Subject:	RE: [novaroma] New citizen
From:	"Vibius Invictus Naso" <jbare@-------->
Date:	Thu, 25 Oct 2001 19:44:20 -0500

Salvete,

Welcome to Nova Roma, Maia Vipsania, I myself am hoping for citizenship,
just waiting for the word. :) I too am a Sophomore in college in Wisconsin
and am also a Classics Major with a Ancient History minor. I plan to do
doctorate work in the subject and eventually teach. It is a very rewarding
subject, and its the main reason I reached out to Nova Roma. Well, good luck
in your endeavors and perhaps we can talk again!

Valete,
Vibius Invictus Naso

Now, when it wills, the fatal day (which has
only the body in its grasp) can end
my years, however long or short their span.
But, with the better part of me, I'll gain
a place that's higher than the stars: my name,
indelible, eternal, will remain.

Vivam...

-----Original Message-----
From: Lindsay Penner [mailto:lrpenner@--------]
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 3:32 PM
To: novaroma@--------
Subject: Re: [novaroma] New citizen



Salvete,

Thanks for the great welcome :) I figured I'd introduce myself and let you
all get to know me a bit.

I'm 19 years old, and a second year university student here in Calgary (I
was
born in Winnipeg, though, and even if my team's long gone, I'll be a Jets
fan
forever! *g*). I'm taking a double major in Psychology and Classics, and I
eventually plan on going into child psychiatry. I do a lot of volunteer
work
with Scouts Canada, and I work part-time as a tutor. I've been Neopagan for
three years now, and I find it to be a very rewarding way of life. I'm
taking Intermediate Latin at the moment, so I'm not all that bad at reading
the language.

Nice to meet you all.

Valete,
Maia Vipsania Serena





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

Subject:	Re: CORRECTED: Re: [novaroma] 3rd draft of Census Lex
From:	"L. Cornelius Sulla Felix" <alexious@-------->
Date:	Thu, 25 Oct 2001 19:39:57 -0700

----- Original Message -----
From: Flavius Vedius Germanicus
To: novaroma@--------
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 4:37 PM
Subject: RE: CORRECTED: Re: [novaroma] 3rd draft of Census Lex


Salvete;

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix [mailto:alexious@--------]
> Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 4:48 PM
>
> Ave, here is a repost WITH modifications of the Census lex that I wrote
> back in June. I hope this meets with the overall approval of the
> citizens of Nova Roma. I have gone back and added in, and revised it
> based on the comments I received back in June.

This is just a list of ideas, right; not the actual draft legislation to be
presented for a vote? I'll make what comments I can based on your rough
outline, short of seeing the actual text of your proposed lex. The devil is,
of course, in the details.

Sulla: Actually this was the draft. If you go back to the archieves in June, this is the intention. And, yes the devil is in the details, which is precisely why I took extra time to reread the archieves to include additional suggestions and comments from those individuals who commented on it back in June.

> 1. A Census of all citizens of Nova Roma should be done every 5 years.
> This would be the responsibility of the Censors.

Considering the fact that Nova Roma has not yet been existence for five
years, and we are already experiencing problems (indeed, that's the whole
point of the current discussion), this seems odd. If doing a Census every
five years is adequate, we shouldn't even be considering such a thing until
2003. Obviously that is not going to do.

Historically, the Census was theoretically held every five years, true. But
let us not forget that the Censors were only elected every five years as
well, and then only for a period of five months. I don't think it makes
sense to incorporate the one without the other.

Sulla: Well Consul, back in June you came out against the Census proposal at that time. (taken from message 23428 of the archieves). I am glad you have changed your mind on the need for it. The proposed legislation here is to spell out, as clearly as possible the aspects of it. Beginning with item 1. That the censors are in charge of it and that they will be conducting it.

> A. The First Census shall take place the year after this lex is
> passed.

This is not necessary. If the lex is passed after the deadline for that
year's Census, then of course it will be held for the first time the
following year. If it is passed prior to the deadline, then why wait
(potentially 18 months, if the lex is passed in March)?

Sulla: I added this in to clarify that this first Census was to be conducted as soon as possible. Nothing more nothing less.

> 2. To help facilitate the Censors in this work, according to the
> (IV.A.8. of the Constitution of Nova Roma), two new magisterial
> (Vigintisexviri) position
> would be established. Their title would be, Duumviri census populi.

I wonder why we need to add a new elected position to handle the Census.
Fortunatus is correct; that is, of course, the primary job of the Censors.
Specifically, it is an aspect of the Constitutional mandate to "maintain the
Album Civium", and thus I feel that to delegate that responsibility to some
other magistrate might even be considered unconstitutional. Now, if the
Censors feel the need to appoint scriba to assist with that job function,
that is certainly within their purview. But creating a new magistracy
specifically to help with an aspect of the job of another? I'm agin' it.

Sulla: Consul, while you have been a Censor, you have always left the duties prior to completeing a complete term, twice. I have tried to be a very proactive Censor. And, when the Censor handbook is finally published you will see the true ramifications of the extensivness of the position, spelled out in a clear and hopefully concise manner. There is a need to have subordiantes whose duties will be to oversee the actually conduction of the Censorship while the Censors have to balance their time on the MANY Plethora of duties that must be performed on a near daily basis. I have stated in the past discussions on the archieves why I feel that we need magistrates who have been appointed by the People I think the paramount reason for this is where we have citizens in non-provinicalized or non-governed provincies.

> One of the main aspects of this position is that it would only be
> available during a Census year. It will be the chief function of the
> Duumviri census populi to facilitate and assist the Censors in this
> work.

"Chief function" makes it sound like there are other, ancilliary functions.
What would they be?

Sulla: I explained that below.
> The Censors and Duumviri census populi may work with the local
> provincial governors to facilitate this project.

I wonder if you want to use such soft language like "may". That gives the
discretion, it seems to me, for a governor to tell the Censors to stuff it.
If you want the provincial governors to have a role (and I personally think
that's an excellent idea; they should probably be the primary on-the-ground
agents for the Census), spell it out explicitly.

Sulla: I think there needs to be room in case a governor is INACTIVE, fails to respond, or any other unforseen situation. This clause gives the opportunity for local governement involvement but also will allow the Duumviri the ability to act if the local government FAILS to respond. Since in the past NR has had governors essentially in name only, I felt this would be an important option, for it will allow Duumviri to bypass local governmental structures if necessary since this is in essence a Central governmental function.

> [The reason I feel the
> Censors need Duumviri census populi are two fold. One the People elect
> them, secondly, they would be magistrates who would be able to work in
> areas where there are no provincial governors.]

Why is having them elected particularly necessary? How is it superior to
simply having the (elected) Censors appoint scriba through
already-established procedures?

Sulla: I believe I answered part of this above. I think its essential that they be elected.

> 3. The Census of all citizen of Nova Roma must be done by the Ides of
> September, in the year that the Census is due. This will give the
> Censors enough time to clean the roles and make adjustments before the
> alignment of century points and century placements must be completed.
> [This must be done during November, according to the Constitution].

The timing, at least, is a good idea. It fits in nicely with the rest of the
civil calendar. Personally, however, I see no reason not to make the Census
an annual event.

Sulla: I tried, I received alot of hostility when I tried that on the first draft. Please review the June archieves and see the arguements varius respected citizens voiced against it.

> 4. The Census will consist of the following:
>
> A. Active citizens are those citizens that do not need to be contacted
> by the Censors to determine if they are apart of Nova Roma:
>
> 1. Those citizens who vote are considered "censi."
> 2. Those citizens who pay taxes are considered "incensi".

Two things. First, you need to specify when a Citizen has to have voted in
order to be considered active. After all, if someone votes in the December
elections, but then drops out, it could conceivably be two years before
their absense is officially discovered and corrected. (Of course, with your
once-every-five-year scheme, that isn't really a worry, but I've already
covered that ground.)

Sulla: Thanks thats a great suggestion, i would suggest anyone that voted within the past TWO elections so that we get teh largest potential pool. However, if we want to go based JUST on the December election which usually gives us the larger turnout, I could understand that as well.

Second, I don't believe merely having voted or paid taxes a year or six
months before is prima face evidence that someone is currently an active
Citizen. Surely someone who is truely interested in maintaining their
Citizenship won't look sideways at having to check in every once in a while.
Let everyone be counted.

Sulla: I respectfully disagree. I think its a good starting point to start trimming off those citizens who have at least showed interest to NR. Which is the whole purpose of this legislation.

> 5. Inactive citizens are those citizens who will need to be contacted
> by the National Census. The following will lay down some of the
> procedures to make certain we get the best response in any National
> Census:

You sure you want to put the impetus for contact on the Censors? Wouldn't it
make more sense to put the onus on the individual Citizens, and then set up
procedures for trying to contact those who don't check in on their own?
Seems to me it would make more sense to at least let folks have the chance
to check in.

Sulla: I have thought about it. Honestly I think this is the best way. The most "fair" way to do this. This is a function of the Central goverment, and it is for this reason primarly for the creation of the Duumvri positions.

> A. Bulk email. At least two attempts should be done to contact
> citizen
> via this avenue.

Just a nitpick; why "bulk" email, rather than just "email"?

Sulla: This would be done by Senator M. Octavius when he sends MASS (or bulk) emails to our citizens about voter codes and such. Do you prefer Mass or Bulk?

> B. Phone calls. I know this can be costly. Maybe this is where we
> can
> incorporate some cooperation between the local governors and the Censors
> (coordinated by the Duumviri census populi).

Here is where I think the role of governors as point men comes into its own.
If it's a local call for the governor of Germania to check on someone in
Munich, why not give him the responsibility to do so?

Sulla: I agree.

Also, I note that you don't give any guidelines for when one form of
communication should be used in preference to another. Is it email first,
and then phone, and then regular mail? Or some other order. You'll want to
specify that.

Sulla: I think that discretion can be determined by the Censors, Duumviri and if they involve local government as LONG as the attempts have been made and there is reasonable documentation to show that the attempts has been made.

> Or done via the Internet.

Ummm... what does this mean?

Sulla: Dialpad.com or some other alternative telephone medium that utulizes the internet.

> Discretion
> lies with the Censors and the Censorial Duumviri census populi. The
> attempts may
> vary, in this avenue, but at least two attempts would be required.
> [There has to be some kind of documentation either via email or snail
> mail by the applicant to confirm the information gained via the phone,
> this confirmation will need to go to the Censors]

How do you confirm a local call?

Sulla: Where do you see "local call?"

> C. Snail mail. Again, this might be an avenue that there can be
> some
> cooperation between the Office of the Censor and local governments.
> However, it must be imperative that any documentation received must be
> forwarded to the Office of the Censors by the Ides of September.

Again, you need to establish when each method of communication would be
employed. And specify just whose job it is (and where the money will come
from) to send out the letters/postcards/whatever.

Sulla: Again, discretion is going to be needed, I dont want to over regulation the job becuase it hasnt been done yet. I am sure that once we start implementing this we can start to develop procedures based on what has proven beneficial. Overregulation can hinder the process since this process has not been properly completed.

> 6. By the Ides of August, the Censors should post a list to the
> official email list of Nova Roma displaying the names of those citizens
> who have failed to respond.

What is the "official email list"? And don't you think that if someone is
inactive, the chances that they're subscribed to the email list are rather
slim? Just what is the purpose of posting the list of not-heard-from
Citizens; to goad them into getting in touch, or to see if any other Citizen
knows what's happened to them? If the latter, why not leave the venue up to
the discretion of the Censors; they could post the list on the website, or
on a mailing list, or wherever they thought was appropriate.

Sulla: I am sorry Consul, I dont see your point. I think Item 6's intent is clear and reasonable.

> [Hopefully, by this time, Paters and Maters
> will receive notification on those in their gentes who failed to respond
> and can get their gens members to contact the Censors by the Ides of
> September, when the Census will be complete.]

Not sure what relevance this has. Are you saying now that the patresfamiliae
will have a role in the Census? If so, what is it, and why isn't it spelled
out?

Sulla: The Brackets are opinions of mine..that I have yet to spell out and are outside thoughts....I am hoping that even Paters and Maters might be involved in the process to surpervise their gentes and report back those of thier family members who are active but maybe not available...of if members of their family have disappeared and have never been heard of again.

> 7. If citizens fail to respond to the contact attempts. That person
> will no longer be considered a citizen of Nova Roma, and they would be
> ineligible to reapply for a period of six months. His name will be
> stricken from the Album Civium and if he/she is a Pater/Mater, the
> Censors will abide by the Constitution and any Censorial edict if the
> appointment of a paterfamilias is necessary.

As I believe Fortunatus pointed out, the Censors don't appoint
patresfamiliae; they simply record the choice of the gens members. Now, what
you might want to specify is that, if the Citizen who is removed is the last
remaining member of the gens, that gens is declared extinct.

Sulla: There will be an edict on this as I have stated before. But, the Constitution does allow flexibility in this area if Paters are not registered with the Censors. That is my main point.

> 8. If any person who was once a citizen but was removed due to a
> National Census, he will be stricken from the Album Civium.

This sentence makes no sense. If someone was "once a citizen" (i.e., not
currently a citizen) they wouldn't be in the Album Civium to begin with...

Sulla: No, I think it makes sense. You were once a citizen of NR....now you are being removed from the rolls the name and potentially the Gens will be stricken from the Album Civium available for any new propsective applicant to take it.

> However,
> the Censors have the discretion to waive this clause if both Censors
> feel there are legitimate reasons for the citizen to remain
> inncommunicado (homelessness, war, national disaster, etc).

Fair enough. Although do you want to leave this to the Censors' discretion,
or perhaps the Senate could make such a determination, such as it does with
taxes?

Sulla: No the Censors because the power is already granted in the Constitution to maintain the Albums.

All in all, your ideas are a start, but I think they do need quite a bit of
work yet. I look forward to seeing the actual draft of the lex. If it can be
kneaded into an acceptable form, I would be happy to include it in this
year's legislative agenda.

Sulla: Personally I think this is more than just a start. I think its a workable plan.

Respectfully,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
Censor of Nova Roma

Valete,

Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
Consul

Subject:	[novaroma] Maximo gaudio te accipio O Marce Quinti Geto - Bienvenido - Welcome
From:	danielovi@--------
Date:	Fri, 26 Oct 2001 04:26:36 -0000

Salvus sis civis novus argentinianus Marce Quinti Geto. Civis
novissimus novaromanus argentinianus es. Te gratulor O Marce.
Nunc iam quattordecim cives in provincia argentina sumus.
Provincia nostra adulescit. Maximas gratias omnibus novis civibus
argentinianis ago.

Lucius Pompeius Octavianus
Propraetor provincialis Argentinae

Salvus sis civis novus argentinianus Marce Quinti Geto.
You are the newest novaroman citizen from Argentina. Congratulations
Marcus. Now we are 14 citizens in provincia Argentina. Our provincia
grows. Many thanks to all the new citizens from Argentina.

Lucius Pompeius Octavianus
Propraetor provincialis Argentinae

Salvus sis civis novus argentinianus Marce Quinti Geto.
Sos el ciudadano argentino más reciente de Argentina. Felicitaciones
Marcus. Ahora somos 14 ciudadanos en la provincia. Nuestra provincia
crece. Muchas gracias a todos los ciudadanos nuevos de Argentina.

Lucius Pompeius Octavianus
Propraetor provincialis Argentinae

Subject:	[novaroma] A happy announcement
From:	danielovi@--------
Date:	Fri, 26 Oct 2001 04:51:37 -0000

Salvete omnes cives novaromani.
I am very happy to announce that provincia Argentina doubled its
population. At the very beginning we were 7 citizens. Now, in less
than a year we are 14!!. WOW!!. I do not know how to express my
happiness for this reason in english, but I'm sure you'll guess :-).
Vivant Novam Romam et provinciam Argentinam!!
Curate ut valeatis

Lucius Pompeius Octavianus
Propraetor provincialis Argentinae






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

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] A happy announcement
From:	"L. Cornelius Sulla Felix" <alexious@-------->
Date:	Thu, 25 Oct 2001 21:53:32 -0700

Ave,

Congrats on your achievement...may you continue having wonderful luck in your provincia in the coming years.

Vale,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
Censor
----- Original Message -----
From: danielovi@--------
To: novaroma@--------
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 9:51 PM
Subject: [novaroma] A happy announcement


Salvete omnes cives novaromani.
I am very happy to announce that provincia Argentina doubled its
population. At the very beginning we were 7 citizens. Now, in less
than a year we are 14!!. WOW!!. I do not know how to express my
happiness for this reason in english, but I'm sure you'll guess :-).
Vivant Novam Romam et provinciam Argentinam!!
Curate ut valeatis

Lucius Pompeius Octavianus
Propraetor provincialis Argentinae




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



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

Subject:	[novaroma] 4th draft
From:	Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix <alexious@-------->
Date:	Fri, 26 Oct 2001 00:44:11 -0700

Ave,

I have gone over the latest thread and have revised the latest draft to
include some very useful additions by Consul Flavius Vedius and Senator
T. Labienus. I hope this will be a better draft than the third one.

I will make a follow up post for my explanation on why I have phrased
this draft proposal the way I have.

Respectfully submitted,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
Censor of Nova Roma

____

Pursuant to the Constitution of Nova Roma (IV.A.1.b) the following lex
is hereby enacted to determine the accurate numbers of citizens who make
up Nova Roma.

1. A Census of all citizens of Nova Roma should be done every 5 years.

2. To help facilitate the Censors in this work, according to the
(IV.A.8. of the Constitution of Nova Roma), two new magisterial
(Vigintisexviri) position would be established. Their title would be,
Duumviri census populi. The function of the Duumviri will be to assist
the Censors in conducting, recording and maintaining the flow of the
Census project. They will be the focal point in coordinating the Census
in the provinces. They will be giving feedback to the Censors if any
issues have arisen. Duumviri will also have the latitude to assist
Censors in the Census projects in areas where there is no local
governmental presence.

3. The Census of all citizen of Nova Roma must be done by the Ides of
September, in the year that the Census is due. This will give the
Censors enough time to clean the roles and make adjustments before the
alignment of century points and century placements must be completed.
[This must be done during November, according to the Constitution].

4. The Census will consist of the following:

A. Active citizens are those citizens that do not need to be contacted
by the Censors to determine if they are apart of Nova Roma:

1. Those citizens who vote are considered "censi."
2. Those citizens who pay taxes are considered "incensi".

5. Inactive citizens are those citizens who will need to be contacted
by the National Census. The following will lay down some of the
procedures to make certain we get the best response in any National
Census:

A. Bulk email. At least two attempts should be done to contact
citizen via this avenue.

B. Phone calls. I know this can be costly. Maybe this is where we
can incorporate some cooperation between the local governors and the
Censors (coordinated by the Duumviri census populi). Or done via the
Internet (ie. Dialpaid.com). Discretion lies with the Censors and the
Censorial Duumviri census populi. The attempts may vary, in this
avenue, but at least two attempts would be required. [There has to be
some kind of documentation either via email or snail mail by the
applicant to confirm the information gained via the phone, this
confirmation will need to go to the Censors]

C. Snail mail. Again, this might be an avenue that there can be
some cooperation between the Office of the Censor and local
governments. At least one attempt will be necessary. However, it must
be imperative that any documentation received must be forwarded to the
Office of the Censors by the Ides of September.

6. Documentation. The Censors are required to maintain a report that
documents the attempts to contact citizens. For each method of contact
that has been attempted the following information is to be entered:
Date, Time, What method was used, and a summary of explanation of what
occurred. If a telephone was used the database would need to include if
a message was left on an answering machine or if a conversation took
place and the results of that conversation.

A. It is left up to the discretion of the Censors as to how to organize
which methods to utilizes as long as the minimum requirements of contact
attempts are made, as specified above. (2 required attempts for email,
2 required attempts for phone calls, and 1 attempt for snail mail, if
all of the information is included on the citizenship application.)

B. Missing information on citizenship applications. If there is missing
information it will be noted on the documentation what information was
missing.

7. By the Ides of August, the Censors should post a list to the
official email list of Nova Roma (novaroma@--------),
novaromaannounce@-------- and the Nova Roman Message Board
displaying the names of those citizens who have failed to respond.

8. If citizens fail to respond to the contact attempts. That person
will no longer be considered a citizen of Nova Roma, and they would be
ineligible to reapply for a period of six months. His name will be
stricken from the Album Civium and if he/she is a Pater/Mater, the
Censors will abide by the Constitution and any Censorial edict if the
appointment of a paterfamilias is necessary.

A. If the citizen who has been removed was the last member of that gens
is considered extinct.

9. If any person who was once a citizen but was removed due to a
National Census, he will be stricken from the Album Civium. However,
the Censors have the discretion to waive this clause if both Censors
feel there are legitimate reasons for the citizen to remain
inncommunicado (homelessness, war, national disaster, etc).

10. Budget. Every year a Census must take place, the Senate shall
create a budget to allow compensation for expenses, which shall be
itemized and submitted by the Censors.

Subject:	[novaroma] ATTN (Religio Romana): ante diem VII Kalendas Novembres (October 26th)
From:	"Antonio Grilo" <amg@-------->
Date:	Fri, 26 Oct 2001 09:25:49 +0100

Pontifex Antonius Gryllus Graecus omnibus salutem

This is one of the dies comitiales (C), when committees of citizens can vote
on political or criminal matters.

This is the first day of the Ludi Victoriae Sullanae, which will take place
until the Kalendae Novembres (November 1st). These games were instituted by
disctator Sulla in 81 BCE to cellebrate the victory of Sulla over the
samnites commanded by Telesinus in 82 BCE at the Porta Collina in Rome. The
Ludi Victoriae Sullanae were staged by the Praetores and culminated on
November 1 (the day of the battle) with circus games. The games were
originally called Ludi Victoriae, but their name was changed, possibly to
distinguish them from the Ludi Victoriae Caesaris.

Di vos bene ament

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] 4th draft - MY COMMENTS
From:	Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix <alexious@-------->
Date:	Fri, 26 Oct 2001 02:05:45 -0700

Ave Citizens of Nova Roma,

I will proceed to my comments to the proposed draft.


> ____
>
> Pursuant to the Constitution of Nova Roma (IV.A.1.b) the following lex
> is hereby enacted to determine the accurate numbers of citizens who
> make
> up Nova Roma.
>
> 1. A Census of all citizens of Nova Roma should be done every 5
> years.

Sulla: The original drafts included a 1 year Census as well as others.
They were criticized by a variety of respected citizens of Nova Roma,
all of whom suggested a 5 year census because of it being historic.

> 2. To help facilitate the Censors in this work, according to the
> (IV.A.8. of the Constitution of Nova Roma), two new magisterial
> (Vigintisexviri) position would be established. Their title would be,
> Duumviri census populi. The function of the Duumviri will be to
> assist
> the Censors in conducting, recording and maintaining the flow of the
> Census project. They will be the focal point in coordinating the
> Census
> in the provinces. They will be giving feedback to the Censors if any
> issues have arisen. Duumviri will also have the latitude to assist
> Censors in the Census projects in areas where there is no local
> governmental presence.

Sulla: This seems to be the sticking point. As you can see I have
redefined the role and clarified it. This is an important issue in my
opinion for a few reasons. One, the Censors are already overworked as
it is. There is alot that we do. There are alot of responsibilities
that the Censors must do. A small listing of them are: Dealing with
emails of Citizens, Trying to facilitate the approving of new citizens,
the Voter Codes, the Centuries and their alignments, the Tribal
alignments, the Ordo Equaestor, Soon we will be having yearly gens
registration, and many other duties I am leaving now. Now we are going
to add a very significant job to the duties of the censor. Currently
Nova Roma has about 1100 citizens. A reasonable estimation would
require a contact of 700 citizens, within about a 5 month period, in
addition to maintaining our current productivity levels. In years
ahead, Nova Roma might have 5000, 10000 and even 25000 citizens. Every
5 years a Census will require contacting between 60-90% of our citizens
to maintain a proper perspective of the roles of the Album Civium. This
will require extensive supervision and coordination, and the Duumviri
would be a definate need to make certain that this is being properly
implemented.

> 3. The Census of all citizen of Nova Roma must be done by the Ides of
> September, in the year that the Census is due. This will give the
> Censors enough time to clean the roles and make adjustments before the
> alignment of century points and century placements must be completed.
> [This must be done during November, according to the Constitution].

Sulla: I think this is self explanatory. This timeframe gives the
Censors sufficient time to modify the roles, in addition to the tribes
and centuries.

> 4. The Census will consist of the following:
>
> A. Active citizens are those citizens that do not need to be
> contacted
> by the Censors to determine if they are apart of Nova Roma:
>
> 1. Those citizens who vote are considered "censi."
> 2. Those citizens who pay taxes are considered "incensi".

Sulla: These citizens will be considered to be active members of the
Nova Roma community and will not need to be contacted. This then
lightens the load of the Censors and the Duumviri. This can potential
lighten the census load by as much as 30%.

> 5. Inactive citizens are those citizens who will need to be contacted
> by the National Census. The following will lay down some of the
> procedures to make certain we get the best response in any National
> Census:
>
> A. Bulk email. At least two attempts should be done to contact
> citizen via this avenue.
>
> B. Phone calls. I know this can be costly. Maybe this is where
> we
> can incorporate some cooperation between the local governors and the
> Censors (coordinated by the Duumviri census populi). Or done via the
> Internet (ie. Dialpaid.com). Discretion lies with the Censors and the
> Censorial Duumviri census populi. The attempts may vary, in this
> avenue, but at least two attempts would be required. [There has to be
> some kind of documentation either via email or snail mail by the
> applicant to confirm the information gained via the phone, this
> confirmation will need to go to the Censors]
>
> C. Snail mail. Again, this might be an avenue that there can be
> some cooperation between the Office of the Censor and local
> governments. At least one attempt will be necessary. However, it
> must
> be imperative that any documentation received must be forwarded to the
> Office of the Censors by the Ides of September.

Sulla: All citizens who do not meet the requiremetns of Item 4 will be
contacted by the following methods. This will be done to ensure that
all citizens, even those citizens who do not have computer access will
attempted to be contacted.

> 6. Documentation. The Censors are required to maintain a report that
> documents the attempts to contact citizens. For each method of
> contact
> that has been attempted the following information is to be entered:
> Date, Time, What method was used, and a summary of explanation of what
> occurred. If a telephone was used the database would need to include
> if
> a message was left on an answering machine or if a conversation took
> place and the results of that conversation.

Sulla: I would like to thank Consul Germancius for giving me the idea
of inputting this section in. I feel documentation will be a very
necessary factor to ensure that all citizens who do not meet the
requirements of number 4 are properly contacted based on the
requirements of Item 5.

> A. It is left up to the discretion of the Censors as to how to
> organize
> which methods to utilizes as long as the minimum requirements of
> contact
> attempts are made, as specified above. (2 required attempts for
> email,
> 2 required attempts for phone calls, and 1 attempt for snail mail, if
> all of the information is included on the citizenship application.)

Sulla: This empowers the Censors to determine how Item 5 is to be
carried out. Once again, thank you Consul Germancius for giving me the
idea to add this. The reason why I think its important is based
primarly on the fact that some Censors might want to do snail mail
first, phone contact last....or vice versa, and this gives the ability
for the Censors to determine how they want to conduct the contact.

> B. Missing information on citizenship applications. If there is
> missing
> information it will be noted on the documentation what information was
> missing.

Sulla: I threw this in because it should be noted on the documentation
if an applicant is missing a phone number or a snail mail address that
this inforamtion is noted. When I began my lustrum as Censor there was
no regulation in terms of points of contact. I promulgated an edict
requireing two points of contact. There are many applications where we
are missing information and hopefully via the Census our records can be
updated by the citizens who we contact.

> 7. By the Ides of August, the Censors should post a list to the
> official email list of Nova Roma (novaroma@--------),
> novaromaannounce@-------- and the Nova Roman Message Board
> displaying the names of those citizens who have failed to respond.

Sulla: Once again, thank you Consul Germancius for having me spell this
item out. Based on this clause, we will now be able to use three venues
that the predominate methods that unite Nova Romans so that this final
attempt can be attempted to contact those citizens in danger of getting
removed. The Nova Roma main list, which has 470 subscribers, the Nova
Roma announce list and the Nova Roma Message board.

> 8. If citizens fail to respond to the contact attempts. That person
> will no longer be considered a citizen of Nova Roma, and they would be
> ineligible to reapply for a period of six months. His name will be
> stricken from the Album Civium and if he/she is a Pater/Mater, the
> Censors will abide by the Constitution and any Censorial edict if the
> appointment of a paterfamilias is necessary.

Sulla: I think this is fairly self explanatory. The issues raised by
Senator T. Labienus and Consul Flavius Vedius have been noted. In no
way shape or form will the Censors "appoint" paters and maters. As it
states, the Constitution and Censorial Edicts will be properly
enforced. (Section II.D.1 and 3 clearly states the limitations of
Censorial involvement.)

> A. If the citizen who has been removed was the last member of
> that gens
> is considered extinct.

Sulla: Thank you Senator T. Labienus and Consul Flavius Vedius for
pointing this out. This will allow future members of Nova Roma to
revive those extinct Gentes.

> 9. If any person who was once a citizen but was removed due to a
> National Census, he will be stricken from the Album Civium. However,
> the Censors have the discretion to waive this clause if both Censors
> feel there are legitimate reasons for the citizen to remain
> inncommunicado (homelessness, war, national disaster, etc).

Sulla: I think this clause is self explanatory.

> 10. Budget. Every year a Census must take place, the Senate shall
> create a budget to allow compensation for expenses, which shall be
> itemized and submitted by the Censors.

Sulla: I have added this clause because there will be a potential
expenditure, and given that this is a function of the Central government
an itemization in the budget should be included so that any expenditures
can be duly compensated. I think this is a reasonable expectation, and
I hope that the members of Nova Roma will agree with me given the time
constraints that must be done and the various attempts of contact that
will be attempted, expenses such as stamps for at least 700 citizens,
phone calls (hopefully on the net, but some actual long distance phone
calls might be necessary.)

I hope this explains some of the reasonings as to why I included the
clauses.

Respectfully,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
Censor of Nova Roma

> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> ADVERTISEMENT
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] 4th draft
From:	labienus@--------
Date:	Fri, 26 Oct 2001 10:14:21 US/Central

Salvete

First, some thoughts.

It appears that the censores are expecting to promulgate an edictum or two
requiring annual registration of patres matresque familias. Such a
registration, if it also included each pater or mater giving a full accounting
of their current gentiles, would be what I would consider a sufficient census.

Gentes with unregistered patres matresque familias would then have to choose a
new pater or mater familias, who would then need to register him or herself and
his or her gentiles. Gentes that couldn't do so (most likely due to a lack of
members), or that refused to do so, would be disbanded and any remaining
gentiles would be at liberty to either found a new gens or join an existing
one. This is not unconstitutional, as the constitution requires both
m/patresfamilias and gentes to be registered with the censores.

Anyone who "fell through the cracks" in such a system would be considered
incensus. Since we haven't defined any legal status for the incensi, we would
be at liberty to determine just what that means. I would expect that someone
who was incensus would neither receive a voter code nor be included in the
centuriae or tribus, though this would require a constitutional amendment if
being incensus didn't also involve a suspension of citizenship, which would
require a lex.

What Censor Cornelius is suggesting is a census along the lines of that
conducted periodically in the United States. He wants to actively attempt to
contact everyone on the rolls and remove those that are incommunicado. I'm not
sure that such an attempt is particularly necessary if other means are taken to
remove the detrimental effects of inactive cives. The measures I've suggested
above would most likely suffice. This doesn't mean that I'm opposed to
performing an active census whose purpose is to prune the tree, so to speak.
I'm just not convinced of its necessity.

And now, some comments on the proposal.

I wouldn't suggest using this as the final wording of a law, as it is rife with
suggestion, grammatical vagueries and errors, and lax on mandated action.
However, it is a reasonable explanation of the procedure.

> Pursuant to the Constitution of Nova Roma (IV.A.1.b) the following lex
> is hereby enacted to determine the accurate numbers of citizens who make
> up Nova Roma.

Actually, its purpose, as implied by its sections, is two-fold. First, it is
an attempt to get an accurate count of cives, as stated above. Second, it is
aimed at getting rid of those who are either no longer interested in Nova Roma
or impossible to contact.

> 1. A Census of all citizens of Nova Roma should be done every 5 years.

Combined with a yearly gens and p/materfamilias registration scheme which
ensures active p/matresfamilias, this is reasonable.

> 2. To help facilitate the Censors in this work, according to the
> (IV.A.8. of the Constitution of Nova Roma), two new magisterial
> (Vigintisexviri) position would be established. Their title would be,
> Duumviri census populi.

I still think that scribae would suffice. If you simply must have elected
officers, then I'd suggest the title "Praecones Consulares". The praecones
were town criers who, among other things, would call the citizens of Roma to
assemble for the census. In this way, we are at least using somewhat
historical titles. In any case, this isn't all that big a deal.

> A. Active citizens are those citizens that do not need to be contacted
> by the Censors to determine if they are apart of Nova Roma:
>
> 1. Those citizens who vote are considered "censi."
> 2. Those citizens who pay taxes are considered "incensi".

You misunderstood my earlier objection to this section, Censor Corneli. I have
no problem with assuming that tax-payers are active cives and simply keeping
them in the rolls. This will cut down considerably the amount of work involved
in the census you propose, and is therefore a good idea.

What I object to is the terminology you use here. The word "census"
means "registered". The "censi" are those who are registered with the
censores, and therefore on the rolls. The "incensi" are those who are not
registered, and therefore *not* in the Album Civium. If you must make a
distinction between voting and non-voting taxpayers (not necessary for either
of the two purposes of this lex), then I'd suggest calling the
voters "sciscentes" (those who vote) and the non-voters "tacentes" (those who
are silent).

> 10. Budget. Every year a Census must take place, the Senate shall
> create a budget to allow compensation for expenses, which shall be
> itemized and submitted by the Censors.

This probably needs to be elaborated upon. Do the censores submit a proposed
budget to the Senate to ratify, or does the Senate set aside funds beforehand,
with the censores justifying their use of said funds at the end of the census?
What needs to be done if the censores find that they need more money? It may
be that such things should be left to the Senate and quaestores to decide. If
so, that ought to be stated.

Valete
T Labienus Fortunatus

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Market Day chat: 26 October
From:	Marcus Octavius Germanicus <haase@-------->
Date:	Fri, 26 Oct 2001 10:18:33 -0500 (CDT)

Salvete Omnes,

Today is a Market Day; therefore all available citizens are encouraged
to participate in the regularly scheduled chat session (reviving a
tradition that's been defunct for a year or more).

The designated times are:

I. 8pm Roma, 7pm UK (intended primarily for Europeans)
II. 9pm US/Eastern, 6pm Pacific (mainly for Americans)

Of course, are all welcome to join in either session.

Valete, Octavius.

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

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] 4th draft
From:	Marcus Octavius Germanicus <haase@-------->
Date:	Fri, 26 Oct 2001 10:24:41 -0500 (CDT)

Salve,

>Gentes with unregistered patres matresque familias would then have to choose a
>new pater or mater familias, who would then need to register him or herself
>and his or her gentiles. Gentes that couldn't do so (most likely due to a
>lack of members), or that refused to do so, would be disbanded and any
> remaining gentiles would be at liberty to either found a new gens or join
> an existing one.

If the remaining citizens of a decapitated gens cannot agree on a
paterfamilias amongst themselves, then the Censores should choose one of
them - then, only those who disagreed with the choice would have to
change their names. The choice could be made either by age, seniority as
length of citizenship, or the most visibly active citizen (perhaps measured
by century points) could become pater.

Vale, O.

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

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] 4th draft
From:	labienus@--------
Date:	Fri, 26 Oct 2001 10:38:45 US/Central

Salve M Octavi

> If the remaining citizens of a decapitated gens cannot agree on a
> paterfamilias amongst themselves, then the Censores should choose one of
> them - then, only those who disagreed with the choice would have to
> change their names. The choice could be made either by age, seniority as
> length of citizenship, or the most visibly active citizen (perhaps measured
> by century points) could become pater.

So long as the choice of new m/paterfamilias is based upon a reasonable,
public, and fixed set of rules, this is a very good idea.

Vale
T Labienus Fortunatus

Subject:	[novaroma] AMS Maillist Reminder
From:	Sextus Cornelius Cotta <cotta@-------->
Date:	Fri, 26 Oct 2001 05:24:04 +0000

Salve,
Just reminder to Citizen's living in America Medioccidentalis Superior
Province that there is now Provincial Maillist available at Yahoogroups.

AMS_NR-subscribe@--------

Sextus Cornelius Cotta

--
Legate Major, Regio Campus(KS, MO, NE)
America Medioccidentalis Superior Province
Nova Roma
AIM: LegateMajor
YahooMsgr: iguard2

Subject:	[novaroma] Introduction
From:	Terry Wilson <twilson@-------->
Date:	Fri, 26 Oct 2001 08:37:40 -0500

Salvete,

It occurs to me, that although I have already posted a message or two to
this list, I have not formally introduced myself to Nova Roma. Last
weekend I was honored with membership in Nova Roma and in the Gens
Cornelia. I will always do my best to bring honor to both institutions.

By way of introduction to the members of my adopted family, I will tell
you something of myself. I live in Galesburg, Illinois (in the west
central part of the state. I am 45 years old, married, have three grown

children, and 2 grandchildren. I work for Knox College (in Galesburg)
in the Lincoln Studies Center, where I currently am assisting in the
transcription and edition of the incoming presidential correspondence of
Abraham Lincoln for the Library of Congress. Images of the documents
being transcribed, and the transcriptions will be posted on the
Library's website.

My special interests lie in the politics of the late Republic and in the
history of the early Imperial army (particularly the auxilia). I hope
very much to take an active part in the activities of Nova Roma,
especially in the promotion of her growth. I eagerly look forward to
this new adventure!

With great respect,

Gaius Cornelius Pudens

Subject:	CORRECTED [novaroma] 3rd draft of Census Lex (City Praetor's Comm.)
From:	QFabiusMaxmi@--------
Date:	Fri, 26 Oct 2001 13:44:50 EDT

Salvete.
I've semi returned to office, and going through an enormous back log of
e-mail, so I'm making legal comments about Lucius Cornelius Lex. No doubt
other people have made similar comments which I have not read, I just wanted
my thoughts to known.
Q. Fabius Maximus

> In a message dated 10/25/01 1:54:06 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
> alexious@-------- writes:
>
> Ave Citizens of Nova Roma,
>
> With the discussion of a census the "hot topic" currently in Nova Roma,
> I would like to make my opinion known on this matter. I have been
> discussing this very issue with a couple of citizens, and now I think
> its time I tried to formulate this so that everyone can get an idea of
> just where I am on this issue. I speak for myself. My colleague, if
> you will notice will also be getting a copy of this very email. I hope
> he will add his opinion sometime soon on this topic.
>
> I will fashion this as a proposed Lex. For this is something I would
> like to have promulgated, eventually.
>
> 1. A Census of all citizens of Nova Roma should be done every 5 years.
> This would be the responsibility of the Censors.
>

QFM Since the Censor office in Rome was a five year office, this made sense,
but our Censores hold overlapping offices, so either yearly or Bi yearly
would follow the historical model. Also remember, our mass communication
system makes taking a census much easier then our historical ancestors.

> A. The First Census shall take place the year after this lex is
> passed.
>
> 2. To help facilitate the Censors in this work, according to the
> (IV.A.8. of the Constitution of Nova Roma), two new magisterial
> (Vigintisexviri) position would be established. Their title would be,
> Duumviri census populi. One of the main aspects of this position is that
> it would only be
> available during a Census year. It will be the chief function of the
> Duumviri census populi to facilitate and assist the Censors in this
> work. The Censors and Duumviri census populi may work with the local
> provincial governors to facilitate this project.

QFM If the Censores wish to appoint scribes to help them they can, that's
within
their Imperium, however they cannot add a new titled office. This would be
unconstitutional.



> 3. The Census of all citizen of Nova Roma must be done by the Ides of
> September, in the year that the Census is due. This will give the
> Censors enough time to clean the roles and make adjustments before the
> alignment of century points and century placements must be completed.
> [This must be done during November, according to the Constitution].
>

QFM. See my first remarks And it is "Rolls" Comes from "Roll of parchment."

> 4. The Census will consist of the following:
> A. Active citizens are those citizens that do not need to be contacted
> by the Censors to determine if they are apart of Nova Roma:
>

QFM Criteria being? If they are active in politics, clubs, post twice a day
on the main list?

> 1. Those citizens who vote are considered "censi."
> 2. Those citizens who pay taxes are considered "incensi".
>
> 5. Inactive citizens are those citizens who will need to be contacted
> by the National Census. The following will lay down some of the
> procedures to make certain we get the best response in any National
> Census:
>

QFM Again if you don't pay taxes and do not vote you are inactive? What if
you still are a member of a club, or post on the list twice a day.

> A. Bulk email. At least two attempts should be done to contact
> citizen via this avenue.
>

> B. Phone calls. I know this can be costly. Maybe this is where we
> can incorporate some cooperation between the local governors and the Censors
> (coordinated by the Duumviri census populi). Or done via the Internet.
> Discretion lies with the Censors and the Censorial Duumviri census populi.
> The
> attempts may vary, in this avenue, but at least two attempts would be
> required.
> [There has to be some kind of documentation either via email or snail
> mail by the applicant to confirm the information gained via the phone,
> this confirmation will need to go to the Censors]
>

QFM: Phone calls are the most reliable for instant gratification. But I can
tell you
from personal experience, that a lot of people do not liked to be called.
They find
it intrusive, and become surly. Surfice mail like what our ancestors used,
works best.

> C. Snail mail. Again, this might be an avenue that there can be
> some cooperation between the Office of the Censor and local governments.
> However, it must be imperative that any documentation received must be
> forwarded to the Office of the Censors by the Ides of September.
>

QFM: This should be one of the stated duties of the Provincial Praetor.
After all that is reason that the Senate appoints Praetors, to act a liaison
between the Roman gov.
and the populace.

> 6. By the Ides of August, the Censors should post a list to the
> official email list of Nova Roma displaying the names of those citizens
> who have failed to respond. [Hopefully, by this time, Paters and Maters
> will receive notification on those in their gentes who failed to respond
> and can get their gens members to contact the Censors by the Ides of
> September, when the Census will be complete.]
>

QFM: In theory this sounds fine, in practice a lot harder to carry out.


> 7. If citizens fail to respond to the contact attempts. That person
> will no longer be considered a citizen of Nova Roma, and they would be
> ineligible to reapply for a period of six months. His name will be
> stricken from the Album Civium and if he/she is a Pater/Mater, the
> Censors will abide by the Constitution and any Censorial edict if the
> appointment of a paterfamilias is necessary.
>
QFM: This should be spelled out to the prospective citizen before he joins.
This way, we limit our exposure to irate dismissed citizens.


> 8. If any person who was once a citizen but was removed due to a
> National Census, he will be stricken from the Album Civium. However,
> the Censors have the discretion to waive this clause if both Censors
> feel there are legitimate reasons for the citizen to remain
> inncommunicado (homelessness, war, national disaster, etc).
>
>

QFM: "Incommunicado."

This is again fine in theory. But unless you have the Provincial Praetors
cooperation contacting the citizens, doomed to fail.
Except by non confirmation of the office with the help of the Senate,
Censores have
no means to compel Provincial Praetors to cooperate.
Another Lex would be needed to do so.

Q. Fabius Maximus



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

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] 4th draft
From:	Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix <alexious@-------->
Date:	Fri, 26 Oct 2001 12:37:00 -0700

Ave,

Thank you for your comments Senator. I will answer them to the best of
my ability.

labienus@-------- wrote:
>
> Salvete
>
> First, some thoughts.
>
> It appears that the censores are expecting to promulgate an edictum or
> two
> requiring annual registration of patres matresque familias. Such a
> registration, if it also included each pater or mater giving a full
> accounting
> of their current gentiles, would be what I would consider a sufficient
> census.

The edicts that we will be publishing will be a yearly registration for
the Paters/Maters. Not for the entire gens.

> Gentes with unregistered patres matresque familias would then have to
> choose a
> new pater or mater familias, who would then need to register him or
> herself and
> his or her gentiles. Gentes that couldn't do so (most likely due to a
> lack of
> members), or that refused to do so, would be disbanded and any
> remaining
> gentiles would be at liberty to either found a new gens or join an
> existing
> one. This is not unconstitutional, as the constitution requires both
> m/patresfamilias and gentes to be registered with the censores.

That is correct.

> Anyone who "fell through the cracks" in such a system would be
> considered
> incensus. Since we haven't defined any legal status for the incensi,
> we would
> be at liberty to determine just what that means. I would expect that
> someone
> who was incensus would neither receive a voter code nor be included in
> the
> centuriae or tribus, though this would require a constitutional
> amendment if
> being incensus didn't also involve a suspension of citizenship, which
> would
> require a lex.

What do you mean fell through the cracks. The Censor edict that will be
promulgated shall, IMHO be comprehensive in terms of making certain
Paters and Maters are proactive in that particular aspect.

> What Censor Cornelius is suggesting is a census along the lines of
> that
> conducted periodically in the United States. He wants to actively
> attempt to
> contact everyone on the rolls and remove those that are
> incommunicado. I'm not
> sure that such an attempt is particularly necessary if other means are
> taken to
> remove the detrimental effects of inactive cives. The measures I've
> suggested
> above would most likely suffice. This doesn't mean that I'm opposed
> to
> performing an active census whose purpose is to prune the tree, so to
> speak.
> I'm just not convinced of its necessity.

I understand if you do not feel such steps are necessary, I absolutely
do think they are necessary. The C.C. Vote was just one indication,
that convinced many respected citizens that being a numbers based person
is not realistic anymore. Ideally, the Gentes should be the focal point
in a Census, but we cannot do that either. A Census conducted by the
Censors of Nova Roma, similar to the US Census is the ideal way to
measure and clean off the roles of inactive, JUST name and nothing else
citizens. What is the point when the Album Civium states we have 1100
members and only 130 actually VOTE? What is the point of having 1100
members but less than 200 actually voting. There is NO tangible
benefit to having this situation. The only thing is that it requires
extra time and effort being spent on trying to find ways of putting
these people in Tribes and Centuries, look at the time that was spent
for this past election. I know Propraetor Lucius Sicinius foretold that
this situation would happen, that we would have an issue during the CC
vote because the way the centuries are allocated given that most of
those invisible citizens are now in the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd class of
centuries. It is time that the Censors office be Proactive before our
Album Civium is composed of 15000 citizens total with about 12500 of
them being invisible.

> And now, some comments on the proposal.
>
> I wouldn't suggest using this as the final wording of a law, as it is
> rife with
> suggestion, grammatical vagueries and errors, and lax on mandated
> action.
> However, it is a reasonable explanation of the procedure.

This is why its being discussed on the ML. But, I am hoping, nay
optimistic that together we can all come up with a reasonable compromise
so that it can then be immediately submitted to a vote. Thus any effort
that can be completed now, is the better.

> > Pursuant to the Constitution of Nova Roma (IV.A.1.b) the following
> lex
> > is hereby enacted to determine the accurate numbers of citizens who
> make
> > up Nova Roma.
>
> Actually, its purpose, as implied by its sections, is two-fold.
> First, it is
> an attempt to get an accurate count of cives, as stated above.
> Second, it is
> aimed at getting rid of those who are either no longer interested in
> Nova Roma
> or impossible to contact.

That is correct. I would be pleased to add that to draft 5 as an
addendum to the introduction.

> > 1. A Census of all citizens of Nova Roma should be done every 5
> years.
>
> Combined with a yearly gens and p/materfamilias registration scheme
> which
> ensures active p/matresfamilias, this is reasonable.

Thank you.

> > 2. To help facilitate the Censors in this work, according to the
> > (IV.A.8. of the Constitution of Nova Roma), two new magisterial
> > (Vigintisexviri) position would be established. Their title would
> be,
> > Duumviri census populi.
>
> I still think that scribae would suffice. If you simply must have
> elected
> officers, then I'd suggest the title "Praecones Consulares". The
> praecones
> were town criers who, among other things, would call the citizens of
> Roma to
> assemble for the census. In this way, we are at least using somewhat
> historical titles. In any case, this isn't all that big a deal.

As you know, I don't have much skill in Latin, I got this title Duumviri
from the June discussions. I took it from that, if we want Praecones
Consulares (should it be for the Censors though), I don't mind.
However, I still think, based on what the individuals will be doing,
that they need to be elected by the People. Let me ask you, why do you
think Scriba are sufficient?

> > A. Active citizens are those citizens that do not need to be
> contacted
> > by the Censors to determine if they are apart of Nova Roma:
> >
> > 1. Those citizens who vote are considered "censi."
> > 2. Those citizens who pay taxes are considered "incensi".
>
> You misunderstood my earlier objection to this section, Censor
> Corneli. I have
> no problem with assuming that tax-payers are active cives and simply
> keeping
> them in the rolls. This will cut down considerably the amount of work
> involved
> in the census you propose, and is therefore a good idea.
>
> What I object to is the terminology you use here. The word "census"
> means "registered". The "censi" are those who are registered with the
>
> censores, and therefore on the rolls. The "incensi" are those who are
> not
> registered, and therefore *not* in the Album Civium. If you must make
> a
> distinction between voting and non-voting taxpayers (not necessary for
> either
> of the two purposes of this lex), then I'd suggest calling the
> voters "sciscentes" (those who vote) and the non-voters "tacentes"
> (those who
> are silent).

Ahh, I see what you mean. As in my above comments, I got the title
Censi from the June discussion, I believe from Gn. Salix. I have since
incorporated it. In the original draft I had ACTIVE. Because they have
shown they are active. Ok, I can replace incensi with censi. So that
both 1 and 2 are listed as censi. I am not trying to actually create a
difference between voters and taxpayers. I just want, when the
documentation section of the Census must be completed, that it somehow
needs to be noted that these people were not contacted and the reason
they were not contacted clearly spelled out. I hope you understand my
intent.

> > 10. Budget. Every year a Census must take place, the Senate shall
> > create a budget to allow compensation for expenses, which shall be
> > itemized and submitted by the Censors.
>
> This probably needs to be elaborated upon. Do the censores submit a
> proposed
> budget to the Senate to ratify, or does the Senate set aside funds
> beforehand,
> with the censores justifying their use of said funds at the end of the
> census?
> What needs to be done if the censores find that they need more money?
> It may
> be that such things should be left to the Senate and quaestores to
> decide. If
> so, that ought to be stated.

I expected that that would need to be done. Last nite when I came up
this section I tried to throw some numbers around. (Based on US
figures). If we did one snail mail issuance at the beginning of the
Census where every inactive citizen was conducted we are looking about
700 * .35 (US Postage Stamp). That is about $245. I would honestly
suggest putting in about another $100.00 for other budgetary needs.
(Phone calls and generic office supplies). PLEASE REMEMBER, that this
is to be done only 1 time every 5 years. This total would roughly be
about 350.00-400.00 to conduct a full Census. This is the worst case
scenario, because IMHO. As for submitting a budget, I can easily
forecast and prepare a budget for the Senate to ratify beforehand and at
the end of the census a balance sheet can be prepared showing how the
money was essentially allocated. If the Censors need more money, I can
foresee, that the Censors would make a request to the Consuls who, I
believe can release funds or prepare an item for Senatorial
consideration. I have no problem adding such measures into Item 10.

Respectfully,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
Censor

Respectfully,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] 4th draft
From:	Fortunatus <labienus@-------->
Date:	Fri, 26 Oct 2001 16:10:03 -0500

Salvete

> The edicts that we will be publishing will be a yearly registration for
> the Paters/Maters. Not for the entire gens.


Why not? It seems to be a perfect opportunity for obtaining full lists
of the members of each active gens directly from the
patres/matresfamilias themselves. Surely it isn't too much to expect a
p/materfamilias to be able to produce a list of his/her gentiles on
demand? It might provide an impetus for p/matres to keep in touch with
the members of their gentes.


> What do you mean fell through the cracks. The Censor edict that will be
> promulgated shall, IMHO be comprehensive in terms of making certain
> Paters and Maters are proactive in that particular aspect.


Well, I was talking about my suggestion, not edicta whose contents are
currently unknown to me. Let's say that paterfamilias Bibulus fails to
mention civis Catullus, who is listed as belonging to Gens Bibula in the
Album Civium, when he gives his yearly list of gentiles of Gens Bibula
to the censores. Catullus, then, has "fallen through the cracks", and
is incensus.

I'd suggest placing the incensi in a state of suspended citizenship,
which would be reversed as soon as a m/paterfamilias claimed them as a
member of his or her gens (no 6-month wait). In this way, someone who
was declared incensus accidentally or due to unforeseen or unavoidable
circumstances wouldn't be penalized while those who really are gone will
not need to be given voter codes or assigned to centuriae or tribus, and
will therefore place no extra burden upon the censores. All that would
need to be done is to keep their info in the censorial database in case
they resurface. (Note that this means that p/matresfamilias must remain
"census" in order to retain their position, which is, IMO, both
reasonable and fair.)


> I understand if you do not feel such steps are necessary, I absolutely
> do think they are necessary. The C.C. Vote was just one indication,
> that convinced many respected citizens that being a numbers based person
> is not realistic anymore.


I'm not sure what you mean by "a numbers based person". That said, the
problems uncovered by this latest vote in the centuriae would not have
occurred if that vote had happened next year after non-taxpayers were
removed to the 193rd centuria. Far fewer cives would have been spread
across the centuriae, with little to no doubling up of voters within
given centuriae. A problem might have occurred in which there were
fewer than 192 taxpayers, and so not enough people to fill the taxpaying
centuriae, but this is not related to having or not having a census.

> Ideally, the Gentes should be the focal point
> in a Census, but we cannot do that either.


Why not? If the main responsibility for registering with the censores
rests on the shoulders of the p/matresfamilias, rather than the other
way 'round, then the gentes can easily be the focal point in a census.
If the survival of the gens is on the line, then gentes with more than
one member, but with an inactive p/mater, will have an incentive to
replace their "deadbeat" leader. One-person gentes with inactive
p/matres would then just disappear. So long as this policy is well
publicized so that all cives who desire to be p/matres are aware of
their responsibilities, there is nothing unfair about it.

> A Census conducted by the
> Censors of Nova Roma, similar to the US Census is the ideal way to
> measure and clean off the roles of inactive, JUST name and nothing else
> citizens. What is the point when the Album Civium states we have 1100
> members and only 130 actually VOTE?


It seems to me that my suggested policy would solve this problem with
less effort than your suggested policy, and that it would do so on a
yearly basis, rather than once every 5 years.

> It is time that the Censors office be Proactive before our
> Album Civium is composed of 15000 citizens total with about 12500 of
> them being invisible.


Sure. Be proactive by establishing a system that weeds out the inactive
on a yearly basis with a minimum of effort by the censores.


> As you know, I don't have much skill in Latin, I got this title Duumviri
> from the June discussions. I took it from that, if we want Praecones
> Consulares (should it be for the Censors though), I don't mind.


Doh! Yes, that should be "Praecones Censoriales" (sing. = Praeco
Censorialis). Mea culpa.


> However, I still think, based on what the individuals will be doing,
> that they need to be elected by the People. Let me ask you, why do you
> think Scriba are sufficient?


I think scribae are sufficient because that's exactly what they're given
to the censores for. You can appoint as many scribae as needed, when
needed, for any task. And, you can get rid of them whenever they're no
longer required. Why create precisely two elected magistrati when you
can just as easily appoint five scribae and assign them each to one
fifth of Nova Roma's ostensible population with the orders, "Contact
everyone on this list and verify their information." You're creating an
unhistorical and unnecessary office that just robs the process of
flexibility. And, your reason for doing so is that you feel that these
people should be elected, but you can't provide any compelling reason
for that feeling.

If you think that scribae involved in the census should receive more
century points because of the level of effort involved, either assign
more scribae in order that they each receive a smaller workload, or
write a larger century point reward into this lex for such scribae.


> Ahh, I see what you mean. As in my above comments, I got the title
> Censi from the June discussion, I believe from Gn. Salix. I have since
> incorporated it. In the original draft I had ACTIVE. Because they have
> shown they are active. Ok, I can replace incensi with censi. So that
> both 1 and 2 are listed as censi. I am not trying to actually create a
> difference between voters and taxpayers. I just want, when the
> documentation section of the Census must be completed, that it somehow
> needs to be noted that these people were not contacted and the reason
> they were not contacted clearly spelled out. I hope you understand my
> intent.


Yes, I do. I hope you don't think I'm beating you up for an
inconsequential point of terminology. It's just that any terms in the
law, whether English or Latin, should make sense. Otherwise, the law
just becomes confusing.

Note that, by definition, the "censi" include everyone, active or not,
who is included in the Album Civium. I'd suggest sticking with active
and inactive, with the understanding that the law refers only to a very
strict, impartial, and easily verifiable definition of activity, and
that it applies no penalty for being inactive according to that definition.


> scenario, because IMHO. As for submitting a budget, I can easily
> forecast and prepare a budget for the Senate to ratify beforehand and at
> the end of the census a balance sheet can be prepared showing how the
> money was essentially allocated. If the Censors need more money, I can
> foresee, that the Censors would make a request to the Consuls who, I
> believe can release funds or prepare an item for Senatorial
> consideration. I have no problem adding such measures into Item 10.


I'd suggest a procedure in which the budget is submitted by the censores
at the start of the mess, with a procedure for requesting additional
funds if necessary during the census' course. It really wouldn't
require much more than that. The important thing is to state *who* is
responsible for *what*, and *when*.

Valete
T Labienus Fortunatus
--
Quicquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur.

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] 4th draft
From:	"L. Cornelius Sulla Felix" <alexious@-------->
Date:	Fri, 26 Oct 2001 14:47:47 -0700

----- Original Message -----
From: Fortunatus
To: novaroma@--------
Sent: Friday, October 26, 2001 2:10 PM
Subject: Re: [novaroma] 4th draft


Salvete

> The edicts that we will be publishing will be a yearly registration for
> the Paters/Maters. Not for the entire gens.


Why not? It seems to be a perfect opportunity for obtaining full lists
of the members of each active gens directly from the
patres/matresfamilias themselves. Surely it isn't too much to expect a
p/materfamilias to be able to produce a list of his/her gentiles on
demand? It might provide an impetus for p/matres to keep in touch with
the members of their gentes.

Sulla: Because the edict is primarily concerned with the Paters themselves. Because the problem we are dealing with on that particular edict is related to gens registration. And, there is no way we can remove inactive gens members from the rolls of the citizens. The only recourse that gives us is putting them in Gens NEMO. That is not an adequate solution. The edict which will govern the paters and maters, the Census Lex will be covering ALL citizens of Nova Roma.

> What do you mean fell through the cracks. The Censor edict that will be
> promulgated shall, IMHO be comprehensive in terms of making certain
> Paters and Maters are proactive in that particular aspect.


Well, I was talking about my suggestion, not edicta whose contents are
currently unknown to me. Let's say that paterfamilias Bibulus fails to
mention civis Catullus, who is listed as belonging to Gens Bibula in the
Album Civium, when he gives his yearly list of gentiles of Gens Bibula
to the censores. Catullus, then, has "fallen through the cracks", and
is incensus.

I'd suggest placing the incensi in a state of suspended citizenship,
which would be reversed as soon as a m/paterfamilias claimed them as a
member of his or her gens (no 6-month wait). In this way, someone who
was declared incensus accidentally or due to unforeseen or unavoidable
circumstances wouldn't be penalized while those who really are gone will
not need to be given voter codes or assigned to centuriae or tribus, and
will therefore place no extra burden upon the censores. All that would
need to be done is to keep their info in the censorial database in case
they resurface. (Note that this means that p/matresfamilias must remain
"census" in order to retain their position, which is, IMO, both
reasonable and fair.)

Sulla: Paters can already do that. There is nothing that prevents them from "policing" their gens, and reporting their findings to the Censors. I have done that with the Gens Cornelia, but have not done it in the past couple of years.


> I understand if you do not feel such steps are necessary, I absolutely
> do think they are necessary. The C.C. Vote was just one indication,
> that convinced many respected citizens that being a numbers based person
> is not realistic anymore.


I'm not sure what you mean by "a numbers based person". That said, the
problems uncovered by this latest vote in the centuriae would not have
occurred if that vote had happened next year after non-taxpayers were
removed to the 193rd centuria. Far fewer cives would have been spread
across the centuriae, with little to no doubling up of voters within
given centuriae. A problem might have occurred in which there were
fewer than 192 taxpayers, and so not enough people to fill the taxpaying
centuriae, but this is not related to having or not having a census.

Sulla: I mean those respected Nova Romans who believe numbers are very important. Senator, your right, that if the CC vote occured after we implemented the Lex Vedia Assudi we would probably not have this issue. But, here is a difference between, you and I. I prefer an accurate representation of the truer number of active and involved citizens in Nova Roma. I think its not too hard to ask to have citizens respond to an email...answer a snail mail, or pick up a phone call and confirm that they are still interested in Nova Roma. Or for that matter that they even know Nova Roma exists. There have been far too many times when I have had to call citizens as Censor and explain why I am calling them for those individuals to say to me, what is Nova Roma? How do you have my phone number? I dont even remember applying to Nova Roma. It is unfortunate that you dont think we should take these reasonable steps to ensure a cleaner and more realistic view of our citizens.

> Ideally, the Gentes should be the focal point
> in a Census, but we cannot do that either.


Why not? If the main responsibility for registering with the censores
rests on the shoulders of the p/matresfamilias, rather than the other
way 'round, then the gentes can easily be the focal point in a census.
If the survival of the gens is on the line, then gentes with more than
one member, but with an inactive p/mater, will have an incentive to
replace their "deadbeat" leader. One-person gentes with inactive
p/matres would then just disappear. So long as this policy is well
publicized so that all cives who desire to be p/matres are aware of
their responsibilities, there is nothing unfair about it.

Sulla: Senator, I really hope your not serious in this. We have TONS of problems with the gentes. Beginning with the large numbers of inactive paters/maters. Its going to take alot of time to fix that. The Censor edict, when published will fix it, but its going to take time. The Census is a central government function. This must be done with the organization and coordination of the Central government. Besides, I am sure there will be paters who say, all of my gentes are active without actually conducting the Census of their gens. That is just one potential issue. So, I still maintain the belief that this Census must remain in the pervue of the Censors.

> A Census conducted by the
> Censors of Nova Roma, similar to the US Census is the ideal way to
> measure and clean off the roles of inactive, JUST name and nothing else
> citizens. What is the point when the Album Civium states we have 1100
> members and only 130 actually VOTE?


It seems to me that my suggested policy would solve this problem with
less effort than your suggested policy, and that it would do so on a
yearly basis, rather than once every 5 years.

Sulla: I respectfully disagree. I do not think your plan is feasable at all.

> It is time that the Censors office be Proactive before our
> Album Civium is composed of 15000 citizens total with about 12500 of
> them being invisible.


Sure. Be proactive by establishing a system that weeds out the inactive
on a yearly basis with a minimum of effort by the censores.

Sulla: The plan I am proposing does exactly that, I have no problem making it bi-yearly or yearly as long as it is properly completed and maintained.


> As you know, I don't have much skill in Latin, I got this title Duumviri
> from the June discussions. I took it from that, if we want Praecones
> Consulares (should it be for the Censors though), I don't mind.


Doh! Yes, that should be "Praecones Censoriales" (sing. = Praeco
Censorialis). Mea culpa.

Sulla: Cool.

> However, I still think, based on what the individuals will be doing,
> that they need to be elected by the People. Let me ask you, why do you
> think Scriba are sufficient?


I think scribae are sufficient because that's exactly what they're given
to the censores for. You can appoint as many scribae as needed, when
needed, for any task. And, you can get rid of them whenever they're no
longer required. Why create precisely two elected magistrati when you
can just as easily appoint five scribae and assign them each to one
fifth of Nova Roma's ostensible population with the orders, "Contact
everyone on this list and verify their information." You're creating an
unhistorical and unnecessary office that just robs the process of
flexibility. And, your reason for doing so is that you feel that these
people should be elected, but you can't provide any compelling reason
for that feeling.

If you think that scribae involved in the census should receive more
century points because of the level of effort involved, either assign
more scribae in order that they each receive a smaller workload, or
write a larger century point reward into this lex for such scribae.

Sulla: Well I understand what your saying, but here is how I see this workload being doled out:

Sulla: Censor - Duumviri - and then scribae....the reason why I see this set up is that while the Censor is maintaining their current workload.....the Duumviri are coordinating the census with the scribes.....and the feedback the scribes get will be forwarded to the Censors and Duumviri. The Duumviri will document the results the scriba in Excel (or any other program) and that documention would be forwarded to the Censors to recheck and implement in the Censor database. This frees up the Censors time to maintain their current workload.

Sulla: As for not being historical, We have a few positions in NR that are not historical, the curaetor Sermo, being one. Our Censors office has been morphed into something that is not historical, while many of the responsiblities can be argued as being historical. The Duumviri, I felt was a reasonable compromise that was settled back in the June discussions.
Sulla: If you think that the position is more suitable as a scriba than as a Minor magistrate, I would be pleased to recommend our list moderator to set up a poll on the ML and have the people voice their opinion. I would be satisfied to abide by popular consent.



> Ahh, I see what you mean. As in my above comments, I got the title
> Censi from the June discussion, I believe from Gn. Salix. I have since
> incorporated it. In the original draft I had ACTIVE. Because they have
> shown they are active. Ok, I can replace incensi with censi. So that
> both 1 and 2 are listed as censi. I am not trying to actually create a
> difference between voters and taxpayers. I just want, when the
> documentation section of the Census must be completed, that it somehow
> needs to be noted that these people were not contacted and the reason
> they were not contacted clearly spelled out. I hope you understand my
> intent.


Yes, I do. I hope you don't think I'm beating you up for an
inconsequential point of terminology. It's just that any terms in the
law, whether English or Latin, should make sense. Otherwise, the law
just becomes confusing.

Note that, by definition, the "censi" include everyone, active or not,
who is included in the Album Civium. I'd suggest sticking with active
and inactive, with the understanding that the law refers only to a very
strict, impartial, and easily verifiable definition of activity, and
that it applies no penalty for being inactive according to that definition.


Sulla: Oh no, I want the draft to be clearly understandable so that when it is presented to the People all debates have been ironed out and that it will easily pass the People's scrutiny. I hope you dont think I am being overly defensive in trying to explain the draft.

Sulla: I understand what you mean by Censi, I will change it back to active....that way its clearly understood, Sorry Gn. Salix! <g>

> scenario, because IMHO. As for submitting a budget, I can easily
> forecast and prepare a budget for the Senate to ratify beforehand and at
> the end of the census a balance sheet can be prepared showing how the
> money was essentially allocated. If the Censors need more money, I can
> foresee, that the Censors would make a request to the Consuls who, I
> believe can release funds or prepare an item for Senatorial
> consideration. I have no problem adding such measures into Item 10.


I'd suggest a procedure in which the budget is submitted by the censores
at the start of the mess, with a procedure for requesting additional
funds if necessary during the census' course. It really wouldn't
require much more than that. The important thing is to state *who* is
responsible for *what*, and *when*.

Sulla: Ok, I will rephrase this tonite when I post version 5. Thank you for your comments.

Respectfully,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
Censor

Valete
T Labienus Fortunatus
--
Quicquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur.

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] 4th draft
From:	"L. Cornelius Sulla Felix" <alexious@-------->
Date:	Fri, 26 Oct 2001 14:47:47 -0700

----- Original Message -----
From: Fortunatus
To: novaroma@--------
Sent: Friday, October 26, 2001 2:10 PM
Subject: Re: [novaroma] 4th draft


Salvete

> The edicts that we will be publishing will be a yearly registration for
> the Paters/Maters. Not for the entire gens.


Why not? It seems to be a perfect opportunity for obtaining full lists
of the members of each active gens directly from the
patres/matresfamilias themselves. Surely it isn't too much to expect a
p/materfamilias to be able to produce a list of his/her gentiles on
demand? It might provide an impetus for p/matres to keep in touch with
the members of their gentes.

Sulla: Because the edict is primarily concerned with the Paters themselves. Because the problem we are dealing with on that particular edict is related to gens registration. And, there is no way we can remove inactive gens members from the rolls of the citizens. The only recourse that gives us is putting them in Gens NEMO. That is not an adequate solution. The edict which will govern the paters and maters, the Census Lex will be covering ALL citizens of Nova Roma.

> What do you mean fell through the cracks. The Censor edict that will be
> promulgated shall, IMHO be comprehensive in terms of making certain
> Paters and Maters are proactive in that particular aspect.


Well, I was talking about my suggestion, not edicta whose contents are
currently unknown to me. Let's say that paterfamilias Bibulus fails to
mention civis Catullus, who is listed as belonging to Gens Bibula in the
Album Civium, when he gives his yearly list of gentiles of Gens Bibula
to the censores. Catullus, then, has "fallen through the cracks", and
is incensus.

I'd suggest placing the incensi in a state of suspended citizenship,
which would be reversed as soon as a m/paterfamilias claimed them as a
member of his or her gens (no 6-month wait). In this way, someone who
was declared incensus accidentally or due to unforeseen or unavoidable
circumstances wouldn't be penalized while those who really are gone will
not need to be given voter codes or assigned to centuriae or tribus, and
will therefore place no extra burden upon the censores. All that would
need to be done is to keep their info in the censorial database in case
they resurface. (Note that this means that p/matresfamilias must remain
"census" in order to retain their position, which is, IMO, both
reasonable and fair.)

Sulla: Paters can already do that. There is nothing that prevents them from "policing" their gens, and reporting their findings to the Censors. I have done that with the Gens Cornelia, but have not done it in the past couple of years.


> I understand if you do not feel such steps are necessary, I absolutely
> do think they are necessary. The C.C. Vote was just one indication,
> that convinced many respected citizens that being a numbers based person
> is not realistic anymore.


I'm not sure what you mean by "a numbers based person". That said, the
problems uncovered by this latest vote in the centuriae would not have
occurred if that vote had happened next year after non-taxpayers were
removed to the 193rd centuria. Far fewer cives would have been spread
across the centuriae, with little to no doubling up of voters within
given centuriae. A problem might have occurred in which there were
fewer than 192 taxpayers, and so not enough people to fill the taxpaying
centuriae, but this is not related to having or not having a census.

Sulla: I mean those respected Nova Romans who believe numbers are very important. Senator, your right, that if the CC vote occured after we implemented the Lex Vedia Assudi we would probably not have this issue. But, here is a difference between, you and I. I prefer an accurate representation of the truer number of active and involved citizens in Nova Roma. I think its not too hard to ask to have citizens respond to an email...answer a snail mail, or pick up a phone call and confirm that they are still interested in Nova Roma. Or for that matter that they even know Nova Roma exists. There have been far too many times when I have had to call citizens as Censor and explain why I am calling them for those individuals to say to me, what is Nova Roma? How do you have my phone number? I dont even remember applying to Nova Roma. It is unfortunate that you dont think we should take these reasonable steps to ensure a cleaner and more realistic view of our citizens.

> Ideally, the Gentes should be the focal point
> in a Census, but we cannot do that either.


Why not? If the main responsibility for registering with the censores
rests on the shoulders of the p/matresfamilias, rather than the other
way 'round, then the gentes can easily be the focal point in a census.
If the survival of the gens is on the line, then gentes with more than
one member, but with an inactive p/mater, will have an incentive to
replace their "deadbeat" leader. One-person gentes with inactive
p/matres would then just disappear. So long as this policy is well
publicized so that all cives who desire to be p/matres are aware of
their responsibilities, there is nothing unfair about it.

Sulla: Senator, I really hope your not serious in this. We have TONS of problems with the gentes. Beginning with the large numbers of inactive paters/maters. Its going to take alot of time to fix that. The Censor edict, when published will fix it, but its going to take time. The Census is a central government function. This must be done with the organization and coordination of the Central government. Besides, I am sure there will be paters who say, all of my gentes are active without actually conducting the Census of their gens. That is just one potential issue. So, I still maintain the belief that this Census must remain in the pervue of the Censors.

> A Census conducted by the
> Censors of Nova Roma, similar to the US Census is the ideal way to
> measure and clean off the roles of inactive, JUST name and nothing else
> citizens. What is the point when the Album Civium states we have 1100
> members and only 130 actually VOTE?


It seems to me that my suggested policy would solve this problem with
less effort than your suggested policy, and that it would do so on a
yearly basis, rather than once every 5 years.

Sulla: I respectfully disagree. I do not think your plan is feasable at all.

> It is time that the Censors office be Proactive before our
> Album Civium is composed of 15000 citizens total with about 12500 of
> them being invisible.


Sure. Be proactive by establishing a system that weeds out the inactive
on a yearly basis with a minimum of effort by the censores.

Sulla: The plan I am proposing does exactly that, I have no problem making it bi-yearly or yearly as long as it is properly completed and maintained.


> As you know, I don't have much skill in Latin, I got this title Duumviri
> from the June discussions. I took it from that, if we want Praecones
> Consulares (should it be for the Censors though), I don't mind.


Doh! Yes, that should be "Praecones Censoriales" (sing. = Praeco
Censorialis). Mea culpa.

Sulla: Cool.

> However, I still think, based on what the individuals will be doing,
> that they need to be elected by the People. Let me ask you, why do you
> think Scriba are sufficient?


I think scribae are sufficient because that's exactly what they're given
to the censores for. You can appoint as many scribae as needed, when
needed, for any task. And, you can get rid of them whenever they're no
longer required. Why create precisely two elected magistrati when you
can just as easily appoint five scribae and assign them each to one
fifth of Nova Roma's ostensible population with the orders, "Contact
everyone on this list and verify their information." You're creating an
unhistorical and unnecessary office that just robs the process of
flexibility. And, your reason for doing so is that you feel that these
people should be elected, but you can't provide any compelling reason
for that feeling.

If you think that scribae involved in the census should receive more
century points because of the level of effort involved, either assign
more scribae in order that they each receive a smaller workload, or
write a larger century point reward into this lex for such scribae.

Sulla: Well I understand what your saying, but here is how I see this workload being doled out:

Sulla: Censor - Duumviri - and then scribae....the reason why I see this set up is that while the Censor is maintaining their current workload.....the Duumviri are coordinating the census with the scribes.....and the feedback the scribes get will be forwarded to the Censors and Duumviri. The Duumviri will document the results the scriba in Excel (or any other program) and that documention would be forwarded to the Censors to recheck and implement in the Censor database. This frees up the Censors time to maintain their current workload.

Sulla: As for not being historical, We have a few positions in NR that are not historical, the curaetor Sermo, being one. Our Censors office has been morphed into something that is not historical, while many of the responsiblities can be argued as being historical. The Duumviri, I felt was a reasonable compromise that was settled back in the June discussions.
Sulla: If you think that the position is more suitable as a scriba than as a Minor magistrate, I would be pleased to recommend our list moderator to set up a poll on the ML and have the people voice their opinion. I would be satisfied to abide by popular consent.



> Ahh, I see what you mean. As in my above comments, I got the title
> Censi from the June discussion, I believe from Gn. Salix. I have since
> incorporated it. In the original draft I had ACTIVE. Because they have
> shown they are active. Ok, I can replace incensi with censi. So that
> both 1 and 2 are listed as censi. I am not trying to actually create a
> difference between voters and taxpayers. I just want, when the
> documentation section of the Census must be completed, that it somehow
> needs to be noted that these people were not contacted and the reason
> they were not contacted clearly spelled out. I hope you understand my
> intent.


Yes, I do. I hope you don't think I'm beating you up for an
inconsequential point of terminology. It's just that any terms in the
law, whether English or Latin, should make sense. Otherwise, the law
just becomes confusing.

Note that, by definition, the "censi" include everyone, active or not,
who is included in the Album Civium. I'd suggest sticking with active
and inactive, with the understanding that the law refers only to a very
strict, impartial, and easily verifiable definition of activity, and
that it applies no penalty for being inactive according to that definition.


Sulla: Oh no, I want the draft to be clearly understandable so that when it is presented to the People all debates have been ironed out and that it will easily pass the People's scrutiny. I hope you dont think I am being overly defensive in trying to explain the draft.

Sulla: I understand what you mean by Censi, I will change it back to active....that way its clearly understood, Sorry Gn. Salix! <g>

> scenario, because IMHO. As for submitting a budget, I can easily
> forecast and prepare a budget for the Senate to ratify beforehand and at
> the end of the census a balance sheet can be prepared showing how the
> money was essentially allocated. If the Censors need more money, I can
> foresee, that the Censors would make a request to the Consuls who, I
> believe can release funds or prepare an item for Senatorial
> consideration. I have no problem adding such measures into Item 10.


I'd suggest a procedure in which the budget is submitted by the censores
at the start of the mess, with a procedure for requesting additional
funds if necessary during the census' course. It really wouldn't
require much more than that. The important thing is to state *who* is
responsible for *what*, and *when*.

Sulla: Ok, I will rephrase this tonite when I post version 5. Thank you for your comments.

Respectfully,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
Censor

Valete
T Labienus Fortunatus
--
Quicquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur.

Subject:	RE: [novaroma] 4th draft
From:	"JusticeCMO" <justicecmo@-------->
Date:	Fri, 26 Oct 2001 18:39:24 -0400

Salve,

>>If we did one snail mail issuance at the beginning of the Census where
every inactive citizen was conducted we are looking about 700 * .35 (US
Postage Stamp). That is about $245.>>

Do we have any idea the breakdown of American versus international people we
would need to contact? I only ask because I would think the mail costs
would be significantly higher to send mail to, say, Poland as opposed to
Portland.

>>I would honestly suggest putting in about another $100.00 for other
budgetary needs.
(Phone calls and generic office supplies).>>

I would think this is rather a low-ball estimate. Local toll calls alone
can run up *very* quickly, and that is within the same *state*, let alone
potential international calls. Of course, that is in addition to the
paper/postcards, etc that would be needed.

>>PLEASE REMEMBER, that this is to be done only 1 time every 5 years.>>

Even so, it seems an awful lot of money. :/ This alone makes me think much
more in favor of the idea of putting the responsibility of contacting the
Censors in the hands of the people. Heck, if they can't be bothered to
check in once a year <or once every five years as the case may be> are they
really worth our spending 400 dollars on?

>>This total would roughly be about 350.00-400.00 to conduct a full Census.
This is the worst case scenario, because IMHO.>>

Oh I understand that everyone involved would do their best to keep costs
down, but it still seems an awfully cumbersome and expensive project. Would
it not be in our best interest to do what others have suggested in placing
the Paters and Maters in charge of reporting on their own gens strength,
leaving us only to deal with the gentes that are not heard from? Between
that and changing the current lex so that a majority of *voting* centuries
is necessary to pass/elect I think we can solve the problem quite easily.

I am all in favor of an accurate count of our populace, but if the choice
lies between having 700 "ghosts" doing no good but no harm on the roles
<once the lex is fixed> versus spending an inordinate amount of time and
money tracking them down.....well, I am in favor of letting them haunt the
roles.

Vale,
Priscilla Vedia Serena

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] 4th draft
From:	"L. Cornelius Sulla Felix" <alexious@-------->
Date:	Fri, 26 Oct 2001 15:54:29 -0700

----- Original Message -----
From: JusticeCMO
To: novaroma@--------
Sent: Friday, October 26, 2001 3:39 PM
Subject: RE: [novaroma] 4th draft


Salve,

>>If we did one snail mail issuance at the beginning of the Census where
every inactive citizen was conducted we are looking about 700 * .35 (US
Postage Stamp). That is about $245.>>

Do we have any idea the breakdown of American versus international people we
would need to contact? I only ask because I would think the mail costs
would be significantly higher to send mail to, say, Poland as opposed to
Portland.

Sulla: Well I checked on that yesterday as a matter of fact, based on the demographic breakdown, about 70% of Nova Roman Citizens are American. 30% are international. Of the international citizens about 90% of them are based in provincia about 10% are not. (If I recall correctly). I was not currnetly able to determine how many citizens in provincia lack a governor. I can try to do that tonite..but I hope this helps.

>>I would honestly suggest putting in about another $100.00 for other
budgetary needs.
(Phone calls and generic office supplies).>>

I would think this is rather a low-ball estimate. Local toll calls alone
can run up *very* quickly, and that is within the same *state*, let alone
potential international calls. Of course, that is in addition to the
paper/postcards, etc that would be needed.

Sulla: I understand that. My ideas for the budget are strictly ideas...and have not be finalized.

>>PLEASE REMEMBER, that this is to be done only 1 time every 5 years.>>

Even so, it seems an awful lot of money. :/ This alone makes me think much
more in favor of the idea of putting the responsibility of contacting the
Censors in the hands of the people. Heck, if they can't be bothered to
check in once a year <or once every five years as the case may be> are they
really worth our spending 400 dollars on?

Sulla: LOL I like that too. But you know, if we do that....we will lose ALOT of citizens, because as Consul Flavius Vedius said...many citizens are not on the ML. If we want to do that I can rephrase it. But, we could save more citizens by actually taking the initiative. I would be amicable for a poll for the citizens to determine if they want the Censors to be proactive or if the responsbility should be placed on the indiviudal citizen.

>>This total would roughly be about 350.00-400.00 to conduct a full Census.
This is the worst case scenario, because IMHO.>>

Oh I understand that everyone involved would do their best to keep costs
down, but it still seems an awfully cumbersome and expensive project. Would
it not be in our best interest to do what others have suggested in placing
the Paters and Maters in charge of reporting on their own gens strength,
leaving us only to deal with the gentes that are not heard from? Between
that and changing the current lex so that a majority of *voting* centuries
is necessary to pass/elect I think we can solve the problem quite easily.

I am all in favor of an accurate count of our populace, but if the choice
lies between having 700 "ghosts" doing no good but no harm on the roles
<once the lex is fixed> versus spending an inordinate amount of time and
money tracking them down.....well, I am in favor of letting them haunt the
roles.

Sulla: I have never been in favor of letting them haunt the roles. I think we have a duty to make our roles as accurate as possible, whats the purpose of maintaining the roles if they are not accurate? Seems to be contradictory in my opinion. However, I do think that placing the burden on the citizens will save time, money and effort.

Respectfully,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
Censor

Vale,
Priscilla Vedia Serena

Subject:	RE: [novaroma] 4th draft
From:	"JusticeCMO" <justicecmo@-------->
Date:	Fri, 26 Oct 2001 19:03:23 -0400

Salve,

>>Sulla: Censor - Duumviri - and then scribae....the reason why I see
this set up is that while the Censor is maintaining their current
workload.....>>

Lots of cooks piling into the kitchen, eh? I will admit to a bit of paranoia
here, but I just *have* to ask. Just how many people will the censors be
giving our phone numbers, mundane names and home addresses to?

>>the Duumviri are coordinating the census with the scribes.....>>

At first glance that seems logical and efficient, but keep going......

>>and the feedback the scribes get will be forwarded to the Censors and
Duumviri.>>

If the Censors are getting feedback while the Census is in progress, doesn't
that make for an awful lot of paperwork? Think about it.........let's say 3
scribes EACH sending all of their info to BOTH Duumviri....who then in turn
are passing it along to BOTH Censors. Seems a logistical nightmare trying
to track who got what from whom and when.

>>The Duumviri will document the results the scriba in Excel (or any other
program)>>

Could the scribae not each compile their own results? It just seems an
extra step is being added here unnecessarily.

>>and that documention would be forwarded to the Censors to recheck>>

Ok, I gotta ask. How on Earth will the Censors "recheck" any of the
information without going through the entire process again from scratch? I
thought the whole purpose was so that the Censors didn't get bogged down in
e-mailing, calling, writing, etc to all those citizens. How can they
"recheck" the info supplied by the scribae which in turn is transmitted to
the Duumviri.....wouldn't they have to trust the job was done accurately?

>>and implement in the Censor database. This frees up the Censors time to
maintain their current workload.>>

Phew....if you call that "freeing up" any kind of time I am amazed! It
seems to me a nightmare of people that could easily be avoided by the use of
scribae alone, whom can then be dismissed with thanks when the Census is
over, as opposed to two magistrates which you admit yourself serve *no*
other purpose.

We have enough trouble getting folks to run for ANY office. To distract
from other magistracies with what amounts to "baby-sit the scribae for the
Censors" seems a total waste of our resources. I, for one, would far
prefer seeing active and talented citizens put to better use.

Vale,
Priscilla Vedia Serena

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] 4th draft
From:	"L. Cornelius Sulla Felix" <alexious@-------->
Date:	Fri, 26 Oct 2001 16:19:58 -0700

----- Original Message -----
From: JusticeCMO
To: novaroma@--------
Sent: Friday, October 26, 2001 4:03 PM
Subject: RE: [novaroma] 4th draft


Salve,

>>Sulla: Censor - Duumviri - and then scribae....the reason why I see
this set up is that while the Censor is maintaining their current
workload.....>>

Lots of cooks piling into the kitchen, eh? I will admit to a bit of paranoia
here, but I just *have* to ask. Just how many people will the censors be
giving our phone numbers, mundane names and home addresses to?

Sulla: I dont know, as I stated, this is how my mode of thinking has been going as I have been thinking this issue out. Basically the Censors would appoint the Duumviri with a particular task such as phone contact, or breaking it down that one Duumviri would focus on the states and one international....but that would be up to the discretion of the Censors. But, I would think that it would be fairly organized and concise.
>>the Duumviri are coordinating the census with the scribes.....>>

At first glance that seems logical and efficient, but keep going......

Sulla: I have tried to be logical and efficient.

>>and the feedback the scribes get will be forwarded to the Censors and
Duumviri.>>

If the Censors are getting feedback while the Census is in progress, doesn't
that make for an awful lot of paperwork? Think about it.........let's say 3
scribes EACH sending all of their info to BOTH Duumviri....who then in turn
are passing it along to BOTH Censors. Seems a logistical nightmare trying
to track who got what from whom and when.

Sulla: Not really. The Duumviri would be sending reports to the Censors based on inputting the information on the database. The censors would check the data that they have received to make certain there have been no mistakes. A similar situation was done when Senator. M. Octavius and our censor scribes did the Century point revisions to make sure all points were allocated correctly.

>>The Duumviri will document the results the scriba in Excel (or any other
program)>>

Could the scribae not each compile their own results? It just seems an
extra step is being added here unnecessarily.

Sulla: I dont think so....each scriba would be in charge of their appropriate, again, I forsee a large force of scriba that might be necessary, espically when the population of NR reaches 10K or even 2K population. Hence the Duumviri are necessary to coordinate the information in a workable format.

>>and that documention would be forwarded to the Censors to recheck>>

Ok, I gotta ask. How on Earth will the Censors "recheck" any of the
information without going through the entire process again from scratch? I
thought the whole purpose was so that the Censors didn't get bogged down in
e-mailing, calling, writing, etc to all those citizens. How can they
"recheck" the info supplied by the scribae which in turn is transmitted to
the Duumviri.....wouldn't they have to trust the job was done accurately?

Sulla: Before the announcement there will be an excell database that can be checked for anything to see if a contact has not be attempted or if there is anything unclear.

<Snip>

Respectfully,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix


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

Subject:	[novaroma] 5th draft - Totally different emphasis
From:	"L. Cornelius Sulla Felix" <alexious@-------->
Date:	Fri, 26 Oct 2001 16:32:42 -0700

Ave,

Here is a new draft that places the responsibility of the action on the citizens. This will definately simplify the process and is the most cost effective way. Please let me know of any comments.

Respectfully,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
____

Pursuant to the Constitution of Nova Roma (IV.A.1.b) the following lex
is hereby enacted to determine the accurate numbers of citizens who make
up Nova Roma.

1. A Census of all citizens of Nova Roma should be done every 5 years. When the Census begins the Censors should post a notification to the novaroma@--------, novaromaannounce@-------- and the Nova Roma message board notifying that the citizens must notify the censors that they are active and invovled in Nova Roma. At least a three month window is necessary to give ample time for all citizens to respond.

2. The Census of all citizen of Nova Roma must be done by the Ides of
September, in the year that the Census is due. This will give the
Censors enough time to clean the roles and make adjustments before the
alignment of century points and century placements must be completed.
[This must be done during November, according to the Constitution].

3. The Census will consist of the following:

A. Active citizens are those citizens that do not need to be contacted
by the Censors to determine if they are apart of Nova Roma:

1. Those citizens who vote are considered "ACTIVE."
2. Those citizens who pay taxes are considered "ACTIVE".

4. Inactive citizens are those citizens who will need to respond to the Office of Censors request.

5. Documentation. The Censors are required to maintain a report that
documents the information that was received from the Citizen. Such infomration should be noted: the date, the method of communication used (phone, email, snail mail).

6. By the Ides of August, the Censors should post a list to the
official email list of Nova Roma (novaroma@--------),
novaromaannounce@-------- and the Nova Roman Message Board
displaying the names of those citizens who have failed to respond.

7. If citizens fail to respond to the Censors request. That person
will no longer be considered a citizen of Nova Roma, and they would be
ineligible to reapply for a period of six months. His name will be
stricken from the Album Civium and if he/she is a Pater/Mater, the
Censors will abide by the Constitution and any Censorial edict if the
appointment of a paterfamilias is necessary.

A. If the citizen who has been removed was the last member of that gens
is considered extinct.

8. If any person who was once a citizen but was removed due to a
National Census, he will be stricken from the Album Civium. However,
the Censors have the discretion to waive this clause if both Censors
feel there are legitimate reasons for the citizen to remain
inncommunicado (homelessness, war, national disaster, etc).




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