeed, warned and I did, indeed, ask you to discuss things with me
privately. To this very day I have not even had the courtesy of a reply
e-mail from you for my trouble. Saddam Hussein? LOL Your rhetoric is
beyond belief.
> The list censor decided that stating that some magistrates should be
removed from charge because they are harming our state was a personnal
attack against those magistrate and censored the posts asking for it.Just
like in other dictatures it is forbidden in NovaRoma to speak against the
head of the state and to ask for their removal.>>
Once again you give *part* of the truth. Let us be honest. Your attempt to
harass me (much like your current use of the term list censor, as I am
neither an elected censor nor censoring your thoughts) was stopped. A
cursory reading of almost every post you make will make it clear to the
reader that you hold me in personal contempt. If you were well and truly
being censored not another one of your mistruths would appear. As for it
being forbidden to criticize the heads of state......LOL that is too funny!
If my job is to protect the leaders of NR from criticism I am doing a very
poor job of it. :) Heck, even your half-truths come through. It is only
your harassment that gets stopped and that, my friend, you brought upon
yourself.
> A senator stated that he was very sorry but since the population of
NovaRoma was not yet educated enough it was impossible to give them the
right of free speech. Therefore he justified the censor imposed on the forum
under the the name of "moderation". Another argument heard a lot in all
"temporary" dictatures around the world : "we are educating our people and
when time comes we will give the power to them">>
As I have *no* idea what Senator you refer to I cannot comment. I would
hazard a guess though that you approached one and he/she turned away your
false claims of persecution so now, of course, you must attack them as well.
> And now we have a new "proposition" of the list censor: It should be
forbidden to speak of politics on the forum (this list). Politics should be
reserved to politicians in her mind. Obviously another very democratical
proposition.>
Oh my goodness, you get better and better. :) For starters, these are not
*my* proposals, but those of members who have approached me. As for having
separate political lists, I shall await with interest the day you attack the
Comitia Populi Tribuni.....then again you won't, because you attack only
*me* and *I* am not a member there. ::rolling eyes::
> Somebody else was stating that we should need an external thread in order
to join our ranks, or perhaps an internal ennemy? Just like all dictatures
found their ennemies internal or externals in order to shut the mouth of
their co-citizens (Cf. Hitler, Stalin, anti-communist dictatures, communist
dictatures)>>
You know, I have about HAD it with you and your obnoxious attacks directed
toward me as a dictator, nazi, oppressor, Hussein, you name it. If it
hasn't yet occurred you, ponder this: if I were even a fraction of the
oppressive evil nazi you try and convince others I am you would be long gone
from Nova Roma. Heck, by *your* twisted logic I can silence you, right? So
why don't I? Because even your speech has a place here, regardless of it
being lies and rhetoric.
Vale,
Priscilla Vedia Serena
Curatrix Sermonis
> Manius Villius Limitanus.
>
>
>
> 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] Nova Roma Home |
| From: |
europamoon7@-------- |
| Date: |
Wed, 04 Jul 2001 03:26:55 -0000 |
|
Avete,
I feel that whatever property we purchase should be self-sustaining
at the very least. There's no point in acquiring anything if we will
be dependent on citizens to pay for it. That's really an unnecessary
burden on us and a very risky proposition. A lot of planning should
go into what would be done with the property once we would have it. I
suggest our financial body come up with some plans and present them
to all citizens for discussion before anything is ever actually
done. Just buying in the hopes of meeting the financial obligations
is both reckless and irresponsible. All of our ventures should be
handled as business ventures as are other non-profits. There should
be a clear and concise outline as to the nature of the acquisition
and it's purpose and projected outcome. This may not seem romantic
but it is practical.
Vale,
Pompeia Antonia Caesar
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] List Guidelines and the Constitution |
| From: |
"Pompeia Cornelia Strabo" <scriba_forum@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 04 Jul 2001 03:50:55 -0000 |
|
Salvete Omnes:
To begin with, I will say at the outset that I am the one who suggested to
Consul Germanicus that the animal rights thread should be curtailed.
I was list moderator at the time when Priscilla was giving birth, and during
her postpartum. As scriba, I read all of the posts. The animal rights
discussion was getting a bit heated in my opinion, over a nonRoman topic to
boot. I did not want a huge foofah and mudslinging over a nonRoman topic.
This action was taken by the Consul and was never vetoed by the Tribune, nor
objected to by anyone else.......until now. So if there is any mudslinging
over this issue now, "I" am your target.
It goes like this:
We have had a history of some nasty outbursts, flaming, swearing,
namecalling, which frankly paints a poor picture to one of the public who
might be interested in joining NR. Do you not think that this sort of
behaviour and sniping over animals is going to discourage folks to join us?
Heck, they get this kind of stuff at work and home in some cases....they
don't need or want more!
Our history shows the need for a list moderator. She is elected by *us* and
has *imperium*. (And she was elected even though she was the only one on the
ballot.....she could have been written in). Does that mean she is perfect?
Nope. She exercises her *judgement* by virtue of the *imperium* she
received from us. If she is grossly unconstitutional, it can be vetoed by
the Tribune, and others (Praetor). Otherwise, Priscilla, our elected
magistrate is using her "judgement" and if we do not like it, well, we can
stand for office next year and do this thankless job!
I resent Priscilla being equated with demons like Hussein, Stalin, et al,
over a judgement call on her part. And I do not think that chronic abusers
of list policy loopholes should be rendering much opinion on the
"unconstitutionality" of the list minding. List moderation is a necessary
evil, imposed by a few people who have difficulty maintaining some semblence
of civility.
Pricilla is bringing these issues forth AT THE REQUEST OF OTHER CITIZENS AND
MAGISTRATES. She is inviting discussion, but she is NOT inviting abuse and
unqualified criticisms. She is being very pragmatic in presenting you with
a composite of requests from the MAGISTRATES AND CITIZENS, even though she
clearly has stated that HER opinion doesn't in every way parallel the
revisions. This approach is hardly the product of a partisan censor or a
dictatrix.
If WE do not LIKE the ideas, let us say so, but in a civil manner, and with
respect that she is truly doing her best to make this a pleasant list for
everyone.
I will write myself a note reminding myself not to use caps in the forum
without saying "I'm not yelling".
Valete,
Pompeia Cornelia
Scriba, Curatrix Sermonen
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] The Language Policy |
| From: |
"Pompeia Cornelia Strabo" <scriba_forum@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 04 Jul 2001 03:56:28 -0000 |
|
I have a solution!!!!
Priscilla and I can quite our jobs (young Vedia can be shipped off to
boarding school......after all, she is an "older" baby now), and we shall
take full time courses in several languages at NR expense of course, so that
we can moderate the list (and it needs to be moderated) in several different
languages, so we can avoid appearing like dictators by asking for the
courtesy of an English translation for us poor English-speaking gals.
How would this be?
Po
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] Re: New List Policies-Proposals for discussion |
| From: |
"Robert Woolwine" <alexious@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 04 Jul 2001 04:15:14 -0000 |
|
Ave,
I will have brief comments below:
--- In novaroma@--------, "JusticeCMO" <justicecmo@g...> wrote:
> Salve,
>
> I would like to address some concerns that have been brought to my
attention
> in recent weeks and solicit opinions. We do have an issue with the
amount
> of traffic our List sees on a monthly basis, and some of the
policies below
> would address the high volume of posts. Other proposals are more
in the
> "housekeeping" area and would simply serve to make the functioning
of the
> List a bit smoother. Please note that none of the following
policies are
> being made official at this time. I am merely interested in
hearing what
> the List members think, so please feel free to chime in and discuss
the
> issues. This is your List and your choices and opinions determine
how this
> List will function.
First off, let me state that I am pleased you that you brought this
to our attention to get our input.
> 1. Signatures: the new policy would require that all posts are
signed. This
> has been a rather small problem but one which a number of people
have
> approached me about. Considering that all members receive
the "welcome"
> text containing our policies, even non-citizens would know to sign
posts
> with their mundane name.
I have no problem with you implementing this policy. I certainly
would like to know who I am responding whether my response is done
publically on the ML or privately. Its just consideration.
> 2. Posting of Policies: the new policy would require that I post
the entire
> "welcome/policy" text to the Main List on a monthly basis. Some
feel this
> would be beneficial as a reminder to members as to how they are to
behave,
> while others feel it is unnecessary repetition, as the file is
available
> 24/7 on the website for personal review.
I do not have a problem with this either. It would be good for new
members who just subscribe to the list to get this as well as it
would be good for us old-timers who have been on the ML for years to
get a refresher. If the refresher is not needed just delete.
> 3.Number of messages: a point has been raised that a small number
of members
> make the vast majority of posts. For the sake of discussion, let
us say the
> new policy would limit all members to a maximum of three posts per
day.
> Obviously, there will be some excellent arguments for and against
this one,
> so I am eager to hear what people think. Monthly traffic on the
List *is*
> averaging 1000 posts, but on the other hand this is currently our
*main*
> forum.
List Mistress, I must respectfully, but strenously disagree with this
proposal. I am one of the many individuals who at times post many
many posts. However, looking back, hindsight is a beautiful thing,
most of the posts (NOT ALL) but most were/and still are necessary. I
respectfully request you not implement this policy. Just as an
example, look at the amount of emails generated when we are proposing
laws. Questions being asked, questions needing to be answered.
Traffic is one thing I think does not need added policing. That does
not mean that you stop your moderation of individuals who cross the
line. But do not regulate valid traffic by individuals.
> 4. Politics: an argument has been made that the intense focus on
politics
> here on the Main List drowns out all other interests. For the sake
of
> discussion, let us say the new policy would require that all
political
> discussion would be moved to a new official list for that express
purpose.
> Needless to say, this will also bring many good arguments on both
sides. On
> the one hand, it would allow those interested in detailed political
debate
> to do so, but election time could get interesting, as could
determining what
> is and is not a political post.
List Mistress, I respectfully disagree on this as well. Your
Husband, the Senior Consul created the Nova Roma Announce to try to
alleviate some of the political traffic on this list. Overall, its
failed, (No disrespect intended) the reason its failed is that there
are just not the numbers on that list. This is the Rostra, this is
where Nova Romans campaign for office, this is where edicts and laws
are debated and announced. This role does not need to change.
> 5. E-mail addresses: the new policy would require all citizens to
use their
> official (listed with the Censors) e-mail address for the Main
List. This
> would make it very simple to verify whether a poster is a citizen
or not.
> It would also eliminate the ability for some, and I will admit this
is a
> small but bothersome bunch, to have multiple accounts/personas
under which
> they post.
Well, I really do not have an opinion on this, I can see your side in
this but I also respect and agree with the words of Consul Cassius.
I do not think at this juncture this should be adopted. I think you
are doing a sufficient job by moderating new members for a period of
time and taking your current actions. I dont see a reason to change.
And, since no one has asked you, Priscilla Vedia, just what are your
opinions on these items you have brought forward.
Respectfully,
Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
Censor of Nova Roma
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Example of Unconstitutional Regulation |
| From: |
gcassiusnerva@-------- |
| Date: |
Wed, 4 Jul 2001 00:20:46 EDT |
|
Oh come on Priscilla,
You know very well that I said not one word about your multiple alias
policy. That is not a concern of mine.
You removed from us the use of the upload option in the file section of
the archives, when *that option was not abused by anyone*.
All of us are barred from using the poll feature, in an act of overkill,
on the excuse that one person made a silly poll.
{My own Roman Movie poll was set to automatically end in August. It was
abruptly terminated prematurely. Was this your action also? Or was it Yahoo
or someone else?}
You want to keep conversations civil? Fine! But you do not have the
right to quash the *subject matter*. Don't confuse these two very distinct
matters. If two people got into a flame fight over whether or not Julius
Caesar was a great leader or a tyrant, would you end that topic also? Animal
rights, dull as it may be, is not a clear and present danger, and you had no
business stepping on it in the heavy-handed manner you did.
Oh, so Fortunatas doesn't complain, so it must be Constituional? Since
when did Fortunatas become infallible? Sorry, but anyone can read the text
of the Constitution and see that *subject matter* may not be restricted
unless it presents a *clear and present danger* to the republic. If
Fortunatas cannot see this, than he is wrong.
Your suggestion that I would allow porn on the list is misguided and
silly. Surely you must know that porn is illegal for minors, and that minors
are on this list, and that NR could face real legal problems should porn be
on the list {not to mention Yahoo would yank the list anyway} and so porn
WOULD be a "clear and present danger". Stop blowing smoke screens.
You may wish to read the applicable section of the Constituion again.
You may find it quite an eye opener.
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: |
[novaroma] My Concerns |
| From: |
jmath669642reng@-------- |
| Date: |
Wed, 4 Jul 2001 00:48:04 -0400 (EDT) |
|
Master Manius Villius Limitanus;
I am sorry to hear you continue your diatribe against Mistress Pricilla
Vedia Serena. Your comments do not even approach what Mistress Serena's
post was about. She has said that she wanted the opinions of the
Citizens of Nova Romans. To most fairly intelligent individuls that
also means your "polite" opinions.
Because I am the Senate Respondorum, I have been asked by a number of
Citizens about the questions that she has posted here today. The
questions that you have taken such unnecessary offense to are the ones
that I have asked her to post, that I may get a feel for the feelings of
the Nova Roman Citizens. My purpose was not to expose the lady to
political diatribe, but rather to gather information. There is no undue
concern here, no tricks, no political tomfoolery, just a couple of
simple questions. Mistress Serena neither deserves nor merits such
treatment in any way, for she has only generously given of her time to
forward my questions to the NR Citizens.
My purpose is to gather information as a Senator and ProConsul in order
to better advise the Senate. My purpose in using Mistress Serena for
this venue, is that such questions would properly come from her, and
further I did not want my question's response ratio affected in any way
by my popularity or lack of it in Nova Roma.
I have now told the Citizens of Nova Roma the purpose and reasons for my
questions as asked of Mistress Serena to place before them. I would
specifically request that if there are any who cannot keep a Civil
Tongue in thier head while addressig a Lady of the First Class, that you
address your objections to those questions to me, and I will try to find
some 5th grade words to explain this purpose to you more fully.
While you may not understand the operation of a government or the
procedures for the gatherings of information for the benefit of
constituents requesting such, I would ask that you not shout such
improbable accusations from the Main List and convince all of your
shortcomings.
Marcus Minucius Audens
Senator / ProConsul
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: |
[novaroma] Praise For Our List Moderators |
| From: |
Amulius Claudius Petrus <pkkt@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 04 Jul 2001 00:45:25 -0400 |
|
Salve,
I wish to congratulate our outstanding list moderators for there patience in
dealing with so much criticism. You obviously have a challenging duty and do
an excellent job. I personally have broken a few little rules on the list
and have been set right and not once did I feel as if I was under a
dictatorship. This list would not be as good of a place with out the
citizens that have been given the task of not letting us rip each other to
pieces. I thank you and wish you all the best.
"Quamquam cupido sis delictum ab sui crebro suum mater ab vitualis"
"Though ambition may be a fault in itself it is often the mother of virtues"
--
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: |
RE: [novaroma] Re: New List Policies-Proposals for discussion |
| From: |
"JusticeCMO" <justicecmo@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 4 Jul 2001 00:46:54 -0400 |
|
Salve,
<<And, since no one has asked you, Priscilla Vedia, just what are your
opinions on these items you have brought forward.>>
I have been hesitating to put forth my own views, for fear of skewing
discussion. I will, however, answer as I am directly asked.
1. Signatures: I see no down side to this. I would whole-heartedly agree
with policy requiring signatures. I would strongly argue for no action
being taken for a first offense, as newcomers might not realize their error.
But for regulars I see no reason not to sign post. We have one member who
has never once signed a post and yet he has been a member since 1998, for
example
2. Posting the list policies: I am neutral here. I can easily set the
computer to post it for me so no hardship is involved. I can't help but
think one more post a month can't hurt, but I also see where 90% of members
will delete it. Best answer I can muster is "whatever the people want is
good for me too"
3. Limiting number of messages: I am actually 100% against this policy.
For practical reasons, mind you. I would have to keep track of who posted,
how many times, and when. Then I would need to figure out when the "new"
day started in their time zone. Ugh.....no thanks!! Even though the decrease
in post volume would be nice, the hellish job of tracking all of this is too
much to ask of any moderator, IMO.
4. Separate Political List: In theory I really like this idea. I think we
could do well with Comitia Populi and Comitia Tribuni Lists. Trouble is
that, right now, *this* is our main forum. As such, I don't see how we can
weed out all political discussion. In truth, just deciding what is and what
is not a political post could be a full-time job. Much as I like the basic
idea I don't see it as practical right now.
5. E-mail addresses: I like the idea of all e-mail addresses needing to be
official. In the event a member needs to change addresses for a bit, they
could always let me know so there would be no problem. On the other hand,
non-citizens are not protected by our Constitution. I can safely say that
98% of all offensive posts come from non-citizens. Right now it can be hard
to tell who is and who is not protected under our laws. This policy would
make that status obvious. Unfortunately, a number of even our own cives
post under false name. This policy would prevent that, or at least make it
harder. However it is not a make-or-break issue for me. I like the idea but
can live with things as is if need be.
Those are *my* opinions on the issues. Please note I sign this as a plain
old cive, not as a magistrate.
Vale,
Priscilla Vedia Serena
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Latin Translation request |
| From: |
CmndrZil@-------- |
| Date: |
Wed, 4 Jul 2001 01:21:54 EDT |
|
In a message dated 7/3/01 10:54:38 AM, MarekJG@-------- writes:
>This is (slightly distorted) sentence by Marcus Cato (in original: Ceterum
>censeo Carthaginem delendam esse).
Aha! Ending it "esse delendam" didn't make much sense to me. I was worried
that the Virgil had made too much of an impact on me. (I have no confidence
in infinitives anymore, its sad.) Thank you for restoring my faith.
Oh, and that reminds me. I need to purchase a new dictionary and a few other
Latin related things from Amazon that aren't on our web page. Do we have the
ability to add a few more things (for example, the books I need), so that
Nova Roma can get credit for the sale, or should I throw my oh so
difficultily earned 62.9 American dollars directly to the huge evil
conglomeration?
I is a college student.
Tarquinia Euphemia
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] New List Policies-Proposals for discussion |
| From: |
"Raina Faolan" <GuruPoet@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 04 Jul 2001 01:23:12 -0400 |
|
Salve,
List Mother, Pompeia, you guys do a great job. From a fellow moderator's
view, I could not do what the two of you do. Although I do things very
differently, in an overall standpoint. To the actual point, I agree with
everything exception of #three. Limiting posts, I will not say is unfair or
unconstitutional, what about those of us who don't post multiple times a day
on this list?
Vale Bene,
Aeternia
>From: "JusticeCMO" <justicecmo@-------->
>Reply-To: novaroma@--------
>To: <novaroma@-------->
>Subject: [novaroma] New List Policies-Proposals for discussion
>Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 20:19:38 -0400
>
>Salve,
>
>I would like to address some concerns that have been brought to my
>attention
>in recent weeks and solicit opinions. We do have an issue with the amount
>of traffic our List sees on a monthly basis, and some of the policies below
>would address the high volume of posts. Other proposals are more in the
>"housekeeping" area and would simply serve to make the functioning of the
>List a bit smoother. Please note that none of the following policies are
>being made official at this time. I am merely interested in hearing what
>the List members think, so please feel free to chime in and discuss the
>issues. This is your List and your choices and opinions determine how this
>List will function.
>
>1. Signatures: the new policy would require that all posts are signed.
>This
>has been a rather small problem but one which a number of people have
>approached me about. Considering that all members receive the "welcome"
>text containing our policies, even non-citizens would know to sign posts
>with their mundane name.
>
>2. Posting of Policies: the new policy would require that I post the entire
>"welcome/policy" text to the Main List on a monthly basis. Some feel this
>would be beneficial as a reminder to members as to how they are to behave,
>while others feel it is unnecessary repetition, as the file is available
>24/7 on the website for personal review.
>
>3.Number of messages: a point has been raised that a small number of
>members
>make the vast majority of posts. For the sake of discussion, let us say
>the
>new policy would limit all members to a maximum of three posts per day.
>Obviously, there will be some excellent arguments for and against this one,
>so I am eager to hear what people think. Monthly traffic on the List *is*
>averaging 1000 posts, but on the other hand this is currently our *main*
>forum.
>
>4. Politics: an argument has been made that the intense focus on politics
>here on the Main List drowns out all other interests. For the sake of
>discussion, let us say the new policy would require that all political
>discussion would be moved to a new official list for that express purpose.
>Needless to say, this will also bring many good arguments on both sides.
>On
>the one hand, it would allow those interested in detailed political debate
>to do so, but election time could get interesting, as could determining
>what
>is and is not a political post.
>
>5. E-mail addresses: the new policy would require all citizens to use their
>official (listed with the Censors) e-mail address for the Main List. This
>would make it very simple to verify whether a poster is a citizen or not.
>It would also eliminate the ability for some, and I will admit this is a
>small but bothersome bunch, to have multiple accounts/personas under which
>they post.
>
>Well, there they are. These are just rough ideas at this point, and I am
>sure between the debates and discussions they will likely change a bit
>before reaching their final state. I look forward to your participation in
>making this List a smoother-running and more pleasant place to post.
>
>Vale,
>Priscilla Vedia Serena
>Curatrix Sermonis
>
_________________________________________________________________
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] Latin Translation request |
| From: |
"Raina Faolan" <GuruPoet@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 04 Jul 2001 01:29:36 -0400 |
|
Salve Euphemi,
Try http://www.scholarsbookshelf.com, I think you'll find some great books
there.
Vale Bene,
Aeternia
>From: CmndrZil@--------
>Reply-To: novaroma@--------
>To: novaroma@--------
>Subject: Re: [novaroma] Latin Translation request
>Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2001 01:21:54 EDT
>
>
>In a message dated 7/3/01 10:54:38 AM, MarekJG@-------- writes:
>
> >This is (slightly distorted) sentence by Marcus Cato (in original:
>Ceterum
> >censeo Carthaginem delendam esse).
>
>Aha! Ending it "esse delendam" didn't make much sense to me. I was
>worried
>that the Virgil had made too much of an impact on me. (I have no
>confidence
>in infinitives anymore, its sad.) Thank you for restoring my faith.
>
>Oh, and that reminds me. I need to purchase a new dictionary and a few
>other
>Latin related things from Amazon that aren't on our web page. Do we have
>the
>ability to add a few more things (for example, the books I need), so that
>Nova Roma can get credit for the sale, or should I throw my oh so
>difficultily earned 62.9 American dollars directly to the huge evil
>conglomeration?
>
>I is a college student.
>Tarquinia Euphemia
_________________________________________________________________
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] New List Policies-Proposals for discussion |
| From: |
CmndrZil@-------- |
| Date: |
Wed, 4 Jul 2001 02:00:05 EDT |
|
Domna Claudia Auspicata said:
I can
>also see problems with 'policing' this counting policy and for
>citizens whose 'days' do not end when others do (time-line problems).
Maybe the "three posts a day rule" could be more of a "three post a day
guildline." That way, everybody knew to aim for three posts a day, but it
wouldn't have to be enforced.
Someone said something awhile ago, I don't remember who it was or when, about
how this idea wouldn't necessairly allow people to respond to all of the
questions they might be asked about a specific piece of legislation or
something. (I'm sorry I can't remember who it was.) I think that kind of
situation could easily be handled by cutting and pasting several things into
one email. I've never actually seen it done, but it could work.
For example, if I posted a piece of legislative reform, something I will not
do in the near future, a post could end up looking something like this:
Julius says:
Blah blah blah.
Well, Julius, the thing about my idea is yadda yadda yadda.
Ovid asks:
Blah blah blah blah blah?
See, now, what you don't understand is that the cheeseman flew into the sky
and poked the blindman in the eye.
You could only really do that on a specific issue. The actual post would
seem longer, but it would be more concise.
Just a thought,
Tarquinia Euphemia
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] Re: Totalitarism |
| From: |
europamoon7@-------- |
| Date: |
Wed, 04 Jul 2001 06:03:33 -0000 |
|
--- In novaroma@--------, "JusticeCMO" <justicecmo@g...> wrote:
> Salve,
>
> >The arguments used by all monoparty dictarial regimes specially in
> Africa.>>
>
> I won't comment here except to caution you. Comparing *anyone* in
NR to the
> atrocities taking place in such hell-holes as Sierra Leone is
completely
> beyond reason. No matter how poorly you feel a magistrate is doing
here in
> NR, they are unlikely to hack off your child's legs with a machete
for
> disagreeing with them. Let's keep a little perspective here, shall
we?
>
> >>Six monthes ago, the new list censor edicted a rule by which
citizen could
> no more express themselves in the language of their choice in this
public
> place.>>
>
> Sigh. Once *again* I refer you to the actual facts of the matter:
>
> "XI. All posts to the list should be accompanied by an English
translation
> if they are written in another language. If you are unable to
write in
> English, or uncomfortable posting in English, please let me know
and I will
> be more than happy to facilitate your pairing with a translator who
can help
> you to do so. Posts in multiple languages are MORE than welcome,
as long as
> an English translation is included somewhere therein. Please note
there is
> no penalty for violating this policy on a "first time" basis, as it
is
> assumed that anyone doing so is simply in need of assistance and not
> consciously choosing to violate list policy."
>
> As is "clearly" stated in the official List policy, anyone is free
to write
> in ANY language they choose. All that is required is an
accompanying
> English translation. I am not quite sure why you have so much
trouble
> grasping this, but you repeatedly assert lies about this Policy, so
I must
> assume the problem lies on your end.
>
> >>Effectively excluding a large number of citizens from this forum,
mostly
> the non-US citizens which were mnost opposed to her views of
politics.
> Another widely used method of silencing opposition in multilingual
> countries.>
>
> Not to put too fine a point on it, but if I were intent
on "silencing" my
> critics, please remind me why *you* are still here? LOL Your
complete lack
> of rational thought here borders on the absurd. In the past six
months we
> have had many international posters, and...in fact....a small
number who do
> post in multiple languages on a routine basis. Check the archives
and I
> think you'll be pleasantly deprived of your delusions that I am
banning
> non-English speakers.
>
> > Shortly after a great number of citizens were driven out of
NovaRoma by
> constant harrasment and "Love it or leave it" arguments. The exact
lemma of
> many south-american dictatures of the 20th century.>>
>
> As I drove no one out of NR, and I firmly believe that those who
left did so
> in an attempt to make a point, I have no comment here.
>
> >The senior consul expressed on this forum this exact point while
asking for
> the remainder of the opponents to leave.>>
>
> Far as *I* remember, the only person he challenged to leave was
Formosanus.
> And that was done after Formosanus mistakenly let us all know he was
> considered NR a "disaster". Other than that I believe the Senior
Consul can
> speak for himself in this matter.
>
> > The list censor decreted that talking of secession as a way of
doing
> politics (a common fact in the early republic) was "a clear threat
to the
> state" and censored it. Just like Saddam Hussein does not allow the
Kurds to
> speak about secession.>
>
> If you'd like *some* of the truth to be known, let's let it *all*
be known.
> On 5/9 you were warned for being insulting and degrading to other
posters.
> You told me you had no plans to change. When you, on 5/28, called
for
> secession, you were told you were being put on moderated status
(warning
> already having been given less than a month earlier). You told me
to "do
> what you feel you have to", that you would not change your
behavior. So,
> please don't cloak yourself in the garb of the martyr so quickly,
when you
> were indeed, warned and I did, indeed, ask you to discuss things
with me
> privately. To this very day I have not even had the courtesy of a
reply
> e-mail from you for my trouble. Saddam Hussein? LOL Your
rhetoric is
> beyond belief.
>
> > The list censor decided that stating that some magistrates should
be
> removed from charge because they are harming our state was a
personnal
> attack against those magistrate and censored the posts asking for
it.Just
> like in other dictatures it is forbidden in NovaRoma to speak
against the
> head of the state and to ask for their removal.>>
>
> Once again you give *part* of the truth. Let us be honest. Your
attempt to
> harass me (much like your current use of the term list censor, as I
am
> neither an elected censor nor censoring your thoughts) was
stopped. A
> cursory reading of almost every post you make will make it clear to
the
> reader that you hold me in personal contempt. If you were well and
truly
> being censored not another one of your mistruths would appear. As
for it
> being forbidden to criticize the heads of state......LOL that is
too funny!
> If my job is to protect the leaders of NR from criticism I am doing
a very
> poor job of it. :) Heck, even your half-truths come through. It
is only
> your harassment that gets stopped and that, my friend, you brought
upon
> yourself.
>
> > A senator stated that he was very sorry but since the population
of
> NovaRoma was not yet educated enough it was impossible to give them
the
> right of free speech. Therefore he justified the censor imposed on
the forum
> under the the name of "moderation". Another argument heard a lot in
all
> "temporary" dictatures around the world : "we are educating our
people and
> when time comes we will give the power to them">>
>
> As I have *no* idea what Senator you refer to I cannot comment. I
would
> hazard a guess though that you approached one and he/she turned
away your
> false claims of persecution so now, of course, you must attack them
as well.
>
> > And now we have a new "proposition" of the list censor: It should
be
> forbidden to speak of politics on the forum (this list). Politics
should be
> reserved to politicians in her mind. Obviously another very
democratical
> proposition.>
>
> Oh my goodness, you get better and better. :) For starters, these
are not
> *my* proposals, but those of members who have approached me. As
for having
> separate political lists, I shall await with interest the day you
attack the
> Comitia Populi Tribuni.....then again you won't, because you attack
only
> *me* and *I* am not a member there. ::rolling eyes::
>
> > Somebody else was stating that we should need an external thread
in order
> to join our ranks, or perhaps an internal ennemy? Just like all
dictatures
> found their ennemies internal or externals in order to shut the
mouth of
> their co-citizens (Cf. Hitler, Stalin, anti-communist dictatures,
communist
> dictatures)>>
>
> You know, I have about HAD it with you and your obnoxious attacks
directed
> toward me as a dictator, nazi, oppressor, Hussein, you name it. If
it
> hasn't yet occurred you, ponder this: if I were even a fraction of
the
> oppressive evil nazi you try and convince others I am you would be
long gone
> from Nova Roma. Heck, by *your* twisted logic I can silence you,
right? So
> why don't I? Because even your speech has a place here, regardless
of it
> being lies and rhetoric.
>
> Vale,
> Priscilla Vedia Serena
> Curatrix Sermonis
>
> > Manius Villius Limitanus.
I can only say that the name Limitanus says it all.
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
> >
> >
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] New List Policies-Proposals for discussion |
| From: |
Caeso Fabius Quintilianus <tjalens.h@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 4 Jul 2001 12:03:34 +0200 |
|
Salve Illustrus Curatrix Sermonis Priscilla Vedia Serena et Salvete Omnes!
I am taking from my very restricted spare-time to state my opinion on this
very important topic! By waiting a while I have got time to get to
understand that these proposals are more of a test, so I will not accuse
anyone of any plans to censurship or anything undemocratic. I admit that we
have seen behavior here on the list that would be nice to be free from. I
do think that there are some persons who always start out agressively in a
discussion and there are also persons who have problems with differing
between persons and the actual issues. I think that can be dealt with a by
our Curatrix Sermonis and her scriba strictly keeping this list civil and
us all keeping our "tongues in cheek(?)". I am also for that we as citizens
are very honest with each other when there are breaches of the "rules" of
the Roman virtues.
This said, I will keep the rest short.
1. Signatures: I would appreciate if all could sign their posts with their
Roman name (citizens) or Rela life name (non-citizens). Enforcing such a
policy would be OK. But, I am afraid that I also could see reasons for some
persons in special situations to just sign with an alias. If this policy
would be enforced I think aliases could be anonymous, but the real name
left at the desk of the Curatrix Sermonis, who would keep it secret. This
is how, at least, Swedish newspapers do it.
2. Posting of Policies: OK with me
3. Number of messages: I am against this. Sometimes each or some of us will
need to say more in a debatte or in a discussion.
4. Politics: I am deadly against this proposal ! This is, as have been said
before, the Forum, no restrictions should be made agaist political
discussions here. There are a lot of lists, more than twenty (counting the
provincial lists) lists concerned with other topics. It is easy to go to
such a list to discuss more specific topics if one wants to. This IS (not
yelling) the political list, but with room for all other topics!
5. E-mail addresses: I am not sure, but would this be a problem for cives
going for a trip somewhere? I think it would be better to leave it as it is.
I thank You all for taking of your valuable time to read my thoughts. Lets
us all show the world that we Romans can be civil and polite to each other
and also to the peregrini. Let us still have hard political fights, but
keep our personal relations friendly!
Vale
Caeso Fabius Quintilianus
Quaestor of Nova Roma
Propraetor of Thule
Accensus to Consul Marcus Cassius Julianus
The Opinions expressed are my own,
and not an offical opinion of Nova Roma
************************************************
Join the Main List for Nova Roma
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/novaroma
Join the List for the Thule Provincia in Nova Roma
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ThuleNovaRoma/join
************************************************
The homepage of the Nova Roma Provincia Thule:
http://thule.novaroma.org/
************************************************
Aut inveniam viam aut faciam
"I'll either find a way or make one"
************************************************
"Do not give in to hate. That leads to the dark side."
************************************************
Caeso, he who also is known as Christer Edling.
************************************************
Using a keyboard that don't want to make L! :-(
************************************************
PRIVATE PHONE: +90 - 10 09 10
DOG BOARDING HOUSE PHONE: +90 - 503 56
MOBILE: +70 - 643 88 80
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] Land and the Senate |
| From: |
"L. Sicinius Drusus" <lsicinius@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 4 Jul 2001 04:40:23 -0700 (PDT) |
|
Salvete Quirites,
I will start out by quoting our Constitution.
The Senate shall exercise control over the aerarium
(treasury) and shall oversee the financial endeavors,
health, and policy of the state.
1. No later than the last day of November of each
year, the Senate shall prepare a budget for the
following year. This budget shall deal with the
disbursement of funds from the aerarium to the
quaestors for various purposes. Even though the
quaestors assigned to the consuls shall be responsible
for the maintenance of the entire treasury, no funds
from it may be disbursed without the prior approval of
the Senate. The Senate may, as required by changing
circumstances, pass supplemental Senatus consulta to
modify the annual budget.
2. The Senate may, by Senatus consultum, impose
taxes, fees, or other financial requirements on the
citizens in order to maintain the financial welfare of
the state.
We currently have US $200.00 invested in our land fund
as per last year's budget, but as per the Constitution
this money can NOT be spent without the consent of the
Senate. If we add any donations to this fund, then
spending that money will also require the consent of
the Senate.
Now it may be possible to set up a land fund
independent of the Senate for the purpose of
purchasing some land as private citizens, and then
donating this land to Nova Roma. If we do this however
we are placing the Senate under the obligation to pay
any taxes or other fees that owning land might entail.
I for one am NOT in favor of trying to force the
Senate into assuming any obligations that may
interfere with their finical planing, so I would
advise against trying to set up an independent fund.
I would like to make it possible for citizens to make
direct donations to the land fund via PayPal, so that
our fund will grow faster than it would if we relied
solely on the amounts that the Senate can afford to
budget for this item each year. The actual decision to
spend that money, and to assume any loan obligations
belongs to the Senate.
We can make suggestions about this, and contribute
funds, but the final say on where the site will be,
and when we buy it belongs to the Senate.
Valete,
L. Sicinius Drusus
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] To Crisis, or Not to Crisis? |
| From: |
cassius622@-------- |
| Date: |
Wed, 4 Jul 2001 09:34:42 EDT |
|
Salvete,
It sometimes amazes me how much extra effort we Nova Romans put into things.
Its no wonder so many folks "burn out" on the main list... every simple topic
of discussion has a pretty much even chance of flaring up into a Civil War!
:P
It is not a crime for our List Moderator to politely raise suggestions for
new policies. It really doesn't make that much sense to raise topics on
"totalitarianism" and make a huge deal out of it... when a simple answer to
the questions raised is what will in fact achieve results.
If someone does not like the newly proposed list questions, (and I myself did
not) a calm and rational post of reasons is bound to achieve more than
hostile accusations and recriminations.
The real problem with such frantic and heated argument is that it becomes
difficult to tell whether a problem is real and serious. If *all* discussions
are responded to with cries of "Nazi!" and "Criminal!" how are folks supposed
to tell a true crisis from wasted rhetoricical overkill?
There is a saying of "let the punishment fit the crime." Let also the
rhetoric fit the situation. It helps keep the list rational and
understandable, and conserves our interest and effort for where it is needed!
Oh, and these new list policies? My view on them is contained in message
#24139 of the List Archives. I've posted my opinion and that's that. I am
also going to "officially" answer the poll. I'll be voting NO to all the
proposed issues except for the proposed repost of basic list info once a
month for new folks. My feeling is that these proposals will be generally
unpopular and therefore will not be adopted.
Valete,
Marcus Cassius Julianus
[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] NOVA ROMA: Capita XVI et XVII |
| From: |
"S. Apollonius Draco" <hendrik.meuleman@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 4 Jul 2001 15:35:34 +0200 |
|
Salvete Quirites,
After a °very° long delay, the new installments of the NR Mars novel.
Questions? Comments? Mail me.
XVI. Tamdiu discendum est, quamdiu vivas
---------------------------------------------------------
"Rotten desert. Rotten weather. Rotten Martianalists. Rotten gods. What in
Futuax' name are we doing here?" Peregrinus mumbled in his helmet. All night
they had blindly walked across the great southern plain, only to encounter
wind, rocks and sand. It was a bright day, but that couldn't really cheer up
the mood in the party of partially limping and totally exhausted soldiers.
"Ask Audens," Draco replied.
"Wasn't Audens dead?" Sertorius asked, a frown visibly forming behind the
darkened visor of his helmet. Nobody seemed to care about his stating the
obvious again. Draco looked over his shoulder, and saw no trace of the
wreckage anymore, and neither did he see a trace of the crashed escape pod
that had attacked them the night before. Ever since not much had been said.
Draco was mainly thinking of the loss of Curio - others seemed to be wrapped
up in similar thoughts. But their most important concern was to get out of
there and report this. First Martianalists shot down the gargantuan sand
sailer. Then Ronanus turned on his fellow colleagues, only to be shot down
himself.
"Permission to speak, sirs," Draco requested.
"Go 'head," Peregrinus offered, seemingly without much intrest.
"I've done some thinking, and for me, there are only two possible reasons
why things happened as they happened. Option one is that the Martianalists
have been hunting us down, and shot down Ronanus, who had gone insane.
Option two is that Ronanus worked for the guys who shot us down, but was in
turn stopped from his attempt at killing us by an opposing force."
"And who would that 'opposing force' be?" Oppius Flaccus asked.
"I have no clue, sir." What could they expect? Nobody had let him in on the
real mission, even though they were a scarred group of survivors now, far
from accomplishing their mission - whatever that mission might have been.
Draco was sure Sertorius wasn't aware of the true mission just as well
either. Severus and Peregrinus probably knew, but the military hierarchy and
unwritten law prohibited him from asking. Funny, he thought, how such a
short time in the army had altered his way of thinking.
Yet, on days like today, Draco felt like quitting. However, where could he
run to? He missed his pater, his fratres and the usual daily life of their
hometown.
Almost an hour passed without any word being spoken. The only sounds heard
were the rhythmic pounding of their boots in the crusty soil, and the ever
present Martian winds. It had been said that Mars' children were children of
wind, and it was true: no human civilization in the solar system was so
accustomed to different types of wind as the Romans were. Legend had it that
Augures could predict the future by their interpretation of the winds - as
there were no birds on Mars to observe. Suddenly, all of the soldiers saw a
blinking object in the sky, that was slowly approaching. Draco's visor
identified it as a man, equipped with a jetpack.
"Who's that?" Sertorius uttered.
"Go ask him," Peregrinus offered. Sertorius shrugged and said nothing. The
man approached.
"Be careful," Oppius warned them. The stranger landed in front of them. He
had a pretty regular outside suit on, but there was something about him that
made Draco feel as if he had encountered the man before. He reminded him of
that soothsayer, Maximius.
"Greetings," the stranger said.
"Salve," Oppius said reservedly.
"What brings you here in the southern desert?" Peregrinus wanted to know.
"I am a Martianalist; I live here." Draco grinned. That's a good reason, he
thought.
"My name is Caeso Fabius Quintilianus," he introduced himself, "I've come on
behalf of our leader, to bring you to his caves."
"How do we know you aren't lying?" Peregrinus inquired. Quintilianus
shrugged.
"You don't. You just have to trust me. If I may say it so, I think you've
got no other chance left than to die here if you won't come with me."
Draco awaited what his superiors would do. Sertorius seemed absent, while,
even through the exosuit, both Peregrinus' and Oppius' body language spoke
of tensions and dilemmas. They briefly looked at each other, and then
nodded.
"Agreed," Oppius said, "bring us to your leader." Draco knew Curio would
have said "bring me to your dealer", as was an old common joke among youths.
It saddened him to know that his friend had died in this very desert, and he
tried to focus on something else.
"Take my hand," Quintilianus then said, his gloved hands outstretched.
Sertorius walked past Oppius, Peregrinus and Draco and took the man's hand,
while the others were hesitating. Draco and Peregrinus then simultaneously
took Quintilianus' other hand, with Oppius following as a good last.
Suddenly, the vision in front of his eyes become something totally
different, as if no time had been crossed between standing in the desert and
being in the other place.
"You can take of your helmets," he heard Quintilianus say. And so he did.
Appearently they were inside of a cave. Its rounded forms seemed to point at
a glacial origin. They were lit by torches built in the walls, and the cave
had a small exit to a tunnel. Through the tunnel a figure came closer; a
tall, impressive man dressed in a rugged cloak. He had a grey-black beard,
and a heavy, natural frown on his face. Upon seeing the hermit-like figure,
Quintilianus bowed his head slightly. A short, unnatural silence fell. Draco
had the feeling both men were exchanging telepathical messages, and he
didn't like the idea.
"You must be the negotiation party," the hermit said.
So that's what it was all about: negotiation!
"What's left of it, yes," Oppius said flatly.
"Excuse me, I haven't introduced myself yet. My name is Piperbarbus Ullerius
Venator. I am the leader of the martianalist communities. I heard you had
some difficulties on the way."
"That would be an understatement, sir. We have lost about ten men, among
them our supreme commander, Marcus Minucius Audens."
Venator's frown became deeper.
"Yes," he said absently.
"Were you or your people responsible for this?" Oppius inquired nervously.
"No," Venator spoke placidly, "we weren't. Our opponents did it."
"Martianalists?" Sertorius asked.
"Arg," Venator replied. Draco's eyes crossed Peregrinus'. Arg?
"Follow me," the leader said. A bit docile the soldiers followed the man
through the faintly luminiscent tunnel. It gradually became larger and more
impressive, and they crossed other people, some in the same grey-brown
cloaks like Venator's, others in a simple tunica, and here and there a man
or woman in toga of simple design. On the way, Draco had spotted no
buildings. Some stairways that hinted at entrances to other caves, but no
buildings or rooms other than the one they had come from.
Finally, they reached some sort of square. The ceiling of the cave reached
about thirty metres high above their heads, and the entrance to the next
cave had something church-like about it.
"This is our principal meeting place," Venator said, pointing at the
entrance, which shone with a yellow light. They continued their way to the
entrance. Once they were inside, all cave-like appearances seemed to be
gone. Through a stairway they reached an artificial wooden table with modern
coms built into it, and with about ten chairs around them. The table stood
on a nice and flat platform. Everything in the room had a yellowish glow,
which deepened when the small gates behind them closed. At an invisible
neurocommand of Venator, Draco guessed.
"Please take your seats, domini," Venator said. The leader himself sat down
at the head of the table. Oppius sat at his right hand, Peregrinus at the
left. Next to Oppius sat Sertorius, who was in front of Draco.
"Now, let me tell you a bit more about the martianalists."
XVII. Suos cuique mos
------------------------------
"Allright," Diocletianus said, taking a stool in the interrogatorium, "now
let's hear what you've been doing here." It was morning, and overnight the
Praetor's feelings had calmed down. Festus looked as though he hadn't slept,
and had his arms folded across his chest, leaning over the table with them.
In defensive mode, so it seemed.
"You're supposed to know that," Festus growled. Diocletianus frowned.
"That doesn't really help. We have you taped on several occasions, and
there's no doubt, through identification of your DNA, that you killed at
least one person, namely Consul Cassius. I hope you do realize that you're
facing a lifetime in prison, if not more."
"More than a lifetime?" Diocletianus rolled with his eyes.
"I'm talking about the death sentence."
"Oh."
An uneasy silence entered the room. Diocletianus studied the lines in his
toga and drank some of his coffee while he awaited Festus to speak. After
half a minute, he began to talk.
"Allright. I killed Cassius and Piscinus, and masterminded the others."
The Praetor was a bit shocked to hear confessions so quickly, but he
retained his outer calm.
"How did you do it?" Festus loosened up a bit.
"I impersonated one of Cassius' sons, Nerva, to enter the building without
the guards taking notice. Since I knew from past experience that Cassius is
always available for his family, the automatic detectors in the building are
ordered to let everyone of the gens Cassia pass through without it's being
reported to the central computer. I sneaked in behind a guard's back, and
the rest was fairly easy. He wasn't at his desk, as I had expected, and so I
left a 'present' on it. I smeared a thin layer of poison on the wood of his
desk, that would penetrate his skin upon contact. After three hours the
micro-organisms in the poison would self-destruct, wiping out any trace of
it."
Diocletianus made sure his autoscriba noted it all.
"And how about Piscinus and the others?"
"Piscinus was an accidental catch, actually. I was wandering through the
park around the Curia when I saw him sitting on a bench by himself,
appearently sleeping." He shrugged.
"Since I'm always carrying around my tools, it was quite easy to approach
and kill him. As for the rest, I left that to the skillful hands of my
underworld contacts here."
Diocletianus raised an eyebrow. He suppressed a rise of anger and cleared
his throat.
"What are their names?"
"I don't know. It's a custom we don't know each others' names. They existed
long before I returned here, though. They call themselves the Back Alley."
"I see. Who sent you?"
"Earth."
Diocletianus was unable to supress a sudden shock. So Earth was behind it
after all. And he had thought that Vedius was just being paranoid.
Appearently, he had been proven wrong. Festus laughed a little.
"You don't have to be so surprised. When I was exiled from Mars, I was
contacted by elements within Earth's government soon enough. They asked me
if I, in return for a considerably large reward, would be able to
destabilize the government of the Res Publica so that it would be
defenceless in a war."
"Do you have any proof of this?"
"No. They were clever enough not to give me any documents. Only oral
instructions, or transmissions on a public channel that billions of people
use. Tracking messages in it would be pointless."
"Yet Octavius was able to track down one of your messages."
"He was? That'd be a surprise. I never sent one here."
Diocletianus realized Festus could be lying, but it sounded too honest to be
a lie. On the other hand, nothing pointed towards truth, either, save for
his explanation on the arrangement of the murders on Cassius and Piscinus.
He went on to his last question for the time being.
"Do you know who Eugenias is, then?"
Festus seemed to think, and then frowned.
"Never heard of him."
Diocletianus stared into his coffee. Despite his successful interrogation,
he felt beaten and powerless. Things were far worse than expected. He felt
as though even the man in front of him was a captive, he had won once more.
Anger rose to his head again, but he kept calm. He should not have
interrogated Festus, and had it handled by an Aedilis. But his curiosity had
gotten the better of him. The Praetor shook his head and stared at the man
in the simple white toga.
"That'll be it for now."
Valete bene,
Draco
"Jeder für sich, und Gott gegen allen."
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
RE: [novaroma] Totalitarism |
| From: |
"Marek Grajek" <MarekJG@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 4 Jul 2001 10:16:20 +0200 |
|
Salve,
You have raised some interesting questions in your post, even if using
slightly biased arguments. One of your arguments is based on my statement,
interpreted in contrary to my intent - the one regarding the NR's need for
the external challenge. I do not blame you for this misinterpretation, as I
have a custom similar to yours - one of formulating my opinions in the
provocative way. Let me clarify my statement, which has nothing to do with
totalitarian tendencies.
Watching the discussion in NR's main list planted some doubts in my mind
whether the organization as a whole, as its majority or at least its most
active and visible minority is really focusing the activities around the
declared goals. These doubts led me quite far - I decided to suspend my
citizenship application for half a year, however I am trying to follow the
events and discussions, occasionally throwing in my opinions.
I do recall that in the ancient Rome periods of peace, stability and
prosperity did not seem to be the best time for the traditional Roman
virtues either. Rome's glory used to shine with its full light in the
troubled times, in particular when the trouble was caused by the external
challenge. Note, please, that the civil wars in Rome did not offer the
spectacular show of the Roman virtues but rather its opposite.
I am afraid that significant part of the discussions within NR reminds me
the bad side of the Roman life and politics, while I admit to find also
(probably less frequent) good examples. When thinking about mechanisms which
could revert the proportions between both I recalled the lesson of the
history - offer the party a strong, external challenge and you will find it
united. OK, I know it is rather an unpractical solution for the NR - we are
unlikely to delegate a part of our members to create organization called New
Carthage. On the other hand I believe that in the current NR's structure the
natural for the human beings instincts of competition and domination find
its only exit in "political" disputes and the run for offices. This is not
exactly I am looking for. I believe NR needs badly any form of the internal
competition in fields other than "politics". My natural recommendation is
building into NR's structure mechanisms permitting the individuals and
groups to compete in many fields related to our common goals - the
conservation and restoration of the traditional Roman virtues. I am thinking
about some kind of Ludi Romanae, permitting the individuals and groups to
demonstrate their knowledge, dedication, persistence or skill in competition
with other people.
Now let us get back to your thesis concerning totalitarianism. I must admit
my experience with NR is not long and deep enough to serve a judgement, all
I can do is using historical parallels again. I do recall that excessive and
general involvement into politics together with the decline of the
traditional Roman virtues did lead to the switch from the Republic to the
Principate and then Dominate. I do not know if Nova Roma is this far in its
political evolution.
Vale bene,
Cneus Marius Aquila
---------------R--E--K--L--A--M--A----------------
Szperasz po Internecie? Zostan Tropicielem!
Wytrop sobie nagrody: http://tropiciel.interia.pl/
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Example of Unconstitutional Regulation |
| From: |
Michel Loos <loos@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 04 Jul 2001 06:48:14 -0300 |
|
gcassiusnerva@-------- wrote:
>
> Oh come on Priscilla,
>
> You know very well that I said not one word about your multiple alias
> policy. That is not a concern of mine.
>
> You removed from us the use of the upload option in the file section of
> the archives, when *that option was not abused by anyone*.
>
> All of us are barred from using the poll feature, in an act of overkill,
> on the excuse that one person made a silly poll.
> {My own Roman Movie poll was set to automatically end in August. It was
> abruptly terminated prematurely. Was this your action also? Or was it Yahoo
> or someone else?}
>
> You want to keep conversations civil? Fine! But you do not have the
> right to quash the *subject matter*. Don't confuse these two very distinct
> matters. If two people got into a flame fight over whether or not Julius
> Caesar was a great leader or a tyrant, would you end that topic also? Animal
> rights, dull as it may be, is not a clear and present danger, and you had no
> business stepping on it in the heavy-handed manner you did.
>
> Oh, so Fortunatas doesn't complain, so it must be Constituional? Since
> when did Fortunatas become infallible? Sorry, but anyone can read the text
> of the Constitution and see that *subject matter* may not be restricted
> unless it presents a *clear and present danger* to the republic. If
> Fortunatas cannot see this, than he is wrong.
>
> Your suggestion that I would allow porn on the list is misguided and
> silly. Surely you must know that porn is illegal for minors, and that minors
> are on this list, and that NR could face real legal problems should porn be
> on the list {not to mention Yahoo would yank the list anyway} and so porn
> WOULD be a "clear and present danger". Stop blowing smoke screens.
>
> You may wish to read the applicable section of the Constituion again.
> You may find it quite an eye opener.
>
> Nerva
>
Salve ,
I agree with Nerva !
This list is the forum of our nation it should not be restricted in any
further way as the Yahoo baselines: basically no porn, no insults.
All other regulations are limiting freedom of speech which is one of the
basic human rights.
The insistance of the list censor in imposing those extra regulation
shows nothing more then her totalitarian mind.
Vale,
Manius Villius Limitanus
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] The Language Policy |
| From: |
Michel Loos <loos@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 04 Jul 2001 06:40:29 -0300 |
|
Pompeia Cornelia Strabo wrote:
>
> I have a solution!!!!
>
> Priscilla and I can quite our jobs (young Vedia can be shipped off to
> boarding school......after all, she is an "older" baby now), and we shall
> take full time courses in several languages at NR expense of course, so that
> we can moderate the list (and it needs to be moderated) in several different
> languages, so we can avoid appearing like dictators by asking for the
> courtesy of an English translation for us poor English-speaking gals.
>
Salve Quirites,
first time black on white:
The language policy exists in order for the list to be effectively
censored.
Just an official confirmation of what is going on.
Vale,
Manius Villius Limitanus
> How would this be?
>
> Po
> _________________________________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] Animal Sacrifice |
| From: |
"Aulus Sertorius" <aulus_sertorius@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 04 Jul 2001 09:20:19 -0500 |
|
Salve,
I'm curious as to if anyone in today's world still practices animal sacrifice whether for tradition or for the religous aspect of it and what are the views of Nova Romans about this practice going on in the modern world? If we were to build a temple, would we include these acts that were quite common in ancient Rome and Greece. Of course, if one was to do it - it would have to be eaten otherwise the local law enforcement might have something else to say. Does anyone see it as wrong, right or maybe even useful in pleasing the gods?
Myself, I don't see it as right nor wrong. If it pleases the gods, do it because you get to feast afterwards on the meat and you may get the gods' blessings. If it doesn't, or if it is illegal, you might aswell avoid it. But what different is killing an animal for religous purposes and then feasting than to say, kill an animal for immediate consumption?
One last note, has anyone else seen the latin translation of Cat in Hat by Dr.Seuss? I was looking through the bookstore the other day and I saw the book in the Latin lauguage section. Now that I think about it, that book would come in handy for those who were learning latin for the first time.
Vale,
---
-Aulus Sertorius Doctus
"Doctus Maximus!"
Join 18 million Eudora users by signing up for a free Eudora Web-Mail account at http://www.eudoramail.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
RE: [novaroma] Example of Unconstitutional Regulation |
| From: |
"JusticeCMO" <justicecmo@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 4 Jul 2001 11:06:42 -0400 |
|
Salve,
This is interesting. You have just proven the *need* for moderation. You
state:
>>This list is the forum of our nation it should not be restricted in any
further way as the Yahoo baselines: basically no porn, no insults.>>
No insults? Obviously you do not feel that repeatedly calling me names such
as <for a small sample of your work>: Nazi, censor, Saddam Hussein,
constitute insults. Obviously if people like yourself cannot even recognize
when you are being insulting there is every need for a moderator to monitor
your behavior. ::tongue firmly in cheek.
Bottom line Limitanus is that you delight in trying to annoy me with
insults. That kind of juvenile behavior, along with the head games played
by people like Nerva are *exactly* why this List is moderated. For someone
who complains so much, here is an idea: try being part of the solution and
not part of the problem.
>>The insistance of the list censor in imposing those extra regulation shows
nothing more then her totalitarian mind.>>
You know, I can't tell if you are just difficult to educate or if you just
get so involved in your hatred of me personally that you cannot read.
Please point out where I am "insisting" on ANY of these policies. Please
point out, specifically, where I have "imposed" anything in this discussion.
You lose credibility every time you post these ridiculous accusations.
Vale,
Priscilla Vedia Serena
Curatrix Sermonis
Vale,
Manius Villius Limitanus
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
RE: [novaroma] The Language Policy |
| From: |
"JusticeCMO" <justicecmo@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 4 Jul 2001 11:14:00 -0400 |
|
Salve,
>>first time black on white: The language policy exists in order for the
list to be effectively
censored. Just an official confirmation of what is going on.>>
LOL You are actually becoming funny!
Yes my dear Limitanus, you have successfully uncovered the deep secret plot
of myself and Pompeia: We need to be able to <gasp!> READ the messages in
order to effectively do our jobs. My goodness, the nation can rest easy now
that you have puzzled that out.
::rolling eyes::
Get serious Limitanus! You consider it "censoring" for me to do my job?
Well my boy, you are in for a world of disappointment and hysteria over
nonexistent oppression for quite a while in that case, as I have no
intention of *not* doing my job effectively.
Vale,
Priscilla Vedia Serena
Curatrix Sermonis
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] The Language Policy |
| From: |
"L. Sicinius Drusus" <lsicinius@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 4 Jul 2001 08:46:36 -0700 (PDT) |
|
--- Michel Loos <loos@--------> wrote:
> Pompeia Cornelia Strabo wrote:
> >
> > I have a solution!!!!
> >
> > Priscilla and I can quite our jobs (young Vedia
> can be shipped off to
> > boarding school......after all, she is an "older"
> baby now), and we shall
> > take full time courses in several languages at NR
> expense of course, so that
> > we can moderate the list (and it needs to be
> moderated) in several different
> > languages, so we can avoid appearing like
> dictators by asking for the
> > courtesy of an English translation for us poor
> English-speaking gals.
> >
> Salve Quirites,
>
> first time black on white:
> The language policy exists in order for the list to
> be effectively
> censored.
> Just an official confirmation of what is going on.
>
> Vale,
>
> Manius Villius Limitanus
Salve Mani Villi,
I would suggest that you look into the Macro National
laws regarding defamation of character. Your habit of
calling those you disagree with odious terms like
"Nazi" falls under these laws. Unless you can prove
that the person you are applying that term to, is in
fact a member of the Nazi Party, you could have a
lawsuit filed against you in an American or a British
court. Personally I could care less if you had a
judgment filed against you in either of these nations,
however the laws in the US and the UK also allow the
person you have insulted to file legal action against
the people responsible for this list, Nova Roma,
resulting in a judgment against Nova Roma Inc. and
it's board of directors (The Senate).
Due to our present finances such a judgment would wipe
us out. Because of your inability to refrain from
using personal insults your posts do "represent an
imminent and clear danger to the Republic" and are
rightfully "censored".
What you may think of these laws does NOT give Nova
Roma the leeway to ignore them. I would suggest that
you take your complaints to the governments of the
United States the United Kingdom, and any other nation
that has these laws on the books, rather than
parroting the same old tired distortions of the
policies of this list.
Vale,
L. Sicinius Drusus
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] The Language Policy |
| From: |
"Pompeia Cornelia Strabo" <scriba_forum@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 04 Jul 2001 16:05:17 -0000 |
|
>From: Michel Loos <loos@-------->
>Reply-To: novaroma@--------
>To: novaroma@--------
>Subject: Re: [novaroma] The Language Policy
>Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2001 06:40:29 -0300
>
>Pompeia Cornelia Strabo wrote:
> >
> > I have a solution!!!!
> >
> > Priscilla and I can quite our jobs (young Vedia can be shipped off to
> > boarding school......after all, she is an "older" baby now), and we
>shall
> > take full time courses in several languages at NR expense of course, so
>that
> > we can moderate the list (and it needs to be moderated) in several
>different
> > languages, so we can avoid appearing like dictators by asking for the
> > courtesy of an English translation for us poor English-speaking gals.
> >
>Salve Quirites,
>
>first time black on white:
>The language policy exists in order for the list to be effectively
>censored.
Pompeia:
No, just effectively moderated.........and by the way, do we get any points
for offering to get a translated for a poster who is not comfortable
communicating in English??...........just wonderin
>Just an official confirmation of what is going on.
>
>Vale,
>
>Manius Villius Limitanus
>
>
>
> > How would this be?
> >
> > Po
> >
>_________________________________________________________________________
> > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at
>http://www.hotmail.com.
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
>http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Example of Unconstitutional Regulation |
| From: |
Michel Loos <loos@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 04 Jul 2001 13:15:40 -0300 |
|
JusticeCMO wrote:
>
> Salve,
>
> This is interesting. You have just proven the *need* for moderation. You
> state:
>
> >>This list is the forum of our nation it should not be restricted in any
> further way as the Yahoo baselines: basically no porn, no insults.>>
>
> No insults? Obviously you do not feel that repeatedly calling me names such
> as <for a small sample of your work>: Nazi, censor, Saddam Hussein,
> constitute insults. Obviously if people like yourself cannot even recognize
> when you are being insulting there is every need for a moderator to monitor
> your behavior. ::tongue firmly in cheek.
>
> Bottom line Limitanus is that you delight in trying to annoy me with
> insults. That kind of juvenile behavior, along with the head games played
> by people like Nerva are *exactly* why this List is moderated. For someone
> who complains so much, here is an idea: try being part of the solution and
> not part of the problem.
>
> >>The insistance of the list censor in imposing those extra regulation shows
> nothing more then her totalitarian mind.>>
>
> You know, I can't tell if you are just difficult to educate or if you just
> get so involved in your hatred of me personally that you cannot read.
> Please point out where I am "insisting" on ANY of these policies. Please
> point out, specifically, where I have "imposed" anything in this discussion.
>
Salvete,
my post was prepared before the last propositions of the list censor,
they just added an additional paragraph to it.
The linguistic limitation were imposed by you without any reasons.
You censoring my posts were I ask for the retirement of 2 magistrates
have nothing to do with yahoo policies.
Censuring a discussion about secession has nothing to do with yahoo
policies.
I never called you nazi, I said you are acting just the way they acted
in 1933 (not in 1941). Saddam Hussein is part of our history and
present: he treats the Kurd problem just the way you want to treat any
talk on secession. You are not Saddam Hussein you are Priscilla Vedia
Serena.
Both the nazis and Saddam Hussein are proud of their name: they are
realities not insults.
Each time one uses an historical example you feel insulted, it is you
that does not see the difference between aproveiting the lessons of
history and insults.
You are effectively censoring this list. I asked it before how would you
call it if the US government appointed somebody in order to read papers
to be published before publication with the power of denying its
publication?
Would you call that "moderation"?
Perhaps you are not conscient of what you are doing, but you are laying
down the foundations which all those regimes used to come to their
ultimate excesses which we both condemn. Hitler could have been stopped
in Locarno, hardly in Muenchen after that it was too late. We need to
act ehile the serpent is still in its egg.
Vale,
Manius Villius Limitanus.
> You lose credibility every time you post these ridiculous accusations.
>
> Vale,
> Priscilla Vedia Serena
> Curatrix Sermonis
>
> Vale,
>
> Manius Villius Limitanus
>
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
> 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] Re: New List Policies - Proposal for discussion |
| From: |
Bill Gawne <gawne@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 04 Jul 2001 12:29:49 -0400 |
|
Priscilla Vedia Serena scripsit:
[Proposed changes to current list policies]
> 1. Signatures: the new policy would require that all posts are signed. This
> has been a rather small problem but one which a number of people have
> approached me about. Considering that all members receive the "welcome"
> text containing our policies, even non-citizens would know to sign posts
> with their mundane name.
I have no personal problem with this, as my name is already found in
other places around the 'net. But, since the novaroma main list is
available on the web as an open list that non-members can access,
it is possible certain list members would not want their real names
available to a web search. I note that a number of our cives have
created special e-mail accounts just for their NovaRoma correspondence,
and I'd imagine they want to retain their Roman identity here.
> 2. Posting of Policies: the new policy would require that I post the entire
> "welcome/policy" text to the Main List on a monthly basis. Some feel this
> would be beneficial as a reminder to members as to how they are to behave,
> while others feel it is unnecessary repetition, as the file is available
> 24/7 on the website for personal review.
I suspect a significant number of people don't know it is available
on a website. Pehaps instead of posting the entire text, we could
simply have a link to the website posted periodically?
> 3.Number of messages: a point has been raised that a small number of members
> make the vast majority of posts. For the sake of discussion, let us say the
> new policy would limit all members to a maximum of three posts per day.
> Obviously, there will be some excellent arguments for and against this one,
> so I am eager to hear what people think. Monthly traffic on the List *is*
> averaging 1000 posts, but on the other hand this is currently our *main*
> forum.
I participate in a couple of USENET newsgroups where average daily
volume runs over 200 posts. By comparison, I find the novaroma list
small. But I can see how it looks huge for people who find their
e-mail accounts flooded with NR mail.
A limit on number of posts might help to cut the volume. Though the
Law Of Unintended Consequences may lead to our most prolific posters
simply sending in three very long posts each day, and not cutting back
the volume of their traffic at all.
Have we ever tried a voluntary effort at limiting list traffic? It seems
to me that each privatus citizen could, as a part of civic duty, self-
limit posts here on the main list to no more than 5 per day, and no
more than 20 per week. Magistrates acting in the course of their
official duties might have to post more often, but could still set
an example by limiting those posts they make in their privatus capacity.
> 4. Politics: an argument has been made that the intense focus on politics
> here on the Main List drowns out all other interests.
I agree. All too often it does.
> For the sake of
> discussion, let us say the new policy would require that all political
> discussion would be moved to a new official list for that express purpose.
I understand the desire for this, but I think it would be impossible
to enforce. This list *is* our Forum, and there's going to be some
political discussion here no matter what.
That said, I do think separate lists focused on politics would be
a good idea. Something like a Plebian Assembly list might help,
(Well, it wouldn't help Patricians who couldn't be there.) or a
list representing the entire Centuriate Assembly.
> 5. E-mail addresses: the new policy would require all citizens to use their
> official (listed with the Censors) e-mail address for the Main List. This
> would make it very simple to verify whether a poster is a citizen or not.
I don't like this, simply because I read the NR list on the web,
and post - on the rare occassions I post - from three possible
different addresses. All of those are registered with Yahoo, and
I'd think that information is easily available to the list moderator
if there's any question of my identity. I understand that we don't
want one person to have "sock puppet" accounts where they appear to
have multiple identities, but for someone like me who has the same
identity at multiple accounts, I think the way Yahoo handles it
right now is just fine.
More importantly... why are we interested in verifying whether or not
a poster is a citizen? (I confess I may have missed the reasoning,
I skip over far more NR posts than I read.) Since the mailing list
is open, and does not require NR citizenship, why should anyone care
whether or not a given poster is a citizen?
Gnaeus Equitius Marinus / Bill Gawne
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Example of Unconstitutional Regulation |
| From: |
Amulius Claudius Petrus <pkkt@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 04 Jul 2001 12:58:17 -0400 |
|
Manius Villius Limitanus wrote:
> I never called you nazi, I said you are acting just the way they acted
> in 1933 (not in 1941). Saddam Hussein is part of our history and
> present: he treats the Kurd problem just the way you want to treat any
> talk on secession. You are not Saddam Hussein you are Priscilla Vedia
> Serena.
> Both the nazis and Saddam Hussein are proud of their name: they are
> realities not insults.
Telling someone they "act" like a Nazi is much the same as calling one a
Nazi. Your just twisting words around but getting no where in the process.
> I asked it before how would you
> call it if the US government appointed somebody in order to read papers
> to be published before publication with the power of denying its
> publication?
It is necessary when it's your only efficient way of communication on all
levels of a society, political, religious etc.
>
> Perhaps you are not conscient of what you are doing, but you are laying
> down the foundations which all those regimes used to come to their
> ultimate excesses which we both condemn. Hitler could have been stopped
> in Locarno, hardly in Muenchen after that it was too late. We need to
> act ehile the serpent is still in its egg.
I can vaguely see your fear in singling out posts. Like I said before it is
necessary though when you only have one efficient source of communication
used by the majority. If it was a free for all we would never get anything
done because we would all be fighting each other. Step back a bit and relax,
we are not about to be taken over by a evil dictator... its going to be all
right.
"Quamquam cupido sis delictum ab sui crebro suum mater ab vitualis"
"Though ambition may be a fault in itself it is often the mother of virtues"
--
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] Nova Roma Capita XVI et XVII |
| From: |
"Pompeia Cornelia Strabo" <scriba_forum@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 04 Jul 2001 17:06:39 -0000 |
|
Salvete Draco et alii:
Well written Draco, and well worth waiting for. I am always left
anticipating what is going to happen next.
A nice representation of several NR citizens and other personalities.
Bene valete!
Pompeia Cornelia
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Animal Sacrifice |
| From: |
"Julie & Lawrence Brooks" <anubis@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 4 Jul 2001 12:48:45 -0400 |
|
As a Wiccan, I personally want no involvement with anything that has to do with animal sacrifice. I would report such an act, if I witnessed it, to the proper authorities for animal abuse.
Varia Cassia
----- Original Message -----
From: Aulus Sertorius
To: novaroma@--------
Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2001 10:20 AM
Subject: [novaroma] Animal Sacrifice
Salve,
I'm curious as to if anyone in today's world still practices animal sacrifice whether for tradition or for the religous aspect of it and what are the views of Nova Romans about this practice going on in the modern world? If we were to build a temple, would we include these acts that were quite common in ancient Rome and Greece. Of course, if one was to do it - it would have to be eaten otherwise the local law enforcement might have something else to say. Does anyone see it as wrong, right or maybe even useful in pleasing the gods?
Myself, I don't see it as right nor wrong. If it pleases the gods, do it because you get to feast afterwards on the meat and you may get the gods' blessings. If it doesn't, or if it is illegal, you might aswell avoid it. But what different is killing an animal for religous purposes and then feasting than to say, kill an animal for immediate consumption?
One last note, has anyone else seen the latin translation of Cat in Hat by Dr.Seuss? I was looking through the bookstore the other day and I saw the book in the Latin lauguage section. Now that I think about it, that book would come in handy for those who were learning latin for the first time.
Vale,
---
-Aulus Sertorius Doctus
"Doctus Maximus!"
Join 18 million Eudora users by signing up for a free Eudora Web-Mail account at http://www.eudoramail.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
[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] Animal Sacrifice |
| From: |
Steven - Piparskeggr <catamount_grange@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 04 Jul 2001 12:45:08 -0500 |
|
Avete omnes et salve Varia Cassia,
Julie & Lawrence Brooks wrote:
>
> As a Wiccan, I personally want no involvement with anything that has to do with animal sacrifice. I would report such an act, if I witnessed it, to the proper authorities for animal abuse.
>
> Varia Cassia
>
If I may?
The US Supreme Court has ruled that animal sacrifice is a valid and
protected religious act. This arose out of a lawsuit involving a
Santeria "congregation" in Florida, USA.
So, such an act (in the US) would not be covered under the animal
protection laws, unless botched quite badly.
If an animal sacrifice is carried out properly, the animal is pampered
until the time of execution and is dispatched more swiftly and humanely
than the average slaughter house which prepares marketable meat.
I know Heathens who have performed sacrifices of swine. I know them to
be honorable and caring people, and very dedicated to That Which is
Holy. In over 25 years of existence this group has performed such
sacrifice a handful of times.
Other religions sacrifice much more frequently, such as the
aforementioned Santeria.
One could also look at the rituals follwed for slaughter under Jewish
and Islamic dietary law as a sacrifice of sorts.
I perform a sacrifice every time I slay an animal while hunting.
Otherwise, the natural progression of sacrifice in any religion seems to
trend away from living animals (human and other) to once living
substances (wine, bread, flowers, wreaths and so forth) and crafted
objects (jewelry, weapons, pottery, etceteras).
In my religious devotions I usually offer ale, mead, wine or other
beverage, and sometimes a plate of food. I bury coins everytime I go
hunting and also make a pour of mead to the Landspirits. If I am
successful, I toast the animal's spirit.
Bloodshed and violence are a part of all the phases of life.
Brutality is what we seek to avoid as caring beings.
--
=========================================
In Amicus sub Fidelis
- Piperbarbus Ullerius Venator
Cives et Paterfamilias
My homestead
http://www.river-wood-samfelag.org
File of my Poems and Songs
http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/Pip_music/files/
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Animal Sacrifice |
| From: |
margali <margali@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 04 Jul 2001 13:53:31 -0400 |
|
Except for the fact that in the US as part of a valid religous
tradition [and done properly] it is both legal and no crueler
that slaughter. IIRC, the roman tradition was cutting the throats
of sheep/goats and some of the cattle, and neck snapping for
poultry/birds. Pretty much how animals are slaughtered in the US
today. [well, OK, some slaughter houses use a bolt gun to crack
the skulls of cows and pigs, but YMMV. To be kosher they have to
be cut.]
Try reporting me for abuse? Not that I do animal sacrifice, mind
you, but if you are abrogating my right to freedom of religion,
you will become familiar with our legal system from the inside.
margali
Hyapatia Asinia Margali
~~~~~
the quote starts here:
As a Wiccan, I personally want no involvement with anything that
has to do with
animal sacrifice. I would report such an act, if I witnessed it,
to the proper
authorities for animal abuse.
Varia Cassia
Note well - The specific case on point:
U.S. Supreme Court
CHURCH OF LUKUMI BABALU AYE v. CITY OF HIALEAH, 508 U.S. 520
(1993)
508 U.S. 520
CHURCH OF LUKUMI BABALU AYE, INC. v. CITY OF HIALEAH
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH
CIRCUIT
No. 91-948
Argued November 4, 1992
Decided June 11, 1993
JUSTICE KENNEDY delivered the opinion of the Court, except as to
Part II-A-2.Fn
The principle that government may not enact laws that suppress
religious belief or practice is so well understood that few
violations are recorded in our opinions. Cf. McDaniel v. Paty,
435 U.S. 618 (1978); Fowler v. Rhode Island, 345 U.S. 67 (1953).
Concerned that [this [fundamental nonpersecution principle] of
the First Amendment was implicated here,] however, we granted
certiorari. 503 U.S. 935 (1992). [508 U.S. 520, 524]
Our review confirms that the laws in question were enacted by
officials who did not understand, failed to perceive, or chose to
ignore the fact that their official actions violated the Nation's
essential commitment to religious freedom. The challenged laws
had an impermissible object; and in all events, the principle of
general applicability was violated because the secular ends
asserted in defense of the laws were pursued only with respect to
conduct motivated by religious beliefs. We invalidate the
challenged enactments, and reverse the judgment of the Court of
Appeals.
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] Re: Animal Sacrifice |
| From: |
"Lucius Sicinius Drusus" <lsicinius@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 04 Jul 2001 18:43:12 -0000 |
|
--- In novaroma@--------, "Julie & Lawrence Brooks" <anubis@s...> wrote:
> As a Wiccan, I personally want no involvement with anything that has
to do with animal sacrifice. I would report such an act, if I
witnessed it, to the proper authorities for animal abuse.
>
> Varia Cassia
>
Salve,
Then I would suggest that you avoid any rites that will include sacrifice.
I would also expect that a Wiccan would have a better understanding of
what it feels like when people seek to force their religion on you.
Frankly I see no differance in your attitude, and that of a
Fundementalist Christian who is attacking the Wiccan Religion.
Vale,
L. Sicinius Drusus
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
RE: [novaroma] Totalitarism |
| From: |
Gnaeus Salix Astur <salixastur@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 4 Jul 2001 11:57:17 -0700 (PDT) |
|
Salvete omnes.
--- Marek Grajek <MarekJG@--------> wrote:
<<snipped>>
> Now let us get back to your thesis concerning totalitarianism. I must
> admit
> my experience with NR is not long and deep enough to serve a
> judgement, all
> I can do is using historical parallels again. I do recall that
> excessive and
> general involvement into politics together with the decline of the
> traditional Roman virtues did lead to the switch from the Republic to
> the
> Principate and then Dominate. I do not know if Nova Roma is this far
> in its
> political evolution.
I have to disagree. The Principate appeared as a solution for the
previous Civil Wars. The reason that caused these Civil Wars was not
"excessive and general involvement"; it was, in fact, the opposite: a
deep involvement of a few factions and families that left aside the
general populace, which was simply used as a "weapon" to attack each
other through structures like clientelism.
Besides, if you are against an "excessive and general involvement" in
politics, I guess you must support totalitarism in all its forms,
including Communism and Fascism. Those two systems have been very good
at avoiding "excessive and general involvement".
=====
Bene Valete in Pace Deorum!
Gnaeus Salix Astur.
Scriba ad Res Externas Academiae Thules.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] The Language Policy |
| From: |
"Raina Faolan" <GuruPoet@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 04 Jul 2001 16:48:56 -0400 |
|
Salve,
I think Pompeia was trying to display sarcasm and humor with her post. I'm
sorry but I cannot picture my soror "censoring" or the notion of "censoring"
anyone without good reason or at all period, she's too kind hearted for that
sort of thing.
Vale,
Aeternia
>From: Michel Loos <loos@-------->
>Reply-To: novaroma@--------
>To: novaroma@--------
>Subject: Re: [novaroma] The Language Policy
>Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2001 06:40:29 -0300
>
>Pompeia Cornelia Strabo wrote:
> >
> > I have a solution!!!!
> >
> > Priscilla and I can quite our jobs (young Vedia can be shipped off to
> > boarding school......after all, she is an "older" baby now), and we
>shall
> > take full time courses in several languages at NR expense of course, so
>that
> > we can moderate the list (and it needs to be moderated) in several
>different
> > languages, so we can avoid appearing like dictators by asking for the
> > courtesy of an English translation for us poor English-speaking gals.
> >
>Salve Quirites,
>
>first time black on white:
>The language policy exists in order for the list to be effectively
>censored.
>Just an official confirmation of what is going on.
>
>Vale,
>
>Manius Villius Limitanus
>
>
>
> > How would this be?
> >
> > Po
> >
>_________________________________________________________________________
> > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at
>http://www.hotmail.com.
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
>http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
_________________________________________________________________
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: |
[novaroma] animal sacrifice |
| From: |
"Julie & Lawrence Brooks" <anubis@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 4 Jul 2001 14:34:15 -0400 |
|
As I said in my post "I" want no involvement in it. It is your business
what you choose to do as long as it is within the law. We all have to
follow our own moral and ethical codes. Again, if I saw the animal was
being abused, as has happened in some cases, I would turn them in within a
heartbeart. I did not say that this particular person (whoever it was, I
can't keep the names straight yet), would do so. T
There are humane ways to kill and and inhumane. And yes there are slaughter
houses which do it inhumanely, and I think that it is wrong, because there
is no need for that. We all have to eat, it's the way nature balances
itself. I just do not happen to agree with animal sacrifice or human
sacrifice for any reason, especially for the reason of some so-called deity,
who may or may not exist, or may be just figments of our imagination. I'm
sorry if this statement may tick someone(s) off, but again I am entitled to
my opinion.
Those who feel they can justify such an animal sacrifice within their own
moral, ethical and religious rights, then that is up to them. I don't live
with their code, I live with mine.
Varia Cassia
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] Re: Animal Sacrifice |
| From: |
"Marcus Cassius Julianus" <cassius622@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 04 Jul 2001 21:08:33 -0000 |
|
--- In novaroma@--------, "Aulus Sertorius" <aulus_sertorius@e...> wrote:
> Salve,
>
> I'm curious as to if anyone in today's world still practices animal
sacrifice whether for tradition or for the religous aspect of it and
what are the views of Nova Romans about this practice going on in the
modern world? If we were to build a temple, would we include these
acts that were quite common in ancient Rome and Greece. Of course, if
one was to do it - it would have to be eaten otherwise the local law
enforcement might have something else to say. Does anyone see it as
wrong, right or maybe even useful in pleasing the gods?
Cassius:
As I am sure you have seen by now, Nova Romans are divided on the
question of animal sacrifice. I personally do not care for it, even
though I do eat meat, and though sacrifice is legal in the US, and
even though it is at least in theory more humane than "commercial"
methods of slaughtering.
I have a *personal* dislike for sacrifice simply because I do not
feel it is necessary in the modern world. Most religion and
spirituality seems to have evolved beyond the need for it... and I am
convinced on a personal level that the Gods do not require the life
force of animals in order to survive. In the ancient
world "sacrifice" was a way to give something of importance to the
Gods. Animals were wealth. Today, animals are not the expression of
wealth for most of us. I can't think of any Nova Romans who count
their worldly belongings in the number of cattle they own.
Yet there are those that disagree with me. I respect that opinion
though I cannot endorse it. My *hope* is that sacrifice will not
become an official policy. Most modern people have neither the
facilities, knowledge or circumstances to do it in the way it would
need be done. SOME people DO have the knowledge and circumstances to
get it right. Folks living on a farm, etc. But that is a far cry from
the urban lives of most of us.
> Myself, I don't see it as right nor wrong. If it pleases the gods,
do it because you get to feast afterwards on the meat and you may get
the gods' blessings. If it doesn't, or if it is illegal, you might
aswell avoid it. But what different is killing an animal for religous
purposes and then feasting than to say, kill an animal for immediate
consumption?
>
Cassius:
No difference at all of course. However, I found a great personal
distaste from the few rituals (Non religio, mind you!) where animal
sacrifice was done. I myself found the energy to be far too base and
primal to encourage anything I would call spirituality or worship. I
grew up in farm country and have killed my share of animals for food.
The food chain is indeed a part of life, but it ain't religion to me.
For other folks it's different, I know... but different strokes for
different folks.
I notice that this thread comes up every six months or so, and always
starts a huge argument. Perhaps a blurb ought to be added to the FAQ,
so that new folks coming in don't continually repeat the question and
get the same answer that other folks have had to endure five or six
times now? I believe I'll bring the notion up in the NRPriesthood
list, and with the Collegium Pontificum.
Valete,
Marcus Cassius Julianus
Pontifex Maximus
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] LAND PURSUITS: ADDRESS FROM PROPRAETRIX CANADA ORIENTALIS |
| From: |
Maximina Octavia <myownq@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 4 Jul 2001 12:58:06 -0700 (PDT) |
|
Pompeia Cornelia Strabo <scriba_forum@--------> wrote:
Propraetrix Canada Orientalis Pompeia Cornelia Strabo Senate et Populus
Novae Romae S.P.D.
Wrote:
Let us purchase land for us as Nova Romani to use to promote ourselves, and
to hold physical gatherings, both private and public. Let us use this land
to promote Nova Roma in the eyes of the world, and to nurture each other in
the celebration of the things we embrace and enjoy.
I see this as a place where we could hold:
Public Festivals and Musical Concerts
Roman Military Reenactments
Pontificial Retreats or Retreats held by the collegium of a member of the
collegium
Religious Festivals
Conventions, could be provincial, gens conventions
Senatorial Summits
This is a place which could be shared by all of us,and a place which could
be used to generate income toward more complex and expensive goals.
Personally, I think we *need* this venue to nourish our growth and our
desire for phyical contact with other Nova Romani, and I think we need this
as a means of showing the public what we truly are, giving them time to
recognize that we are a people of a peaceful, nonthreatening mission. And
then, we can perhaps talk physical sovereignity, as opposed to it being a
vision in our hearts.
WHAT ARE WE TRULY??? (again no yelling)
Let me begin by saying what I think we truly are *not*. We are not an
Italian village (sorry to the suggestor of this), we are not *history
buffs*, although the latter is within our purview. We are a group of
citizens of a macronation called Nova Roma. We seek to purchase land for
the celebration and enjoyment of the culture, history, philosophies, and
spiritualities of Roma Antiquita Res publica. Period!
Granted Rome could at one point be considered an Italian village, but such a
statement is not completely true of Nova Roma, is it? Let us be honest
about who we are, and not be fearful of presenting ourselves and our
constitution to our host micronation. To do anything less would imply that
we have something to hide.....nope, actually we have much to give, don't we
quirites?
One step at a time. We get the land. We then dot our I's and cross our
T's in terms of what we will do to dress the land up. A forum, shops, food
vendors, events, that stuff. How often is it available to the public?
Perhaps not always.....during religious retreats, perhaps privacy is
desired, if intimate sharing of religous rituals and personal experiences
are involved.
ADDENDUM (I'm not going to tell you I am not yelling :))
I will say some things in favour of Canada as a location, but please do not
feel I am not in favour of an alternate location, if the consensus is such:
U.S. dollars are worth 40-50% more than Canadian dollars and this has been
pretty constant for a long time.
Interest rates in Canada and U.S. are quite low. In 1980 in Canada during
the recession they were 20% (!).....they are now running at approx. 6.8-8%
depending on the terms.
Canada is very multicultural in nature. This is one neck of planet Earth
where Nova Roma would likely be best received. Our goverment has been
singing a litany to multiculturalism for years.
Although it might cost some folks in the U.S. more to travel to Canada
(thinking of the south) the cost of expenses, once there, is very low. And
it is not like people are going to travel to this venue every week.
In close (finally!)......hey wake up!!. There is nothing wrong with
purchasing a piece of land which is appropriate, taking into account the
aforementioned. We could sit on it, and it could always be resold.
Salve Propraetrix,
Generally, I agree with your opinions. I have often wanted to move to Canada, however, my husband is a tropical kind of guy.
I agree that the focus of the property purchase should be closest to the majority of the participants as well.
The only part that concerns me is the real estate market fluctuations referring to your statement that the land can be sold. The interest rates look especially appealing right now.
If we could purchase property when we are certain that it is a buyers market, then we would possibly be making a good investment that could be sold later if necessary and at a profit.
Also, we must be prepared to suffer a loss or even "sit" on the property as you said until it can be resold. This may take years and maybe more years. Therefore, I heartily agree that a the property not be purchased sight unseen and that it somehow be used to bring in a profit.
Although there are a lot of great ideas from everyone, I have to agree that this is a "complex" matter that may take quite some time to come to fruition. From this point forward, perhaps some of the profits from the public activities (festivals, conventions, etc.) of Nova Roma could go toward this goal as stated in a fund.
This has been a great brainstorm. Thank you for your kind indulgence. It is quite and honor to be part of the Main List. I will continue to try and support, participate and contribute as much as I am able.
Vale, Maximina Octavia
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
[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] Animal Sacrifice |
| From: |
"Raina Faolan" <GuruPoet@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 04 Jul 2001 17:15:53 -0400 |
|
>From: "Aulus Sertorius" <aulus_sertorius@-------->
>Reply-To: novaroma@--------
>To: novaroma@--------
>Subject: [novaroma] Animal Sacrifice
>Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2001 09:20:19 -0500
>
>Salve,
>
>I'm curious as to if anyone in today's world still practices animal
>sacrifice whether for tradition or for the religous aspect of it and what
>are the views of Nova Romans about this practice going on in the modern
>world? If we were to build a temple, would we include these acts that were
>quite common in ancient Rome and Greece. Of course, if one was to do it -
>it would have to be eaten otherwise the local law enforcement might have
>something else to say. Does anyone see it as wrong, right or maybe even
>useful in pleasing the gods?
Aeternia respondit: Salvete, you may want to look on this lists archives.
There was an "Animal Sacrifice" discussion/debate a few months ago (pity
can't remember the month), I think you'll intrested in reading the
responses. Now my honest opinion, since I'm vegan/veg head I couldn't do it.
I use fruit in my sacrfices/rituals, it's all about the fruit for me :-).
>
>Myself, I don't see it as right nor wrong. If it pleases the gods, do it
>because you get to feast afterwards on the meat and you may get the gods'
>blessings. If it doesn't, or if it is illegal, you might aswell avoid it.
>But what different is killing an animal for religous purposes and then
>feasting than to say, kill an animal for immediate consumption?
Aeternia respondit iterum: I can see where you're coming from on this, and
I'm wondering should I respond without seeming "illogical". (what can I say
I have those kind of moments).
>
>One last note, has anyone else seen the latin translation of Cat in Hat by
>Dr.Seuss? I was looking through the bookstore the other day and I saw the
>book in the Latin lauguage section. Now that I think about it, that book
>would come in handy for those who were learning latin for the first time.
Aeternia respondit addendum: Yes, I have seen it on Barnes&Noble.com a few
months ago. Not sure if they still have it or not.
Valete Bene,
Aeternia
>
>Vale,
>---
>-Aulus Sertorius Doctus
>"Doctus Maximus!"
>
>
>Join 18 million Eudora users by signing up for a free Eudora Web-Mail
>account at http://www.eudoramail.com
_________________________________________________________________
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: |
[novaroma] Re: Nova Roma Home |
| From: |
"Marcus Cassius Julianus" <cassius622@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 04 Jul 2001 21:23:00 -0000 |
|
--- In novaroma@--------, europamoon7@-------- wrote:
> Avete,
>
> I feel that whatever property we purchase should be self-sustaining
> at the very least. There's no point in acquiring anything if we
will be dependent on citizens to pay for it. That's really an
unnecessary burden on us and a very risky proposition.
Cassius respondit:
As far as I can tell, there is only one practical way for land
purchased by Nova Roma to be "self sustaining". That is to buy the
most affordable land possible, and then make use of it as an asset
for publicity. Land would turn us from an "internet group" to a "real
world" organization instantly and there is a lot to be gained from
that.
I can't think of any other way that land can pay for itself. We can't
afford to buy prime farm land and farm it, or land with other
resources to make use of, or any of the other "common" methods of
making land pay. Yet land of any stripe would be a huge asset for us,
and useful to help bring us into a more permanent and material
existence.
> A lot of planning should
> go into what would be done with the property once we would have it.
I suggest our financial body come up with some plans and present them
> to all citizens for discussion before anything is ever actually
> done. Just buying in the hopes of meeting the financial
obligations
> is both reckless and irresponsible. All of our ventures should be
> handled as business ventures as are other non-profits. There
should
> be a clear and concise outline as to the nature of the acquisition
> and it's purpose and projected outcome. This may not seem romantic
> but it is practical.
>
Cassius:
Just call me Mr. Reckless and Irresponsible! I believe firmly in the
benefits of owning land, and fully intend to work toward achieving it
as a goal. We must of course make solid plans and discuss everything
in detail - but we must also accept the fact that we will never agree
100% on whether to even BUY land, never mind which land to buy or
what to do with it.
Valete,
Marcus Cassius Julianus
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Re: Nova Roma Home |
| From: |
Amulius Claudius Petrus <pkkt@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 04 Jul 2001 17:45:50 -0400 |
|
Marcus Cassius Julianus wrote:
> That is to buy the
> most affordable land possible, and then make use of it as an asset
> for publicity.
>Land would turn us from an "internet group" to a "real
> world" organization instantly and there is a lot to be gained from
> that.
Salve Marce Cassi Juliane,
I fully believe that for this nations destiny to be achieved we must take
the path of purchasing affordable land, although having the most affordable
land possible means having land in the middle of no where. If we save our
money we will be able to buy land that is still affordable plus useful for
more then publicity. Our land should have easy access for citizens that
funded it along with affordability. It will be great to say we are a
physical real word organisation although that will only get us so far.
Donec infra,
"Quamquam cupido sis delictum ab sui crebro suum mater ab vitualis"
"Though ambition may be a fault in itself it is often the mother of virtues"
--
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] Praise and Policies |
| From: |
Maximina Octavia <myownq@--------> |
| Date: |
Wed, 4 Jul 2001 15:20:22 -0700 (PDT) |
|
Amulius Claudius Petrus <pkkt@--------> wrote:
Salve,
I wish to congratulate our outstanding list moderators for there patience in
dealing with so much criticism. You obviously have a challenging duty and do
an excellent job. I personally have broken a few little rules on the list
and have been set right and not once did I feel as if I was under a
dictatorship. This list would not be as good of a place with out the
citizens that have been given the task of not letting us rip each other to
pieces. I thank you and wish you all the best.
"Quamquam cupido sis delictum ab sui crebro suum mater ab vitualis"
"Though ambition may be a fault in itself it is often the mother of virtues"
--
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 the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Salvete,
I must agree that our moderators have a difficult task and they are to be commended. No one can possibly understand the position of a moderator unless they have done this arduous task.
As for the List Policies, this is where I stand:
1. No message should be censored unless it violates the Macronation, State laws, the Laws of Yahoo, or the laws of the Nova Roma Constitution.
2. No message should be censored unless it is a "clear and present danger. . . " which includes #1.
3. People of the intelligence level of the majority of the members should be able to be creative enough to remain civil. (Posting an uncivil message will only prove how lacking in skill and character the individual is and should therefore be put on the list for all to see.)
4. To limit politics deprives the citizens of participating and understanding the government that is so much a part of the Roman life, therefore, no moderation or censorship should apply unless it violates #1.
5. There should be no limit to postings as this would constrict free speech and the political process and multiple postings may be necessary. (There are those who think a "me too" posting is not important. I disagree. This is a citizens way of being heard and posting their vote on a particular issue. There are some folks who don't care if some one disagrees or not, however, they will during an election. Use these "me too" messages to strengthen your position, not to denigrate the participant. Otherwise, why post your opinion if you are not looking for support and agreement? One might as well talk to oneself and not participate at all.)
6. Personal attacks: Be critical privately, be civil, and praise publically. Learn what is personal and what is not. Criticize the *idea* not the person. (Is this so hard?)
Maybe instead of citizens labeling a topic as "boring", they should take into consideration that it takes all types to make Rome, not just the ones that provide "interesting" subjects. A good politician and citizen has their finger on the pulse of the people and can set aside their ego to discern the importance of even the most mundane of matters.
Lastly, censorship is an insidious enemy that will defeat Nova Roma if allowed to. Censorship of the minds of the citizens is the real enemy. Moderation should only exist to protect Nova Roma not delicate egos.
I do not mean to lecture, I am merely expressing my opinion. We are so worried about hurting someone's feelings that we forget how important free speech is.
A message to the moderators concerning personal attacks: I believe a person does more harm to oneself by becoming defensive. The majority of citizens have not asked moderators to justify their actions and trust their judgment. Just by posting the offenders message, everyone can see that they are not being censored and we can see how foolish the offender is.
As a moderator, if it were me, I would merely stick to the facts and follow the guidelines, and then I would have no reason to defend myself to anyone. I would not diginify these posts by replying and perpetuating an ugly situation. This would only give them the satisfaction they are looking for. I would only reply with a mere acknowledgement that I read the post and that it was sad that they felt that way.
And, offensive language and personal attacks hurt all Nova Romans and they are not necessary to drive home an opinion even when they are presented in a so-called "civil" manner. I entreat those who have attacked the performance of the moderators to please cease and instead make constructive suggestions that will benefit all. Isn't is better to be a hero instead of someone who has nothing better to do than complain?
Valete, Maximina Octavia
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
