| Subject: |
[novaroma] Census - Proactive vs. Reactive |
| From: |
"L. Cornelius Sulla Felix" <alexious@--------> |
| Date: |
Fri, 26 Oct 2001 17:21:51 -0700 |
|
Ave,
I have put together another draft which places the responsibility on the citizens themselves. Clearly this is the most efficient, cheapest and less evasive way we can conduct the Census.
I would support either method, so I dont have a preference, but lets weigh the pros and cons on each method.
The proactive way:
Negative
1. More bureaucratic - resulting in more scribes
2. Costly
3. Various methods of contact can be annoying to those people who do not wish to be contacted.
Pro.
1. It would probably keep more citizens as a result of personal contact.
2. It would be very exhaustive, and would probably complete areas of applications that might be missing information
3. It would assist those citizens in NR who are without access to the internet.
__________
The Reactive way
Con:
1. It would focus on those citizens who have internet access.
2. Those citizens who are not on the ML, not on the NR announce list, or read the message board regularly will be left out.
3. Loss of a greater number of citizens who might not even be aware we are conducting a Census.
Pro:
1. Less bureaucratic
2. Cost effective, heck its free! <g>
3. No other citizen beyond those who have access to confidentail data will be needed.
4. would not require extensive outlay of time for Censors, just a maintaince of a small excell worksheet at the very least.
__________________
So, here are the issues, as I see it between a proactive and a reactive role for conducting a Census. I hope I have summarized this clearly. Please feel free to add pros and cons as you see fit. Honestly, I dont know what is the best for NR. I have always felt that trying to retain citizens is very important, I know that I have tried to exercise that principle as Censor for the past two years, but I also recognize the needs of the organization and in that the cost of the census, if we decide to use the proactive version it will be costly but the benefit would be probably getting citizens who have drifted away from NR back to NR. I see the arguements on both sides.
Respectfully,
Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
Censor
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
|
| Subject: |
RE: [novaroma] 5th draft - Totally different emphasis |
| From: |
"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@--------> |
| Date: |
Fri, 26 Oct 2001 21:55:41 -0400 |
|
Salvete
> -----Original Message-----
> From: L. Cornelius Sulla Felix [mailto:alexious@--------]
> Sent: Friday, October 26, 2001 7:33 PM
>
> 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.
Again, I must question why you want to do this every five years, rather than
more often. After all, Nova Roma has only been around three years, and we
find ourselves needing to clean out the dead wood. If, as you insist, a
regular Census is the optimum way to ensure an active roster of Citizens,
then it seems to me it needs to be done more often.
(Personally, I still think there might be other, better ways to improve our
active/inactive citizen ratio, but for the moment the debate is about your
census idea.)
> When the Census begins the Censors should post a
> notification to the novaroma@--------,
> novaromaannounce@-------- and the Nova Roma message board
What happens when our mailing list gets sold off to yet another company?
It's happened twice already. Why not just say "those public fora which shall
have been designated for such purpose", as we've used in other leges?
Specifying email addresses in leges ties future Censors' hands needlessly.
> 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.
That last sentence isn't clear. A three month window from the time contact
is initiated, from the time the last person is attempted to be contacted, or
the time the whole process begins? Also, what happens to people who join
during the census procedure? What if someone joins in May? Will they then
have to turn around and be counted in the census?
> 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.
I would take out that last sentence. Just set the deadline; the interaction
of the various other legal deadlines will take care of themselves.
> [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:
If they do not need to be contacted, then why does the census "consist" of
these people? (Also, "a part" is two words.)
> 1. Those citizens who vote are considered "ACTIVE."
> 2. Those citizens who pay taxes are considered "ACTIVE".
Again, you have failed to specify what "citizens who vote" means. Does that
mean people who have voted at all, ever? People who have voted in the most
recent general election? People who have voted in the most recent mid-term
election? People who have voted sometime during the last year? You must be
specific.
> 4. Inactive citizens are those citizens who will need to respond
> to the Office of Censors request.
What happened to 3? Oh, I see. You might want to conform to standard outline
format and use Roman numerals for the highest-level items. That would also
be consistent with the other leges in the Tabularium.
But to the point; this sentence doesn't make sense. You define "active"
citizens above by clearly defined criteria; they vote, they pay taxes. You
then go on to give requirements for what "inactive" must do, without
actually defining what makes them "inactive".
> 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).
Slang terms such as "snail mail" are inappropriate for a legal document.
"Regular mail" is, I think, preferable.
> 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.
Again, it's not a good idea to lock such specifics as the email list address
into the law. See above.
I also must once again ask what purpose the posting of the list will serve.
Why post the names of people you've not been able to get in touch with? What
will this accomplish?
> 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.
That first bit is not a complete sentence. You shift tenses in the second
sentence; will/would. Also, you name the Constitution and Censorial edict
regarding the appointment of a new paterfamilias, but omit the possibility
that a lex might be passed impacting such things.
> A. If the citizen who has been removed was the last member of that gens
> is considered extinct.
You shouldn't only have one sub-paragraph. If you have a paragraph A, you
must have a paragraph B. You could make the second half of the last sentence
of paragraph 7 into its own sub-paragraph.
> 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.
Again, this sentence does not make sense. If someone was _once_ a citizen,
they won't be in the Album Civium to begin with; as you have it written it
does not plainly mean a citizen removed because of the current census. It
would make sense if it read "Any person whose citizenship is removed due to
a National Census shall be stricken from the Album Civium", but it doesn't
make sense as it currently reads.
> 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).
It's spelled "Incommunicado"; someone else already pointed that out. Are you
actually reading what other people are saying about your proposal?
And I don't think "homelessness" is appropriate to include in a list
alongside wars and earthquakes...
Vale,
Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
Consul
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] 5th draft - Totally different emphasis |
| From: |
"L. Cornelius Sulla Felix" <alexious@--------> |
| Date: |
Fri, 26 Oct 2001 19:12:07 -0700 |
|
Ave,
----- Original Message -----
From: Flavius Vedius Germanicus
To: novaroma@--------
Sent: Friday, October 26, 2001 6:55 PM
Subject: RE: [novaroma] 5th draft - Totally different emphasis
Salvete
> -----Original Message-----
> From: L. Cornelius Sulla Felix [mailto:alexious@--------]
> Sent: Friday, October 26, 2001 7:33 PM
>
> 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.
Again, I must question why you want to do this every five years, rather than
more often. After all, Nova Roma has only been around three years, and we
find ourselves needing to clean out the dead wood. If, as you insist, a
regular Census is the optimum way to ensure an active roster of Citizens,
then it seems to me it needs to be done more often.
Sulla: I have explained it many times already, during the June discussion, when I originally proposed a YEARLY and a biannual census it was SHOT down. Hence I did not include it in these later revisions.
(Personally, I still think there might be other, better ways to improve our
active/inactive citizen ratio, but for the moment the debate is about your
census idea.)
> When the Census begins the Censors should post a
> notification to the novaroma@--------,
> novaromaannounce@-------- and the Nova Roma message board
What happens when our mailing list gets sold off to yet another company?
It's happened twice already. Why not just say "those public fora which shall
have been designated for such purpose", as we've used in other leges?
Specifying email addresses in leges ties future Censors' hands needlessly.
Sulla: Well Consul, since we are currently using those email addresses and you obviously dont like using the term "official email list." You are kinda narrowing the options. THe problem I see with using "those public fora which shall be designated for such purpose," is what if it is only advertised in teh Comitia Plebis list? Some standards are going to need to be properly defined. How about any email list that is moderated by Curaetor Sermo?
> 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.
That last sentence isn't clear. A three month window from the time contact
is initiated, from the time the last person is attempted to be contacted, or
the time the whole process begins? Also, what happens to people who join
during the census procedure? What if someone joins in May? Will they then
have to turn around and be counted in the census?
Sulla: Three month window from the moment the Censors annouce, "WE are now conducting the official Census of Nova Roma."
> 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.
I would take out that last sentence. Just set the deadline; the interaction
of the various other legal deadlines will take care of themselves.
Sulla: OK cool.
> [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:
If they do not need to be contacted, then why does the census "consist" of
these people? (Also, "a part" is two words.)
Sulla: I put that in there to show that these people will already be "counted." (and according to my spell checker at work "a part" is also two words as well... ;) )
> 1. Those citizens who vote are considered "ACTIVE."
> 2. Those citizens who pay taxes are considered "ACTIVE".
Again, you have failed to specify what "citizens who vote" means. Does that
mean people who have voted at all, ever? People who have voted in the most
recent general election? People who have voted in the most recent mid-term
election? People who have voted sometime during the last year? You must be
specific.
Sulla: I was going to properly define this this evening..but I am thinking of going based on the vote with the higest turnout which would be the December Election, since we use that election for basis of the Tribal alighments. Consistency is important IMHO.
> 4. Inactive citizens are those citizens who will need to respond
> to the Office of Censors request.
What happened to 3? Oh, I see. You might want to conform to standard outline
format and use Roman numerals for the highest-level items. That would also
be consistent with the other leges in the Tabularium.
But to the point; this sentence doesn't make sense. You define "active"
citizens above by clearly defined criteria; they vote, they pay taxes. You
then go on to give requirements for what "inactive" must do, without
actually defining what makes them "inactive".
Sulla: I will convert the drafts to Roman Numerals. <g> Active citizens will be identified in teh next draft.
> 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).
Slang terms such as "snail mail" are inappropriate for a legal document.
"Regular mail" is, I think, preferable.
Sulla: We are just looking at a draft, I will replace all slang terms appropriately.
> 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.
Again, it's not a good idea to lock such specifics as the email list address
into the law. See above.
Sulla: I will change it to reflect whatever list our curaetor Sermo is moderating. That will account for any venue.
I also must once again ask what purpose the posting of the list will serve.
Why post the names of people you've not been able to get in touch with? What
will this accomplish?
Sulla: As a check. In case someone might have resubed to the list....who was inactive....I think its safer. Dont you want to be safe, and try to retain potential citizens?
> 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.
That first bit is not a complete sentence. You shift tenses in the second
sentence; will/would. Also, you name the Constitution and Censorial edict
regarding the appointment of a new paterfamilias, but omit the possibility
that a lex might be passed impacting such things.
Sulla: Right, it should be a comma, instead...NO prob...We can do that.
> A. If the citizen who has been removed was the last member of that gens
> is considered extinct.
You shouldn't only have one sub-paragraph. If you have a paragraph A, you
must have a paragraph B. You could make the second half of the last sentence
of paragraph 7 into its own sub-paragraph.
Sulla: I know the grammar. So should it be included with that clause? It felt odd to me thats why I put it in its own subsection.
> 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.
Again, this sentence does not make sense. If someone was _once_ a citizen,
they won't be in the Album Civium to begin with; as you have it written it
does not plainly mean a citizen removed because of the current census. It
would make sense if it read "Any person whose citizenship is removed due to
a National Census shall be stricken from the Album Civium", but it doesn't
make sense as it currently reads.
Sulla: OK I can change the sentence to your suggestion.
> 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).
It's spelled "Incommunicado"; someone else already pointed that out. Are you
actually reading what other people are saying about your proposal?
And I don't think "homelessness" is appropriate to include in a list
alongside wars and earthquakes...
Sulla: Consul, if the worst you can say is some spelling mistakes, while I am working and my spell checker at work doesnt pick it up, then I am satisfied. I know Senator Labienus pointed it out but I was at home then. Now I am at work and I am multi-tasking between answering emails, revising drafts, working and listening to callers. I am completely satisfied that the people of Nova Roma know what I am talking about even despite the spelling errors that we all make.
Vale,
Sulla
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] Revision 6 - Census - Changes recommended by Consul Germancius |
| From: |
"L. Cornelius Sulla Felix" <alexious@--------> |
| Date: |
Fri, 26 Oct 2001 19:33:30 -0700 |
|
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 2 years. When the Census begins the Censors should post a notification on the lists that are governed by the Curaetor Sermo and the Nova Roma message board notifying that the citizens must notify the censors that they are active and invovled in Nova Roma. The time limit from the time the Census officially begins, with such notification til it concludes must be a minimum of three (3) consecutive months. All members who do not meet the requirements of being "active" will need to comply with this law.
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.
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 voted in the preceding December election are considered "ACTIVE."
2. Those citizens who paid taxes are to be considered "ACTIVE".
4. Inactive citizens are those citizens, are those who do not meet the above requirements, 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, regular mail).
6. By the Ides of August, the Censors should post a list to the lists that are governed by the Curaetor Sermo 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, then 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. If the citizen who has been removed was the last member of that gens is considered extinct.
8. Any person whose citizenship is removed due to a National Census shall 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 incommunicado (homelessness, war, national disaster, etc).
Respectfully,
Lucius Cornelius Sulla FElix
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] Repost v. 6 with Roman Numerals |
| From: |
"L. Cornelius Sulla Felix" <alexious@--------> |
| Date: |
Fri, 26 Oct 2001 19:38:02 -0700 |
|
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.
I. A Census of all citizens of Nova Roma should be done every 2 years. When the Census begins the Censors should post a notification on the lists that are governed by the Curaetor Sermo and the Nova Roma message board notifying that the citizens must notify the censors that they are active and invovled in Nova Roma. The time limit from the time the Census officially begins, with such notification til it concludes must be a minimum of three (3) consecutive months. All members who do not meet the requirements of being "active" will need to comply with this law.
II. The Census of all citizen of Nova Roma must be done by the Ides of September, in the year that the Census is due.
III. 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 voted in the preceding December election are considered "ACTIVE."
2. Those citizens who paid taxes are to be considered "ACTIVE".
IV. Inactive citizens are those citizens, are those who do not meet the above requirements, will need to respond to the Office of Censors request.
V. 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, regular mail).
VI. By the Ides of August, the Censors should post a list to the lists that are governed by the Curaetor Sermo and the Nova Roman Message Board displaying the names of those citizens who have failed to respond.
VII. If citizens fail to respond to the Censors request, then 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. If the citizen who has been removed was the last member of that gens is considered extinct.
VIII. Any person whose citizenship is removed due to a National Census shall 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 incommunicado (homelessness, war, national disaster, etc).
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] my propraetorship |
| From: |
danielovi@-------- |
| Date: |
Sat, 27 Oct 2001 02:51:04 -0000 |
|
Salvete omnes.
I already sent an email to the Senate expressing my wishes to
continue with my position of propraetor provincialis for next year.
During the past weeks I was very doubtful because of some personal
difficulties I am going through currently. However I decided to go
ahead anyway.
By the way we shall keep our regular face to face meetings without
any costs in provincia Argentina. So it will not need any budget for
next year.
curate ut valeatis
Lucius Pompeius Octavianus
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
RE: [novaroma] 5th draft - Totally different emphasis |
| From: |
"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@--------> |
| Date: |
Fri, 26 Oct 2001 23:19:53 -0400 |
|
Salve
> -----Original Message-----
> From: L. Cornelius Sulla Felix [mailto:alexious@--------]
> Sent: Friday, October 26, 2001 10:12 PM
>
> Sulla: I have explained it many times already, during the June
> discussion, when I originally proposed a YEARLY and a biannual
> census it was SHOT down. Hence I did not include it in these
> later revisions.
Well consider a five-year plan "shot down" too. If this census of yours is
to actually do anything rather than just be for show, it needs to be done
more often than every five years.
> What happens when our mailing list gets sold off to yet another company?
> It's happened twice already. Why not just say "those public fora which
shall
> have been designated for such purpose", as we've used in other leges?
> Specifying email addresses in leges ties future Censors' hands
needlessly.
>
> Sulla: Well Consul, since we are currently using those email
> addresses and you obviously dont like using the term "official
> email list." You are kinda narrowing the options.
Actually I'm expanding the options. If yahoogroups.com was sold to another
provider the day after this lex was passed, we'd have to amend it before the
censors could conduct a legal census. Technical details such as precise
email adresses shouldn't be enshrined in law; it's too much trouble to
change them.
> THe problem I
> see with using "those public fora which shall be designated for
> such purpose," is what if it is only advertised in teh Comitia
> Plebis list?
That is the exact phrasing used in the leges regulating voting in all three
comitia. If it's good enough for elections, surely it is good enough for
your census.
> Sulla: Three month window from the moment the Censors annouce,
> "WE are now conducting the official Census of Nova Roma."
Then say so.
> Sulla: I put that in there to show that these people will
> already be "counted."
Okay, that makes sense. You might want to make it more explicit, though.
> Sulla: I was going to properly define this this evening..
Might I suggest that you refrain from sending out any more drafts until you
have one you consider complete?
> Active citizens will be identified in teh next draft.
Ditto. Let's have what you consider a final draft that we can discuss.
> Sulla: We are just looking at a draft, I will replace all
> slang terms appropriately.
Ditto again. If this isn't a serious proposal for legislation, why are we
wasting time on this now?
> Sulla: I will change it to reflect whatever list our curaetor
> Sermo is moderating. That will account for any venue.
The curatrix sermo doesn't moderate the message board or the website. Do you
suggest we limit official venues to email lists only? Personally, I prefer
to leave it flexible to fit the needs of the moment.
> Sulla: As a check. In case someone might have resubed to the
> list....who was inactive....I think its safer. Dont you want to
> be safe, and try to retain potential citizens?
Don't you think it's more likely that an inactive cive would check out the
website, rather than one of fifty yahoogroups email lists dealing with Nova
Roma? But even given your assumption, you already require the Censors to
announce that the census is starting. Are you just trying to net those cives
who happen to come back between June and September? Someone who came back
before June would have seen the initial Censors' announcement, and
presumably would notice that they never got contacted...
>> You shouldn't only have one sub-paragraph. If you have a paragraph A,
you
>> must have a paragraph B. You could make the second half of the last
sentence
>> of paragraph 7 into its own sub-paragraph.
>
> Sulla: I know the grammar.
Then why not use it properly?
> Sulla: Consul, if the worst you can say is some spelling
> mistakes, while I am working and my spell checker at work doesnt
> pick it up, then I am satisfied.
If you think that my only criticisms have been of your spelling, then I am
most definitely not satisfied that you are actually reading what your
critics are saying. Indeed, that wasn't even the point I raised; someone
else had mentioned your spelling error, and yet it persisted through two
drafts. If you're not going to incorporate such an elementary correction
into your document, I don't see why we should be confident that more
substantive criticisms will be considered.
Vale,
Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
Consul
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Re: Slowly, Cautiously, and Carefully |
| From: |
"Marc Sarault" <marc_sarault@--------> |
| Date: |
Sat, 27 Oct 2001 02:38:07 +0000 |
|
Salvete Cives,
I agree there is room for improvement when it comes to introducing new
citizens to the process. As an example I can say that in my case and after
checking with the Censors, my acceptance as a citizen now lies with the
paterfamilias that I have solicitated and has not yet return my e-mail
request for several weeks still.
Eager to persue my goals, I have solicitated another paterfamilias only to
have the e-mail return with the mention "address no longer active". So I
wait for a third paterfamilias in the Provincia Canada Orientalis.
Gratia
Marcus
Marc Sarault
>From: Gnaeus Salix Astur <salixastur@-------->
>Reply-To: novaroma@--------
>To: novaroma@--------
>Subject: Re: [novaroma] Re: Slowly, Cautiously, and Carefully
>Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2001 15:25:37 -0700 (PDT)
>
>Salvete Quirites.
>
>--- CJ Sitter <otto_von_sitter@--------> wrote:
>
><<snipped>>
>
> > Yes, it would have an effect even if it wasn't a requirement to pay
> > right away. That might give new citizens a chance to get a feel for
> > Nova Roma and what it is about before having to pay the $12. Believe
> >
> > it or not, I initially thought Nova Roma was your typical reinactment
> >
> > group mixed with a historical society, not a micronation. But after
> > having been a citizen for a few months I've gotten quite an education
> >
> > in what Nova Roma is about and though I still have much to learn, I
> > am full willing to pay when it comes time just for the fact I've had
> > time to learn.
> >
> > Marcus Cornelius Tiberius
>
>That was what I was talking about. When I joined, my idea of what Nova
>Roma really was was clumsy at best. I had to ask, pester older citizens
>and dedicate much time to get a feeling. It was not easy. If I had not
>been stubborn enough, or if I had been more shy, I coul very well lost
>interest and abandoned. We need to improve our information systems, and
>not make Nova Roma an elitist club. If new citizens do not get
>involved, it is not their fault for not being "good Romans". It is our
>fault for not providing enough information on how they could find what
>they wanted in Nova Roma (or if what they wanted was there at all).
>
>
>=====
>Bene Valete in Pace Deorum!
>Gnaeus Salix Astur.
>Legatus Externis Rebus Provinciae Hispaniae
>Triumvir Academiae Novae Romae in Thule
>Scriba ad Res Externas Academiae Novae Romae in Thule.
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
>http://personals.yahoo.com
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] 4th draft |
| From: |
"Caius Puteus Germanicus" <puteus@--------> |
| Date: |
Sat, 27 Oct 2001 08:18:12 +0200 |
|
Ave,
Just one quick answer to the cost of mailing all people: I am prepared to send an email to all people, if I were to be indicated as a scriba for the censors, and it wouldn't even cost me a sestertius. A cable connection is a lot easier than a telephone line. I oppose the making of lots of international phone calls, as I think the contacting of all people who are not to be contacted via email lies within the hands of the provincial governors. Same question for sending letters.
Problem: scribae would indeed have to report to the censores who in their turn have to thrust the governors with the addresses and phone numbers they pass to them.
The main list is just one bit of Nova Roma, and I agree with Consul Germanicus completely when he states that not all Romans have to/are a member of the list! But we dispose of other means for contacting our cives, e.g. by email.
The last 'problem' are the cives who do not belong to a provincia. Email messages might eliminate - optimistically - 50 % of them, which leaves us with about 5 % of all the cives we would need to send an international letter to.
Nevertheless I remain on my point of view that it is the responsability of all cives to chech in once a year (can be mentionned in the mail we send to them). The first time this 'census' (or whatever it is going to be called) will take lots of work, but next time (e.g. one year later) it should become a lot easier.
Vale!
Caius
----- Original Message -----
From: L. Cornelius Sulla Felix
To: novaroma@--------
Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2001 12:54 AM
Subject: Re: [novaroma] 4th draft
----- 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: |
[novaroma] Re: Slowly, Cautiously, and Carefully |
| From: |
trog99@-------- |
| Date: |
Sat, 27 Oct 2001 12:16:56 -0000 |
|
---
Salve Marcus:
Just to note; your pater/materfamilias does not "have" to be within
your provincia; You are a resident of Provincia Canada Orientalis,
but your Pater could live in Europe.
For example, my Paterfamilias resides in California; our gens has
members there, but members from all over the world.
I just wanted to remove a possible misconception here.......
In the meantime, as always, if there is anything I can do to assist
you, please call upon me.
Bene vale,
Propraetrix Pompeia
In novaroma@--------, "Marc Sarault" <marc_sarault@h...> wrote:
> Salvete Cives,
>
> I agree there is room for improvement when it comes to introducing
new
> citizens to the process. As an example I can say that in my case
and after
> checking with the Censors, my acceptance as a citizen now lies with
the
> paterfamilias that I have solicitated and has not yet return my
e-mail
> request for several weeks still.
>
> Eager to persue my goals, I have solicitated another paterfamilias
only to
> have the e-mail return with the mention "address no longer active".
So I
> wait for a third paterfamilias in the Provincia Canada Orientalis.
>
> Gratia
>
> Marcus
> Marc Sarault
>
>
> >From: Gnaeus Salix Astur <salixastur@-------->
> >Repl--------: novaroma@--------
> >To: novaroma@--------
> >Subject: Re: [novaroma] Re: Slowly, Cautiously, and Carefully
> >Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2001 15:25:37 -0700 (PDT)
> >
> >Salvete Quirites.
> >
> >--- CJ Sitter <otto_von_sitter@--------> wrote:
> >
> ><<snipped>>
> >
> > > Yes, it would have an effect even if it wasn't a requirement to
pay
> > > right away. That might give new citizens a chance to get a feel
for
> > > Nova Roma and what it is about before having to pay the $12.
Believe
> > >
> > > it or not, I initially thought Nova Roma was your typical
reinactment
> > >
> > > group mixed with a historical society, not a micronation. But
after
> > > having been a citizen for a few months I've gotten quite an
education
> > >
> > > in what Nova Roma is about and though I still have much to
learn, I
> > > am full willing to pay when it comes time just for the fact I've
had
> > > time to learn.
> > >
> > > Marcus Cornelius Tiberius
> >
> >That was what I was talking about. When I joined, my idea of what
Nova
> >Roma really was was clumsy at best. I had to ask, pester older
citizens
> >and dedicate much time to get a feeling. It was not easy. If I had
not
> >been stubborn enough, or if I had been more shy, I coul very well
lost
> >interest and abandoned. We need to improve our information systems,
and
> >not make Nova Roma an elitist club. If new citizens do not get
> >involved, it is not their fault for not being "good Romans". It is
our
> >fault for not providing enough information on how they could find
what
> >they wanted in Nova Roma (or if what they wanted was there at all).
> >
> >
> >=====
> >Bene Valete in Pace Deorum!
> >Gnaeus Salix Astur.
> >Legatus Externis Rebus Provinciae Hispaniae
> >Triumvir Academiae Novae Romae in Thule
> >Scriba ad Res Externas Academiae Novae Romae in Thule.
> >
> >__________________________________________________
> >Do You Yahoo!?
> >Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
> >http://personals.yahoo.com
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at
http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Census - Proactive vs. Reactive |
| From: |
"Caius Puteus Germanicus" <puteus@--------> |
| Date: |
Sat, 27 Oct 2001 08:32:21 +0200 |
|
Ave,
third reply in less than ten minutes: two remarks: I refer to M. Tullius Cicero and say that it is the duty of any respected Roman to participate in the public life of his/her community. However, it is easy to post this message on the main list, but we can post it on all NR list too, can't we? Difference is: everybody who actively participates in discussions relating to NR will automatically be notified.
Vale!
Caius
----- Original Message -----
From: L. Cornelius Sulla Felix
To: novaroma@--------
Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2001 2:21 AM
Subject: [novaroma] Census - Proactive vs. Reactive
AAve,
I have put together another draft which places the responsibility on the citizens themselves. Clearly this is the most efficient, cheapest and less evasive way we can conduct the Census.
I would support either method, so I dont have a preference, but lets weigh the pros and cons on each method.
The proactive way:
Negative
1. More bureaucratic - resulting in more scribes
2. Costly
3. Various methods of contact can be annoying to those people who do not wish to be contacted.
Pro.
1. It would probably keep more citizens as a result of personal contact.
2. It would be very exhaustive, and would probably complete areas of applications that might be missing information
3. It would assist those citizens in NR who are without access to the internet.
__________
The Reactive way
Con:
1. It would focus on those citizens who have internet access.
2. Those citizens who are not on the ML, not on the NR announce list, or read the message board regularly will be left out.
3. Loss of a greater number of citizens who might not even be aware we are conducting a Census.
Pro:
1. Less bureaucratic
2. Cost effective, heck its free! <g>
3. No other citizen beyond those who have access to confidentail data will be needed.
4. would not require extensive outlay of time for Censors, just a maintaince of a small excell worksheet at the very least.
__________________
So, here are the issues, as I see it between a proactive and a reactive role for conducting a Census. I hope I have summarized this clearly. Please feel free to add pros and cons as you see fit. Honestly, I dont know what is the best for NR. I have always felt that trying to retain citizens is very important, I know that I have tried to exercise that principle as Censor for the past two years, but I also recognize the needs of the organization and in that the cost of the census, if we decide to use the proactive version it will be costly but the benefit would be probably getting citizens who have drifted away from NR back to NR. I see the arguements on both sides.
Respectfully,
Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
Censor
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] Provincia Illyricum |
| From: |
"Caius Puteus Germanicus" <puteus@--------> |
| Date: |
Sat, 27 Oct 2001 08:43:32 +0200 |
|
Ave omnes!
One question arose to me when checking how many citizens live outside of a provincia. If the map of Europe is accurate, which I suppose it is thanks to Marcus Arminius Maior, how many citizens are living in Illyricum, Moesia and Dacia. If the active members are sufficiently present, would it not be easier to create a new provincia unifying these citizens? Discussions about a name can better be left over to the citizens themselves?
Vale!
Caius
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] 5th draft - Totally different emphasis |
| From: |
"Caius Puteus Germanicus" <puteus@--------> |
| Date: |
Sat, 27 Oct 2001 08:28:32 +0200 |
|
Ave Sulla,
I don't want to break down this proposal, but I think you gave the remarks of Consul Germanicus little consideration (e.g. still mentionning yahoogroups, homelessness - what on eath may that mean for us Romans, who are as you stated yourself 70 % Americans, the rest of the world is civilised enough to live in houses too, you know).
Anyway, I think the idea of making the people responsable of contacting the censores or their scribae is the very best in the proposal.
I have one other remark conc. phone calls: ever thought of the difficulties people may have with English when you look at international members? Do you like to express why you would like to talk to the son of an Italian 'mama'? I worked in an international environment for recruitment of people for multinationals and I have to admit that this is not always easy. Even in present day Belgium, my mother does not speak English. Fortunately, you can call me at my own place, since I do not live with my parents anymore :-).
Sorry if the tone of this message may have hurt people's feelings, but I get the impression that realism is not always a virtue... Please don't take this personally Sulla, I am glad that anyone risks his head on the public forum to try and solve a problem for all of us.
Vale,
Caius
----- Original Message -----
From: L. Cornelius Sulla Felix
To: novaroma@--------
Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2001 1:32 AM
Subject: [novaroma] 5th draft - Totally different emphasis
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]
|
| Subject: |
R: [novaroma] Digest Number 1678 |
| From: |
"Prometheus" <marcusprometheus@--------> |
| Date: |
Sat, 27 Oct 2001 11:02:22 +0200 |
|
Date: 25 Oct 2001 10:43:51 -0200
From: Michel Loos <loos@-------->
Subject: Re: A fictional scenario to occupy our thoughts
[Who would win?]
The Germanic country.
Military advances were huge between 2th cent AD and 11th century AD.
Specially in cavalry strength due to the invention of stribes.
But also in metallurgy:
broken gladii would be legions when facing 10th century swords.
Marcus Prometheus Decius Golia:
1) Please could you elaborate a little:
Where (and when) did happen those metallurgical advances?
2) Nobody mentioned the possible great importance of the very well reputed
discipline (and patriotism) of 2nd century roman armies.
Valete
Marcus Prometheus
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Provincia Illyricum |
| From: |
"M Arminius Maior" <m_arminius@--------> |
| Date: |
Sat, 27 Oct 2001 14:30:26 -0300 |
|
--
On Sat, 27 Oct 2001 08:43:32
Caius Puteus Germanicus wrote:
>Ave omnes!
>
>One question arose to me when checking how many citizens live outside of a provincia. If the map of Europe is accurate, which I suppose it is thanks to Marcus Arminius Maior, how many citizens are living in Illyricum, Moesia and Dacia. If the active members are sufficiently present, would it not be easier to create a new provincia unifying these citizens? Discussions about a name can better be left over to the citizens themselves?
>
>Vale!
>Caius
>
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
Make a difference, help support the relief efforts in the U.S.
http://clubs.lycos.com/live/events/september11.asp
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Provincia Illyricum |
| From: |
"M Arminius Maior" <m_arminius@--------> |
| Date: |
Sat, 27 Oct 2001 14:40:13 -0300 |
|
Salve, Cai Putei
--
On Sat, 27 Oct 2001 08:43:32
Caius Puteus Germanicus wrote:
>Ave omnes!
>
>One question arose to me when checking how many citizens live outside of a provincia. If the map of Europe is accurate, which I suppose it is thanks to Marcus Arminius Maior, how many citizens are living in Illyricum, Moesia and Dacia.
MAIOR: I believe that there are 5 cives in Iugoslavia, 2 in Romenia, 1 in Bulgaria, 1 in Macedonia and none in Croatia, Bosnia, Slovenia and Albania, according to the Album Civium.
>If the active members are sufficiently present, would it not be easier to create a new provincia unifying these citizens? Discussions about a name can better be left over to the citizens themselves?
>
MAIOR: I believe that the Senate had discussed the creation of a great balcanic Province of Dacia-Moesia, but, since some of the countries involved are not exactly friendly, the senatores voted against this proposal. Perhaps you can find cives from that countries and make some type of agreement, or make a petition to the Senate?
>Vale!
>Caius
Vale
Marcus Arminius Maior
Propraetor Brasiliae
Make a difference, help support the relief efforts in the U.S.
http://clubs.lycos.com/live/events/september11.asp
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] my propraetorship |
| From: |
"M Arminius Maior" <m_arminius@--------> |
| Date: |
Sat, 27 Oct 2001 14:42:53 -0300 |
|
Salve, Luci Pompei
Im glad to see my neighbor and colleague Propraetor continuing their good work!
Best wishes
Vale
M Arminius
--
On Sat, 27 Oct 2001 02:51:04
danielovi wrote:
>Salvete omnes.
>I already sent an email to the Senate expressing my wishes to
>continue with my position of propraetor provincialis for next year.
>During the past weeks I was very doubtful because of some personal
>difficulties I am going through currently. However I decided to go
>ahead anyway.
>By the way we shall keep our regular face to face meetings without
>any costs in provincia Argentina. So it will not need any budget for
>next year.
>curate ut valeatis
>Lucius Pompeius Octavianus
Make a difference, help support the relief efforts in the U.S.
http://clubs.lycos.com/live/events/september11.asp
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Grammatical Nit-Picking (was Repost v. 6 with Roman Numerals) |
| From: |
Fortunatus <labienus@--------> |
| Date: |
Sat, 27 Oct 2001 13:07:17 -0500 |
|
Salve Luci Corneli
> 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:
You really do want "a part" here. If I am a part of a group, I am a
member of that group. If I am apart from a group, I am not with that
group. It's the same as the difference between a theist and an atheist.
The "a" attached to the front of the word transforms it into an
antonym of itself.
In other words, while it's reasonably obvious what you mean, the
grammatical error makes the meaning of the sentence entirely ambiguous.
Vale
T Labienus Fortunatus
--
Quicquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur.
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] A Possible Alternate Scheme (was 4th draft) |
| From: |
Fortunatus <labienus@--------> |
| Date: |
Sat, 27 Oct 2001 14:23:13 -0500 |
|
Salvete
Rather than debate the finer points of L Cornelius' proposal, which is
relatively workable if, IMO, a bit overly bureaucratic in its approach,
I thought I'd try to better illustrate how I envision a census working.
I'm doing this in part so that the whole of my idea is in one place,
and in part to allow me to fight with its details in my own mind.
Note that this is not meant to be a draft for a lex. It's just a rough
collection of my thoughts on the matter. Hopefully, it will be at least
somewhat useful.
(For sake of brevity, I will use materfamilias (pl. matresfamilias) to
refer to both male and female heads of gentes. Also, a gentilis (pl.
gentiles) is a member of a gens. A civis (pl. cives) is a citizen of
Nova Roma.)
1. The censores issue an edictum requiring matresfamilias to register
themselves and their gentes with the censores on a yearly basis. In
order to register, a materfamilias must provide:
a. a list of all cives within her gens (minimum of one: herself)
b. macronational and Roman name for all Nova Roman gentiles
c. street address for all Nova Roman gentiles, if possible
d. email address for all Nova Roman gentiles, if possible
e. phone number for all Nova Roman gentiles, if possible
2. According to the edictum, anyone not spoken for by a materfamilias
would be declared incensus, and therefore a member of the incensi. Any
member of the incensi who was claimed as a gentilis by a materfamilias
at any time would immediately cease to be incensus, and would be placed
in the gens of the claiming materfamilias, subject to the approval of
the incensus civis. (The materfamilias would not have to be the
incensus civis' original materfamilias.)
3. In cooperation with a magistratus (preferably a consul), a lex would
be enacted which defined the penalties for being incensus. (This lex
could also set the edictum mentioned above in stone.) The primary
penalty would be an ongoing suspension of citizenship, including the
loss of voter code and assignment to both the centuriae and the tribus.
In this way, those who became incensus would become a negligible
burden to the censores.
4. Since registration of both gentes and matresfamilias would be
simultaneous, any materfamilias who failed to register would lose her
status as materfamilias and her gens would lose its status as a gens of
Nova Roma.
4.a. The gens would only be removed from the Album Gentium if the
remaining gentiles (if any) failed to provide a new materfamilias for
their gens in order to register the gens.
4.a.1. In the case of the imminent removal of a multi-member gens,
all remaining gentiles would be notified by the censores (this would
occur shortly after the deadline for registration passed) in order that
they might appoint a new materfamilias who would then be allowed
register herself and her gens.
4.b.2 A failure to appoint a new materfamilias who registers her
gens within, say, 30 days of being notified would render all remaining
gentiles incensus until they were picked up by some other materfamilias.
5. The information contained in the censorial database for those cives
who became incensus would be kept (possibly for a finite period; e.g.
two years). Their record would simply have a flag applied to it,
changing their status from 'civis in good standing' to 'incensus'. In
this way, the database could exclude them from the Alba, and their
information could be retained in case they were subsequently claimed by
a materfamilias.
6. The actual mechanics of the census could be:
6.a. 30 days before the deadline to register, the censorial database
would automatically send an email message directly to all
matresfamilias, the censores, and whatever official Nova Roman lines of
communication the censores desired.
6.a.1. This message would remind the matresfamilias of their need
to register, detail all the information they would need to provide, and
provide instructions on how to register.
6.a.2. The message would be repeated 15 days before the deadline
for those matresfamilias that hadn't already registered for that year.
6.b. A special registration page would be provided on the Web site,
allowing matresfamilias to view their gens (much like the gens pages
already on the site).
6.b.1. In order to access this page, the materfamilias would need
to log in, perhaps using either her voter code or a password provided by
her by way of the current official Web site login feature.
6.b.2. This page would show each gentilis, along with each
gentilis' respective contact information, currently entered in the
censorial database for that materfamilias' gens.
6.b.3. The page would allow the materfamilias to verify each
gentilis already in the database with a checkbox, allowing her to
exclude gentiles if she wishes.
6.b.4. The page would also allow the materfamilias to correct the
contact information for her gentiles.
6.b.5. If the page did not include all cives that the materfamilias
believed were in her gens, she would have to contact the censores to
work out the problem. This should be relatively rare.
6.c. For any matresfamilias that did not have an email address listed
in the censorial database, an email would be sent to the censores and
the propraetores of the appropriate provinciae.
6.c.1. It would be the propraetores' duty to contact these
matresfamilias, obtain the appropriate information from them, and relay
that information to the censores.
6.c.2. Cives who were not in an established provincia would be
contacted by the censores or, most likely, a scriba or scribae appointed
specifically for the purpose of contacting such matresfamilias.
6.d. All matresfamilias would be allowed to register by a method
other than the Web site (email, snail mail, etc.), so long as their
registration was received by the censores before the deadline. For
matresfamilias in provinciae, this could be coordinated through the
provincial governor. For others, it could either be handled directly by
the censores or by scribae appointed for the purpose.
Valete
T Labienus Fortunatus
--
Quicquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur.
|
| Subject: |
Re: R: [novaroma] Digest Number 1678 |
| From: |
QFabiusMaxmi@-------- |
| Date: |
Sat, 27 Oct 2001 15:39:28 EDT |
|
In a message dated 10/27/01 9:00:52 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
marcusprometheus@-------- writes:
> Who would win?]
> The Germanic country.
> Military advances were huge between 2th cent AD and 11th century AD.
> Specially in cavalry strength due to the invention of stribes.
> But also in metallurgy:
> broken gladii would be legions when facing 10th century swords.
>
>
Salvete.
We assume the Romans would have kept up with current metallurgy standards,
there is
no way a military power like Rome would fall behind. One needs only to study
their history
to understand that.
Stirrups are an important advantage to a cavalryman using a lance, but the
Gallic four horn saddle gave a fairly secure seat, and the thrown lancia was
the same length as the lance.
The Norman armor was inspired by the Gauls, as was the Roman Hamatas. The
helms were inspired by the Sarmations, who the Romans beat regularly.
We've war-gamed this encounter many times. A second century field force
makes mincemeat of a Norman style army. Feudal armies, are just not
maneuverable. Roman armies are. Romans would treat Norman's as they would
any Catafractii army. You fix the front with deep formations that can
withstand the charge. You have Legio Lanciarii supported by horse on the
flanks. Once the charging mass hits the legiones and stops, you hit the
flanks before they can withdraw. After they do this several times, they are
exhausted, and can be driven from the field by a general advance.
For that person who made the snide comment about Norman vrs Byzantine
battles. The Byzantines lost two. They won the rest. They lost one
(Durazzo) because the survivors of Hastings who were now in the Emperor's
guard (Varangians) made an uncontrolled advance against a Norman battle,
defeated it but then was cut off from the rest of the army. It was a
critical battle however, and one that the Byzantines could not afford to lose.
The other was because the hastily mustered Byzantine thematic (levy) army was
caught forming up as the Norman charged them. When a Tagmatic (regular) army
met them in equal numbers like Cannae (1055) the result was a Norman defeat.
Q. Fabius Maximus
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
R: [novaroma] Digest Number 1670 |
| From: |
"Prometheus" <marcusprometheus@--------> |
| Date: |
Sat, 27 Oct 2001 10:40:49 +0200 |
|
Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2001 08:11:02 +0100
From: "M. Apollonius Formosanus" <bvm3@-------->
Subject: Re: Osama's Guilt
M. Apollonius Formosanus omnibus Civibus S.P.D.
Of course
nations fight to uphold their interests. But one of the
interests of the United States (as of Athens) is in
Democracy in itself, because democratic countries are much
more likely to be true friends of the United States, and in
the long run more stable. The U.S. support for Israel, for
example, is not only due to a laudable concern with a
much-mistreated people, but a feeling that Israel is a
fellow democracy, which shares our fundamenal values far
more than any of its neighbours.
Sometimes, indeed, the U.S. supports régimes like Saudi
Arabia or formerly the Shah of Iran which are singularly
unappealing and illiberal. This is partly a matter of
national interest pure and simple: America needs a stable
and steady supply of oil from the Middle East for its
economy and its national security. The two régimes
mentioned were thought of as stable and as probably the
best available in the countries in question.
Marcus Prometheus Decius Golia:
My most sincere compliments for the above post to the optimus
Marcus Apollonius Formosanus Paterfamilias Gentis Apolloniae
Aedilis Plebeius, Amicus Dignitatis, Magister Scholae Latinae.
The above post is one of the wisest things I read recently.
I share fully his general opinions and I would like to introduce just a
small observation.
Speaking of real world and not of utopia, the Shah's secular and progressive
regime if compared with what followed (Khomeini's ultra bloody bigotry's
regime) was in my opinion ten times preferrable.
Best friendly regards
and VALETE
Marcus Prometheus.
===========================
"[T]here is a minority of intellectual pacifists whose real though
unadmitted motive appears to be HATRED of western democracy and admiration
of totalitarianism. Pacifist propaganda usually boils down to saying that
one side is AS BAD AS the other, but if one looks closely at the writings of
younger intellectual pacifists, one finds that they do not by any means
express impartial disapproval but are directed almost entirely against
Britain and the United States. Moreover they do not as a rule condemn
violence as such, but only violence used in defence of
western countries." -George Orwell, "Notes on Nationalism," 1945
"In so far as it hampers the British war effort, British pacifism is on the
side of the Nazis, and German pacifism, if it exists, is on the side of
Britain and the USSR. Since pacifists have more freedom of action in
countries where traces of democracy survive, pacifism can act more
effectively against democracy than for it. Objectively the pacifist is
pro-Nazi." - George Orwell
========================================
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Re: Slowly, Cautiously, and Carefully |
| From: |
"Marc Sarault" <marc_sarault@--------> |
| Date: |
Sat, 27 Oct 2001 19:32:25 +0000 |
|
Salve Pompeia,
I do understand that possibility, however as suggested in the web site of
Novae Romae when asquing for citizenship, to at least try to be part of a
familias located within the provincia.
I do feel strong about that since I would like to be able to meet with my
clan whenever Ifeel like it. I could be wrong or it may be irrelevant.
Your comments...
Gratia
Marcus _________ Firmitus
Provincia Canadae Orientalis
>From: trog99@--------
>Reply-To: novaroma@--------
>To: novaroma@--------
>Subject: [novaroma] Re: Slowly, Cautiously, and Carefully
>Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2001 12:16:56 -0000
>
>---
>
>
>Salve Marcus:
>
>Just to note; your pater/materfamilias does not "have" to be within
>your provincia; You are a resident of Provincia Canada Orientalis,
>but your Pater could live in Europe.
>
>For example, my Paterfamilias resides in California; our gens has
>members there, but members from all over the world.
>
>I just wanted to remove a possible misconception here.......
>
>In the meantime, as always, if there is anything I can do to assist
>you, please call upon me.
>
>Bene vale,
>Propraetrix Pompeia
>
> In novaroma@--------, "Marc Sarault" <marc_sarault@h...> wrote:
> > Salvete Cives,
> >
> > I agree there is room for improvement when it comes to introducing
>new
> > citizens to the process. As an example I can say that in my case
>and after
> > checking with the Censors, my acceptance as a citizen now lies with
>the
> > paterfamilias that I have solicitated and has not yet return my
>e-mail
> > request for several weeks still.
> >
> > Eager to persue my goals, I have solicitated another paterfamilias
>only to
> > have the e-mail return with the mention "address no longer active".
> So I
> > wait for a third paterfamilias in the Provincia Canada Orientalis.
> >
> > Gratia
> >
> > Marcus
> > Marc Sarault
> >
> >
> > >From: Gnaeus Salix Astur <salixastur@-------->
> > >Repl--------: novaroma@--------
> > >To: novaroma@--------
> > >Subject: Re: [novaroma] Re: Slowly, Cautiously, and Carefully
> > >Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2001 15:25:37 -0700 (PDT)
> > >
> > >Salvete Quirites.
> > >
> > >--- CJ Sitter <otto_von_sitter@--------> wrote:
> > >
> > ><<snipped>>
> > >
> > > > Yes, it would have an effect even if it wasn't a requirement to
>pay
> > > > right away. That might give new citizens a chance to get a feel
>for
> > > > Nova Roma and what it is about before having to pay the $12.
>Believe
> > > >
> > > > it or not, I initially thought Nova Roma was your typical
>reinactment
> > > >
> > > > group mixed with a historical society, not a micronation. But
>after
> > > > having been a citizen for a few months I've gotten quite an
>education
> > > >
> > > > in what Nova Roma is about and though I still have much to
>learn, I
> > > > am full willing to pay when it comes time just for the fact I've
>had
> > > > time to learn.
> > > >
> > > > Marcus Cornelius Tiberius
> > >
> > >That was what I was talking about. When I joined, my idea of what
>Nova
> > >Roma really was was clumsy at best. I had to ask, pester older
>citizens
> > >and dedicate much time to get a feeling. It was not easy. If I had
>not
> > >been stubborn enough, or if I had been more shy, I coul very well
>lost
> > >interest and abandoned. We need to improve our information systems,
>and
> > >not make Nova Roma an elitist club. If new citizens do not get
> > >involved, it is not their fault for not being "good Romans". It is
>our
> > >fault for not providing enough information on how they could find
>what
> > >they wanted in Nova Roma (or if what they wanted was there at all).
> > >
> > >
> > >=====
> > >Bene Valete in Pace Deorum!
> > >Gnaeus Salix Astur.
> > >Legatus Externis Rebus Provinciae Hispaniae
> > >Triumvir Academiae Novae Romae in Thule
> > >Scriba ad Res Externas Academiae Novae Romae in Thule.
> > >
> > >__________________________________________________
> > >Do You Yahoo!?
> > >Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
> > >http://personals.yahoo.com
> >
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at
>http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
>
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Provincia Illyricum |
| From: |
"Caius Puteus Germanicus" <puteus@--------> |
| Date: |
Sat, 27 Oct 2001 21:52:48 +0200 |
|
Ave cives Illyriae, Moesiae, Daciae et al.,
What do you, active cives of NR, think about the proposal of creating a new provincia Balcanica? Is it realistic or not? Are we not in the first place Romans, who have to overcome (macro)national(istic) differences?
Please notify me about your ideas, in order to be able to formulate an eventual need towards the Senatus.
Vale,
Caius
----- Original Message -----
From: M Arminius Maior
To: novaroma@--------
Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2001 7:40 PM
Subject: Re: [novaroma] Provincia Illyricum
Salve, Cai Putei
--
On Sat, 27 Oct 2001 08:43:32
Caius Puteus Germanicus wrote:
>Ave omnes!
>
>One question arose to me when checking how many citizens live outside of a provincia. If the map of Europe is accurate, which I suppose it is thanks to Marcus Arminius Maior, how many citizens are living in Illyricum, Moesia and Dacia.
MAIOR: I believe that there are 5 cives in Iugoslavia, 2 in Romenia, 1 in Bulgaria, 1 in Macedonia and none in Croatia, Bosnia, Slovenia and Albania, according to the Album Civium.
>If the active members are sufficiently present, would it not be easier to create a new provincia unifying these citizens? Discussions about a name can better be left over to the citizens themselves?
>
MAIOR: I believe that the Senate had discussed the creation of a great balcanic Province of Dacia-Moesia, but, since some of the countries involved are not exactly friendly, the senatores voted against this proposal. Perhaps you can find cives from that countries and make some type of agreement, or make a petition to the Senate?
>Vale!
>Caius
Vale
Marcus Arminius Maior
Propraetor Brasiliae
Make a difference, help support the relief efforts in the U.S.
http://clubs.lycos.com/live/events/september11.asp
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] opposing mutual recognition of micronation |
| From: |
"Caius Puteus Germanicus" <puteus@--------> |
| Date: |
Sat, 27 Oct 2001 22:32:15 +0200 |
|
Ave omnes!
I saw on the yahoo club NR II that Minister Lewis
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, from The Virtual Nation is inviting us to start diplomatic relationships. I firmly oppose this project as a civis since, after checking the website www.virtualnation.org, we seem to have nothing in common. In case there is a mutual interest, please inform me about it. I hereby call the responsible politicians and in the first place the consuls to stop this action.
Of course, I stay open for criticism from other cives...
Vale optime!
Caius
postscriptum:
here is the message as I copied it from Yahoo Clubs:
Establish Diplomatic Ties jimmejosh
(17/M/Howell, MI) 8/10/01 2:09 pm
Greetings:
As the Foreign Minister of the Virtual Election, I would like to invite the Nova Roma II to begin the formal process to establish diplomatic ties.
Please eMail me at jimmejosh@-------- to start the process!
Regards,
Minister Lewis
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
The Virtual Nation
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] Hello! |
| From: |
"Earl Luther Carr" <S.Stroexarr@--------> |
| Date: |
Fri, 26 Oct 2001 11:21:52 -0500 |
|
Hello,
Almost 2 months ago I applied for citizenship of Nova Roma but to this day I
have not heard anything. I've moved since then, but I still have the same
e-mail address. Would someone please explain the procedure?
There could be a few reasons why I haven't heard anything... Perhaps it is
because I applied for a new gens. I saw one other gens in Holland (The
Netherlands), but he/she was in Brabant which is fairly far away from where
I live (de Groene Hart) and it would be nice to have more personal contact
with fellow gens members and not have to rely on a leader of my gens who I
don't know, and by what I've read, may not even be a participating citizen
any longer. Another reason could be that my computer was (and still is -
but now it's in stable condition) crashing on and off and perhaps I had been
notified, but I never received it?
Due to being very busy, I don't have time to read everything posted, but a
lot of what I read is very interesting. However, now that I'm living out
here on a farm, there is not much else to do... The latin lingo is a bit
difficult, but I suppose I will understand many of the words later if I keep
reading the posts.
By the way, since the discussion of the movie about the famous Greek,
Alexander the Great, was brought up - wasn't he gay or at least bi? That
will be sweet having Leonard de Capio (I don't really know the name of
actor? I have no interest in him or most movies, but I know who he is.)
having a love scene with his beloved boy slave!?!?!? I'm sure Hollywood
will tell the truth, don't you? Didn't he erect a huge temple in the name
of his lover when his slave died, and didn't he die immediately afterwards
at age 30 something, partly because he was so bereaved? Didn't he die of a
syphillus?
Well, I hope to hear from someone.
Regards,
Luuk
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Re: Slowly, Cautiously, and Carefully |
| From: |
Gnaeus Salix Astur <salixastur@--------> |
| Date: |
Sat, 27 Oct 2001 16:00:49 -0700 (PDT) |
|
Salvete Quirites; et salve, Marc.
--- Marc Sarault <marc_sarault@--------> wrote:
> Salvete Cives,
>
> I agree there is room for improvement when it comes to introducing
> new
> citizens to the process. As an example I can say that in my case and
> after
> checking with the Censors, my acceptance as a citizen now lies with
> the
> paterfamilias that I have solicitated and has not yet return my
> e-mail
> request for several weeks still.
>
> Eager to persue my goals, I have solicitated another paterfamilias
> only to
> have the e-mail return with the mention "address no longer active".
> So I
> wait for a third paterfamilias in the Provincia Canada Orientalis.
>
> Gratia
>
> Marcus
> Marc Sarault
It seems to me that your problem is far too common. I personally would
suggest a higher level of information for prospective citizens about
the status of their application; at least to begin with.
We loose too many citizens for a simple lack of information.
=====
Bene Valete in Pace Deorum!
Gnaeus Salix Astur.
Legatus Externis Rebus Provinciae Hispaniae
Triumvir Academiae Novae Romae in Thule
Scriba ad Res Externas Academiae Novae Romae in Thule.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
http://personals.yahoo.com
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Hello! |
| From: |
Caeso Fabius Quintilianus <tjalens.h@--------> |
| Date: |
Sun, 28 Oct 2001 01:19:00 +0200 |
|
>Hello,
>
>Almost 2 months ago I applied for citizenship of Nova Roma but to this day I
>have not heard anything. I've moved since then, but I still have the same
>e-mail address. Would someone please explain the procedure
>....................................
>..................
>
>Well, I hope to hear from someone.
>
>Regards,
>Luuk
>
>Salve
Salve Luuk!
I will give You the advice to contact the Censors, if You haven't done that
already. Illustrus Senator and Censor Lucius Cornewlius Sulla is very
active on this list. Here is his address: alexious@--------
I agree with Honorable Gnaeus Salix Astur, these problems with becoming a
citizen seems to be occuring too often. I know that it mostly is the fault
of "dead" Pater/Mater familias. Our Censors seems usually to be very
active. Maybe this will be solved when we have conducted a Census of some
sort.
Vale
Caeso Fabius Quintilianus
Quaestor of Nova Roma
Propraetor of Thule
The Opinions expressed are my own,
and not an offical opinion of Nova Roma
************************************************
Join the Main List for Nova Roma
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/novaroma
Join the List for the Thule Provincia in Nova Roma
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ThuleNovaRoma/join
************************************************
The homepage of the Nova Roma Provincia Thule:
http://thule.novaroma.org/
************************************************
Aut inveniam viam aut faciam
"I'll either find a way or make one"
************************************************
"Do not give in to hate. That leads to the dark side."
************************************************
Caeso, he who also is known as Christer Edling.
************************************************
Using a keyboard that don't want to make L! :-(
************************************************
PRIVATE PHONE: +90 - 10 09 10
DOG BOARDING HOUSE PHONE: +90 - 503 56
MOBILE: +70 - 643 88 80
|
