Subject:	[novaroma] Question on the new Lex Vedia change
From:	"L. Cornelius Sulla Felix" <alexious@-------->
Date:	Wed, 31 Oct 2001 17:59:35 -0800

Based on the revision of the new lex, if passed by the voters. I would like to have something clarified for me.

Since elections are coming up it is likely we might have numerous candidates run for Censor, Consul or Praetor.

What if we have 4 candidates for Consul next year.
Say one candidate gets 50 centuries
another candidate gets 48 centuries
a third candidate gets 28 centuries
and a final candidate gets 14 centuries

The remainder of the Centuries either fail to vote or tie. What happens in this situation given any changes on the Lex Vedia?

I guess my main question is will we have magistrates if a situation like the one listed above occurs?

Respectfully,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
Censor


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

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Question on the new Lex Vedia change
From:	Fortunatus <labienus@-------->
Date:	Wed, 31 Oct 2001 20:24:07 -0600

Salvete

> Since elections are coming up it is likely we might have numerous candidates

> run for Censor, Consul or Praetor.


Odd logic, that.


> What if we have 4 candidates for Consul next year.
> Say one candidate gets 50 centuries
> another candidate gets 48 centuries
> a third candidate gets 28 centuries
> and a final candidate gets 14 centuries
>
> The remainder of the Centuries either fail to vote or tie. What happens

> in this situation given any changes on the Lex Vedia?


If the proposed changes are enacted, then we don't have any consules,
assuming that 140 centuries actually voted. However, since each century
casts as many votes as open positions, it's impossible to say how many
centuries actually cast votes purely from the votes that each candidate
received. For example, let's say that:

centuries 1-48 vote for candidate A and candidate B
centuries 49-50 vote for candidate A and candidate C
centuries 51-63 vote for candidate C and candidate D
centuries 65-77 vote for candidate C and no one else
centuries 78-193 fail to vote

In this case, only 77 centuries have voted but each candidate has
received exactly as many votes as in L Cornelius' scenario. And,
candidates A and B are the senior and junior consul respectively since
they have each received more than 39 votes (77/2 + 1 = 39).

Therefore, it's difficult to say that there will be a problem with
certainty.


> I guess my main question is will we have magistrates if a situation

> like the one listed above occurs?


One thing to keep in mind is that the ancient elections ended without
electing all the necessary officers relatively frequently. In our
ancestors' case, they simply held another election on the following
comitial day. Unlike us, they had the luxury of holding one-day
elections. This is something to think about, and it may be that we will
find it better to simply give the election to the candidates who receive
the most and second-most centuries (perhaps so long as they receive a
certain minimum).

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

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Question on the new Lex Vedia change
From:	Marcus Octavius Germanicus <haase@-------->
Date:	Wed, 31 Oct 2001 22:30:27 -0600 (CST)

Salve,

> What if we have 4 candidates for Consul next year.
> Say one candidate gets 50 centuries
> another candidate gets 48 centuries
> a third candidate gets 28 centuries
> and a final candidate gets 14 centuries
>
> The remainder of the Centuries either fail to vote or tie. What happens in this situation given any changes on the Lex Vedia?

How many centuries voted? Remember that each gets two votes. If there
were 99 or fewer centuries voting, then the candidate with 50 wins; if
there are 95 or fewer, then the top two both get in.

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

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Question on the new Lex Vedia change
From:	"L. Cornelius Sulla Felix" <alexious@-------->
Date:	Wed, 31 Oct 2001 20:44:04 -0800

Ave,

Well I can think of two scenarios both of them extreme. First scenario...all 193 centuries turn out to vote.

The second would be about 8 Total centuries vote. What would be the result then? If only 84 centuries come out (which is a realistic possiblity given that the Lex Vedia that regulated the Comitia Centuriata only had only 84 centuries vote on it.)

Respectfully,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
----- Original Message -----
From: Marcus Octavius Germanicus
To: novaroma@--------
Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2001 8:30 PM
Subject: Re: [novaroma] Question on the new Lex Vedia change


Salve,

> What if we have 4 candidates for Consul next year.
> Say one candidate gets 50 centuries
> another candidate gets 48 centuries
> a third candidate gets 28 centuries
> and a final candidate gets 14 centuries
>
> The remainder of the Centuries either fail to vote or tie. What happens in this situation given any changes on the Lex Vedia?

How many centuries voted? Remember that each gets two votes. If there
were 99 or fewer centuries voting, then the candidate with 50 wins; if
there are 95 or fewer, then the top two both get in.

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

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Question on the new Lex Vedia change
From:	Kristoffer From <from@-------->
Date:	Thu, 01 Nov 2001 09:30:34 +0100

Fortunatus wrote:
> ...since each century casts as many votes as open positions...

Salve, Tite Labiene Fortunate.

I was just curious; does this mean that all citizens in a century will
vote for two candidates?

Vale,

Titus Octavius Pius.

---

Si hoc signum legere potes,
operis boni in rebus latinis alacribus
et fructuosis potiri potes.

- Not-so-famous quotation

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

Subject:	[novaroma] File - NovaRomaList.txt
From:	novaroma@--------
Date:	1 Nov 2001 09:04:09 -0000

GUIDELINES FOR THE NOVA ROMA MAILING LIST

By Priscilla Vedia Serena
Curatrix Sermonem (List moderator)
(with thanks to Patricia Cassia for the original text)

This list is for you, and I see my role as trying to facilitate a place where we can all share information and get to know one another. These guidelines are open to change, and to your suggestions. Today the list has more than 350 people on it. As we've grown, we have had to adjust the way we communicate so as to make electronic "rooom" for everyone. This set of guidelines represents another effort in that direction. It is not a response to any one person or posting.

I.The list is set up so that replies will automatically be sent to the entire list. Please keep this in mind when replying. If your reply is only intended for one member, consider sending the reply privately and not to the list as a whole.

II.Agreement and support for one another are always welcome. However, if you are simply saying "yes!" or "me too," without adding more information to the thread, consider doing so in private e-mail.

III.If you must criticize another's post, consider doing so in private e-mail. If the person has made a genuine error, this allows him or her to save face and apologize for misbehavior or correct misinformation, rather than having misdeeds pointed out publicly.

IV.It is entirely appropriate to disagree publicly with another's stated views, or with the actions of Nova Roma's Senate, magistrates and other officials. Nova Roma is an organization of individuals from a wide variety of nations, religions, backgrounds and political viewpoints, and it is only reasonable that our views should differ.

V.When expressing disagreement, the following steps are recommended:

* Express respect for the person and faith in his or her good intentions.

* Point out any themes or ideas with which you do agree.

* Express your own opinion pleasantly, with respect for the rights of others to believe differently from you. On the Internet, strong language does not enhance the effectiveness of your communication. It simply makes you look strident and overbearing.

* Offer factual information where possible, backed up with sources. Quiet statements of fact win respect from others following your conversation.

* Offer sources of factual information (books, web links, etc.) that might be of interest to others interested in the topic.

* Use humor when appropriate (i.e. when it helps lighten the tone of a discussion without being aimed at other list members)

VI.If a thread or posting on the list makes you angry or sad, consider not responding at all, or doing so in private e-mail. If you do decide to respond to something that has pressed your emotional buttons, do not press Send right after writing your response. Let it sit in your Out box for 24 hours. Then look at it again, and consider whether this response is the one that best enhances your own honor and advances the knowledge of your fellow list members.

VII.Remember that there are people on this list who are under 18. Profanity is unnecessary and genrally unwelcome. Sexual references should be mild at worst.

VIII.Name-calling and personal attacks are inappropriate. Expressions of disagreement should be confined to criticizing the words or ideas of another, rather than the person. You are always free to disagree with an idea, but please do not turn an ideological debate into a personal fight.

IX.During the time leading up to elections (held each December, and occasionally at other times if offices become vacant), this list is also one of the public forums through which candidates express their views and present their qualifications to the populace. All of the above strictures governing appropriate behavior remain in place and apply to all candidates and their supporters.

X.Avoid giving out your home address and/or phone number on this list. You do not know all the people on here, and while it would be pleasant to believe we are all good-hearted and sane, you cannot trust in that.

XI. All posts to the list should be accompanied by an English translation if they are written in another language. If you are unable to write in English, or uncomfortable posting in English, please let me know and I will be more than happy to facilitate your pairing with a translator who can help you to do so. Posts in multiple languages are MORE than welcome, as long as an English translation is included somewhere therein. Please note there is no penalty for violating this policy on a "first time" basis, as it is assumed that anyone doing so is simply in need of assistance and not consciously choosing to violate list policy.

XII.The topic of this list is ancient Rome and Nova Roma. Off-topic postings include:

* Discussions of macronational politics, except when they shed light on an ancient Roman subject or in some way relate to Nova Roma.

* Bashing of any religion. It is OK to discuss your own disagreements with various faiths, but not to disrespect the rights of others to believe in those faiths.

* Personal attacks of any kind. Be mindful to keep disagreements on the issues and not on personalities.

* Arguments on certain well-worn issues that are contentious in modern society (examples: abortion, gun control), except as they relate to our topic.

* Jokes that aren't related to the topic or to current discussions on the list

* Virus warnings and other urban legends.

* All commercial postings, except from members of the Macellum, Nova Roma's marketplace (and even these should be "low-key" - see below).

XIII.The best postings include those which help us better understand some aspect of Roman history, or which offer ideas and energy to the furtherance of Nova Roma's goals. On-topic postings include, but are not limited to:

* Anything related to ancient history. This is broadly interpreted to include religion, cooking, gardening, family life, politics, military, costuming, medicine and many other topics.

* Anything that has the effect of building community among list members (announcements of local events, planning get-togethers, sharing occasional personal milestones).

* Information of interest to Nova Romans (links, news, tourism information for Roman sites, updates from political or religious bodies, regional or Sodalitas projects).

* Low-key advertisements for Macellum members. A low-key advertisement might include a signature file, a single announcement of a new business, or a mention of one's business in response to a relevant thread on the list.

XIV.The Curatrix Sermonem has imperium to govern this list, but prefers to encourage positive interaction rather than punish negative behavior. In the case of a poster whose actions violate these guidelines or otherwise disrupt the peace, the Curatrix Sermonem will choose from the following list of escalating actions:

i.General note to the list, not directed at anyone personally, but mentioning the behavior in question and suggesting alternate courses of action.

ii.Private note to the individual, warning him or her to stop.

iii.Placement of the individual on "moderated" status (the individual remains a member of the list, but all posts must be filtered by the Curatrix Sermonem).

iv.In extreme cases, the offender can and will be banned from the list. Further action may be taken by the Senate, but this step represents the limit of the Curatrix Sermonem's powers.

The vast majority of cases can be dealt with via the first two steps alone, and it is the Curatrix Sermonem's hope that these guidelines will reduce the necessity even of those steps.

In the further interest of maintaining order and civility on the list, all new subscribers (this includes former members who re-subscribe) are automatically placed on moderated status for their first few posts, after which they revert to normal "unmoderated" status. As this list has an open membership, this policy allows us to avoid the occasional "spam" posts and is intended solely to prevent abuses of the list on a "hit and run" basis. This policy is not intended as, nor will it ever be used as, a form of censorship. It is an unfortunately necessary precaution based on past abuses.

XV.If you are unhappy about someone's behavior on the list, and you do not feel comfortable dealing with him/her privately, do not tell the list about it. This often has the effect of adding further strife. Likewise, if a thread has "gone too far" in your opinion, please refrain from making public statements to cease discussion. Contact me and I will assess the situation and decide upon a course of action accordingly. Instead, e-mail me at justicecmo@-------- I welcome all concerns, questions and ideas for more effective list administration in private e-mail.

XVI.Finally, to all of you who make the Nova Roma list a pleasant and informative place, thank you.



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

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Question on the new Lex Vedia change
From:	Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix <alexious@-------->
Date:	Thu, 01 Nov 2001 00:36:32 -0800

Ave,

No, the law states only the Centuries will pick two candidates...not the
voters. This is why I am very concerned about the fact of voting for
Consuls if there are more than two candidates.

Here is the exact text of the law as it currently exists:

Taken from the Lex Vedia De Ratione Comitiorum Centuriatorum:

V. Procedures for counting votes.
A. Votes shall be counted by centuries.

1. In the case of a magisterial election, each century shall cast a
number of votes equal to the number of vacancies for the magistracy in
question. Votes shall be assigned to those candidates who received votes
by
members of the century, with those candidates receiving the most valid
individual votes receiving the century's vote first, then working down
in
descending order until all the century's votes have been assigned.

EXAMPLE: Four candidates are running for Consul. Each century casts
two
votes, because there are two vacant positions. In century III, there are
26
votes for candidate A, 32 votes for candidate B, 2 votes for candidate
C,
and 13 votes for candidate D. The century's two votes are cast for
candidates A and B, since they received the two highest vote-totals
within
the century.

So, as I read the current lex, we, the individual voters will vote for 1
Consul. However, the top to vote getters per century will get the
century. The problem will exist if there are 4 candidates and NONE of
the candidates achieve the necessary majority to be elected as Consul.

I hope that I have answered your question.

Respectfully,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
Censor
Kristoffer From wrote:
>
> Fortunatus wrote:
> > ...since each century casts as many votes as open positions...
>
> Salve, Tite Labiene Fortunate.
>
> I was just curious; does this mean that all citizens in a century will
> vote for two candidates?
>
> Vale,
>
> Titus Octavius Pius.
>
> ---
>
> Si hoc signum legere potes,
> operis boni in rebus latinis alacribus
> et fructuosis potiri potes.
>
> - Not-so-famous quotation
>
> -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
> Version: 3.1
> GCS d- s:++> a-- C++>$ ULS++ P+ L++ E- W++(--) N
> o-- K- w--- !O M-- V-- PS->$ PE- Y+ PGP- t+@ 5- X-
> R+++>$ !tv- b+++>$ DI++++ D+ G e h! !r-->r+++ !y-
> ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> ADVERTISEMENT
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Question on the new Lex Vedia change
From:	Kristoffer From <from@-------->
Date:	Thu, 01 Nov 2001 10:25:25 +0100

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix wrote:
> So, as I read the current lex, we, the individual voters will vote for 1
> Consul. However, the top to vote getters per century will get the
> century. The problem will exist if there are 4 candidates and NONE of
> the candidates achieve the necessary majority to be elected as Consul.
>
> I hope that I have answered your question.

Salve, Luci Corneli Sulla Felix.

Yes you did, thank you. Shouldn't this be altered, at least temporarily,
so that first class centuries and those centuries who all vote for the
"most popular" candidate still get two votes, as is their right, and not
just one? This problem will, as many other, most likely solve itself
when we gain a larger population, but until then we should ensure that
each century indeed does cast one vote for EACH position to be filled.

My not-so-humble opinion. ;)

Vale,

Titus Octavius Pius,
Senior Legatus Thules,
Praeco Anarei Thules,
Scriba to the Curator Araneum

AKA Kristoffer From

---

Si hoc signum legere potes,
operis boni in rebus latinis alacribus
et fructuosis potiri potes.

- Not-so-famous quotation

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



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

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Question on the new Lex Vedia change
From:	Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix <alexious@-------->
Date:	Thu, 01 Nov 2001 01:36:21 -0800

Kristoffer From wrote:
>
> Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix wrote:
> > So, as I read the current lex, we, the individual voters will vote
> for 1
> > Consul. However, the top to vote getters per century will get the
> > century. The problem will exist if there are 4 candidates and NONE
> of
> > the candidates achieve the necessary majority to be elected as
> Consul.
> >
> > I hope that I have answered your question.
>
> Salve, Luci Corneli Sulla Felix.
>
> Yes you did, thank you. Shouldn't this be altered, at least
> temporarily,
> so that first class centuries and those centuries who all vote for the
> "most popular" candidate still get two votes, as is their right, and
> not
> just one? This problem will, as many other, most likely solve itself
> when we gain a larger population, but until then we should ensure that
> each century indeed does cast one vote for EACH position to be filled.
>
> My not-so-humble opinion. ;)

Ave,

Its also my not-so-humble opinion too. This is why I phrased my
question earlier. I am very concerned about us not having Censors,
Consuls or Praetors in the beginning of the year. It is very likely
that we will barely have 1 person per century vote. Hence there would
be no way those centuries can pick multiple candidates, given the
turnout in the past election.

We simply do not have the population to support 193 centuries at its
current configuration.

Respectfully,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix


> Vale,
>
> Titus Octavius Pius,
> Senior Legatus Thules,
> Praeco Anarei Thules,
> Scriba to the Curator Araneum
>
> AKA Kristoffer From
>
> ---
>
> Si hoc signum legere potes,
> operis boni in rebus latinis alacribus
> et fructuosis potiri potes.
>
> - Not-so-famous quotation
>
> -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
> Version: 3.1
> GCS d- s:++> a-- C++>$ ULS++ P+ L++ E- W++(--) N
> o-- K- w--- !O M-- V-- PS->$ PE- Y+ PGP- t+@ 5- X-
> R+++>$ !tv- b+++>$ DI++++ D+ G e h! !r-->r+++ !y-
> ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

Subject:	[novaroma] ATTN (Religio Romana): Kalendis Novembribus (November 1st)
From:	"Antonio Grilo" <amg@-------->
Date:	Thu, 1 Nov 2001 12:11:00 -0000

PONTIFEX ANTONIVS GRYLLVS GRAECVS OMNIBVS SALVTEM

This is one of the dies fasti (F), on which legal actions are permitted.

This is the Kalends of mensis October. Today a Pontifex Minor calls the
people to the Curia Calabra. The Pontifex Minor and the Rex Sacrorum offer a
sacrifice to Iuno where Ianus is also invoked. Then the Pontifex Minor
announces the Nonas of the month for the fifth day of the month:
"Die Quinti te kalo Iuno Covella"
"Iuno Covella, I call you on the fifth day"
The Regina Sacrorum also sacrifices to Iuno at the Regia.

This is the last and most important day of the Ludi Victoriae Sullanae,
which started on October 26th. These games were instituted by dictator Sulla
in 81 BCE to cellebrate his victory over the samnites commanded by Telesinus
in 82 BCE at the Porta Collina in Rome. November 1st is precisely the day of
the battle and it is cellebrated with circus games.
The games were originally called Ludi Victoriae, but their name was changed,
possibly to distinguish them from the Ludi Victoriae Caesaris.

Mensis November is sacred to Diana.


DI VOS INCOLVMES CVSTODIANT

Subject:	[novaroma] Oath of citizenship
From:	"rapax@--------" <rapax@-------->
Date:	Thu, 01 Nov 2001 14:50:03 +0200

>Salve,
>
>No, no problem. :) Thank you for clarifying and welcome!
>
>Vale,
>Priscilla Vedia Serena
>
>
> Salve and thank you and to everyone who answered my
question.I've been thinking that since there is a general complaint
about the inactive citizens maybe there must be an oath taken by
the new citizens though I know that there is no such thing in history.
Something like..
'On my honor,I swear that I'll never become a 'lurker',a ' ghost',
or 'dead wood'!I'll never disappear from the scene for a long period
without first
notifying the authorities!I swear that I'll vote regularly whenever
there is a call!
If somehow I fail to perform these duties,I accept a free ride
to the Tarpeian
rock escorted by the fun loving people of Novaroma to enjoy a final
view of our
glorious city! '
Just for some fun. :))
Vale / Hypatia




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

Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Question on the new Lex Vedia change
From:	"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 1 Nov 2001 08:19:55 -0500

Salve;

> -----Original Message-----
> From: from@-------- [mailto:from@--------]On Behalf Of Kristoffer From
> Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 4:25 AM
>
> Yes you did, thank you. Shouldn't this be altered, at least temporarily,
> so that first class centuries and those centuries who all vote for the
> "most popular" candidate still get two votes, as is their right, and not
> just one? This problem will, as many other, most likely solve itself
> when we gain a larger population, but until then we should ensure that
> each century indeed does cast one vote for EACH position to be filled.

Actually that is already the case. Assume for the moment there are four
candidates for Consul (A,B,C, and D). Only one valid vote (for candidate
Antoninus) is received within a given century. The remaining candidates--
Brutus, Caesar, and Decius-- each receive zero. That is, there is a tie for
second place within the century. The current lex states that ties are
resolved first in favor of the candidate who is a paterfamilias, or failing
that, by lot. Since none of the remainig three candidates is a pater, the
rogatores draw lots to break the tie.

Thus, there will never be a situation in which a century fails to cast both
of its votes for a given office. In a low voter turnout situation, it may
simply be that the Gods will have a greater hand in determining the victors.

Vale,

Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
Consul

Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Question on the new Lex Vedia change
From:	labienus@--------
Date:	Thu, 1 Nov 2001 09:14:59 US/Central

Salvete

> > ...we should ensure that each century indeed does cast one vote for EACH
> > position to be filled.
>
> Actually that is already the case. Assume for the moment there are four
> candidates for Consul (A,B,C, and D). Only one valid vote (for candidate
> Antoninus) is received within a given century. The remaining candidates--
> Brutus, Caesar, and Decius-- each receive zero. That is, there is a tie for
> second place within the century. The current lex states that ties are
> resolved first in favor of the candidate who is a paterfamilias, or failing
> that, by lot.

This is incorrect.

Lex Vedia de Ratione Comitiorum Centuriatorum V.A.1 states, among other
things, "Votes [cast by the century] shall be assigned to those candidates who
received votes by members of the century..."

So, if all members of a century vote for a single candidate, the century has
abstained from casting any votes for any other candidate, as no other candidate
has received votes from the members of that century.

Note that this is not the case for a law. In that case, any century which does
not vote for a proposed law is considered to have voted against it (LVdRCC
V.A.2).

Valete
T Labienus Fortunatus

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Question on the new Lex Vedia change
From:	Kristoffer From <from@-------->
Date:	Thu, 01 Nov 2001 17:05:56 +0100

Flavius Vedius Germanicus wrote:
> Since none of the remainig three candidates is a pater, the
> rogatores draw lots to break the tie.

Salve, Flavi Vedi Germanice.

Thank you for responding to my statement. I now understand that there is
a system in place for this eventuality, but I must say this system
strikes me as being worse than none at all. In the current scenario,
almost every single voter will be the only one active in his scenario.
This means that HALF of the votes will be dependant upon mere chance.
This is, to me, completely unacceptable. I will not have chance deciding
the way our nation is run. Please, change this, so that within every
century, all citizens cast a number of votes equal to the number of
positions to be filled. Then the mini-election within each century will
present two "winners" as the official votes of that century, both
decided upon by the voters of that century, and not the toss of a coin.

Please don't think of this as a personal attack, I think that maybe,
later, when we have a turnout of at least five voting citizens per
century, the current procedure will do just fine, but up until then we
need to utilize methods more suitable for a smaller population.

Vale,

Titus Octavius Pius,
Senior Legatus Thules,
Praeco Anarei Thules,
Scriba to the Curator Araneum

AKA Kristoffer From

---

Si hoc signum legere potes,
operis boni in rebus latinis alacribus
et fructuosis potiri potes.

- Not-so-famous quotation

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

Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Question on the new Lex Vedia change
From:	"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 1 Nov 2001 11:14:08 -0500

Salvete

> -----Original Message-----
> From: labienus@-------- [mailto:labienus@--------]
> Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 4:15 AM
>
> Lex Vedia de Ratione Comitiorum Centuriatorum V.A.1 states, among other
> things, "Votes [cast by the century] shall be assigned to those candidates
who
> received votes by members of the century..."

Good point. However...

> So, if all members of a century vote for a single candidate, the century
has
> abstained from casting any votes for any other candidate, as no other
candidate
> has received votes from the members of that century.

The century _must_ cast two votes in a magisterial election. The same
paragraph you quoted above states, "each century shall cast a number of
votes equal to the number of vacancies for the magistracy in question."

Taking those two items together, it could be argued that the candidate who
received the only votes in a century would get both of that century's votes.

Valete,

Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
Consul





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

Subject:	[novaroma] Venator has been gone
From:	Piparskeggr - Venator <catamount_grange@-------->
Date:	Thu, 01 Nov 2001 10:57:15 -0600

Salvete Omnes,

To those who may have noticed, I have been a shadow presence here and elsewhere in the New City
for the past few months.

I continue to read the mail, but have been otherwise occupied.

I have taken on a much larger role in my Faith Community, crossing a personal Rubicon, as it
were. I am now a member of the advisory council of one of the oldest Asatrú organizations and
was called upon to sit in judgement on an internal dispute which "spilled over our borders." I
moderate one of the larger Heathen discussion lists, and we are planning a second (becoming)
annual get together. I have finally found companions with whom to form a local Heathen
Fellowship. I am starting to sponsor religious observances. This work looks like it will be
increasing for the foreseeable future. My work has been shifted into odd hours.

This is in addition to the writing I have been doing of poetry both sacral and secular (over
6000 lines of verse and song since last Saturnalia). My first manuscript of (mostly) non-sacral
works was sent to my e-publisher last week. I have started work on some non-fiction works,
mostly simple do-it-yourself manuals.

Thankfully, my duties as Quæstor, Legate and Dominus Sodalis have been light. The Republic is
up and running, debates on points great and small continue, personalitis clash, apologies are
made and acepted, some conflicts remain, some fade, but the Republic moves on...

I shall not be standing for any office in the coming elections, will continue to serve as Legate
if my Prætor thinks I can be of use and I shall continue to sponsor the discussion list for the
Brewers and Cooks.

To any one with whom I had been in contact about joining Gens Ulleria. I have not consciously
overlooked that contact. I plead distraction by issues larger than my personal concerns and a
hard drive problem from which I hae been able to recover most data. I also apologize before this
Forum for any hurtful feelings you may have over my inattention and hereby invite new contact,
if that is your desire.

I support Nova Roma. It is good to have a place in the world where those who strive to live in
the true spirit of Romanitas can gather. Please remember: Dignity of manner, Fortitude in
opinion, Amiability in disagreement, Temperence in retort, Piety in on's personal relation to
That Which Is Holy - these and the other Virtues, Civic and Private, will stand this new Rome in
good light before the world.

Diversity in the Citizenry is a strength, for a wall of differing sizes and shapes of stone will
outlast one of uniform bricks.
May the Gods and Goddesses of all of us, whether Monotheist, Henotheist, Polytheist, or
Pantheist, smile on our efforts.
May the Philosophies of our Agnostics and Atheists likewise lend strength.

I shall be around, be well.

--
=========================================
In Amicus sub Fidelis
- Piperbarbus Ullerius Venator
Cives Nova Romana et Paterfamilias
Domus Familias
http://www.geocities.com/gens_ulleria/index.html

002 Mind's reach should have, no bounds in search
For meaning and wit, riddles to solve
To seek and think, are greatest skills
In mankind's grasp, oftimes unused
- Piparskeggrsmal, Book 2

Subject:	[novaroma] Feminae Magnae: Cornellia, mother of the Gracchi (long)
From:	"Julilla Sempronia Magna" <julilla@-------->
Date:	Thu, 01 Nov 2001 17:09:09 -0000

> Salvete...
> I've a few questions but first allow me to introduce myself. I'm
another 'new,happy and proud' citizen of NovaRoma.My main interests
are Religio (for my husband is a Pagan. No disrespect meant with the
term.) and Roman history as a devoted student!

> I'm 28 years old ,a graduate of the Faculty of Fine Arts,working
as an interior designer in spite of being an Artist :)

> Here are my questions...Were there 'extraordinary' women in the
history of Rome? In politics the ones I know are mostly evil like
Messalina and Agrippina. Were there any virtuous and famous ones who
could represent the ideal model of Roman women?

<snipped>

> Valete
> Minervina Sentia Hypatia

Ave and welcome, Minervina Sentia Hypatia!

Certainly one of the most remarkable women of any period in Roman
history was Cornelia, mother of Tiberius and Gaius. She was born in
the late Republic, a time when the Roman matrona had evolved from the
politically powerful Hellenistic princesses, expanding cultural
opportunities for women. As a daughter of a hero, wife of an
aristocrat, mother of the champions of the Roman people, Cornelia was
admired for her virtue, fidelity, and especially for her intelligence.

She moved in circles that were open only to the most respected women
in Rome. It is clear, however, that, while her family connections
were strong, her own abilities won the admiration and confidence of
important Romans. She was sought out for advice and conversation long
after the death of her husband and sons and later writers portrayed
her as the ideal Roman matron.

Cornelia was born the younger daughter of Publius Scipio Africanus,
renowned for defeating Hannibal, and his wife Aemilia in the late
190s BCE. She married the consul Tiberius Sempornius Gracchus in the
time period between 175 - 165 BCE. Plutarch, a Greek historian of the
first century CE, stated that the marriage was one of mutual love
derived from the union of two of the most virtuous individuals in
Rome. However, Polybius, a Greek historian of the second century BCE,
states the betrothal of Cornelia to the much older Tiberius Gracchus
occurred after her father's death and was arranged by close relatives.

With him she bore twelve children, yet only three lived to adulthood,
Sempronia, Tiberius, and Gaius. Tiberius was most likely born in 163
BCE, with Gaius following nine years later. Sempronia was probably
older than both of her brothers as she was already the wife of Scipio
Aemilianus when the seventeen year old Tiberius was serving under her
husband's command in Africa. Tiberius Sempronius Gracchus died in 154-
153 BCE, leaving Cornelia to raise her daughter and two sons on her
own, with Tiberius being around the age of nine and Gaius being an
infant. She supervised their education and filled them with the
culture and refinement that she herself had absorbed in her parent's
home.

Soon after the death of her husband, the Egyptian monarch Ptolemy
VIII Physcon proposed to her and she outright refused him to remain
faithful to the memory of her husband. She was praised for her
devotion to her household and the education of her children. Cicero
details how carefully she sought out the finest Greek tutors, such as
the famous rhetorician Diophanes of Mytilene and the Stoic Blossius
of Cumae. He further states that her children were nourished more by
her conversation than her breast. At a time when other women of her
age were displaying their various ornamentation, Cornelia declared
that her sons were her most precious jewels.

It would be difficult to separate Tiberius' short and dramatic
political career entirely from his mother's influence. From
childhood, she had groomed him for success, and it is doubtful
Tiberius considered her any less a political ally and advisor. Her
reputation was able to survive rumors that she assisted her daughter
in the murder of Scipio Aemilianus because he opposed the legislation
of Tiberius. Following the assassination that cut short Tiberius'
promising career, Cornelia did not let her son's memory fade away.
She was a major factor in fashioning his subsequent image as a martyr
for the popular cause, which was gaining momentum in Rome, largely
because of Tiberius' land reform program.

Her influence on her younger son Gaius, who, as tribune in 123 BCE,
lionized his brother's efforts and became leader of the popular
movement, must have been just as strong. In one of her letters she
begs Gaius not to employ the same methods of radical reform as did
his brother. When he too died violently in 121 BCE, Cornelia gloried
in the memory of her two sons and continued to be admired for her
political acumen and intelligence. She was as much a politician as
any woman could be in a society that did not allow the formal
participation of women in politics.

Plutarch gives the fullest account of Cornelia's life. He describes
how Cornelia carried on her life after the death of her two sons,
Tiberius and Gaius:

...Cornelia is reported to have borne all her misfortunes in a
noble and magnanimous spirit, and to have said of the sacred places
where her sons had been slain that they were tombs worthy of the dead
which occupied them. She resided on the promontory called Misenum and
made no change in her customary way of living. She had many friends,
and kept a good table that she might show hospitality, for she always
had Greeks and other literary men about her, and all the reigning
kings interchanged gifts with her.

She was indeed very agreeable to her visitors and associates when she
discoursed to them about the life and habits of her father [Scipio}
Africanus, but most admirable when she spoke of her sons without
grief or tears, and narrated their achievements and their fate to all
inquirers as if she were speaking of men of the early days of Rome.

Some were therefore led to think that old age or the greatness of her
sorrows had impaired her mind and made her insensible to her
misfortunes, whereas, really, such person themselves were insensible
how much help in banishment of grief mankind derives from a noble
nature and from honorable birth and rearing....

---------

Text verbatim from the Web site of my great amica and soror (in
spirit) Cornellia Cornelius, http://cornellia.fws1.com/cornelia.htm.
I highly recommend it.

---
cura et valeas,

@____@ Julilla Sempronia Magna
|||| http://julilla.tripod.com/
Daily Life in Ancient Rome
@____@ julilla@--------
||||




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

Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Question on the new Lex Vedia change
From:	labienus@--------
Date:	Thu, 1 Nov 2001 11:16:49 US/Central

Salvete

> The century _must_ cast two votes in a magisterial election. The same
> paragraph you quoted above states, "each century shall cast a number of
> votes equal to the number of vacancies for the magistracy in question."
>
> Taking those two items together, it could be argued that the candidate who
> received the only votes in a century would get both of that century's votes.

Yes, and such an argument is quite reasonable. Indeed, it is more compelling
than my original position that the second vote goes to nobody. And, it doesn't
change anything from my initial analysis.

Section V.B.1 says, "In the case of a magisterial election, candidates must
receive votes from at least 97 of the 193 centuries in order to win." Now,
this doesn't say that a candidate needs 97 *votes*, but rather that a candidate
needs votes from 97 *centuries*--regardless of how many votes each century
casts for him or her. So, if a century's members all vote for candidate A,
then candidate A receives both of that century's votes and therefore receives
votes from one century out of the 97 he or she requires for election. He or
she still needs votes from 96 more centuries.

BTW, I quite dislike allowing magistrates to be chosen, and leges enacted,
entirely, or even almost entirely, by lots. The ancients left the settling of
ties to the Gods, but the will of the people was the primary authority so long
as the Gods did not choose to show their displeasure in the form of an ill
omen. Far better to reduce the number of centuries (not a quick fix,
unfortunately) than to leave things entirely to chance.

Valete
T Labienus Fortunatus





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

Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Question on the new Lex Vedia change
From:	"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 1 Nov 2001 12:37:29 -0500

> -----Original Message-----
> From: from@-------- [mailto:from@--------]On Behalf Of Kristoffer From
> Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 11:06 AM
>
> This is, to me, completely unacceptable. I will not have chance deciding
> the way our nation is run.

You will not have.

YOU will not have?

Just who the Hell do you think YOU are? It's unacceptable? Fine! Don't
accept it! Feel free to leave if you don't like it.

Even better-- run for Consul your own damn self, and see if you can put up
with the bullshit, sniping, harping, personal attacks, aggravation,
countless hours of work whose only reward is more complaining, hearing
almost nothing but bitching about how this is unfair and that is wong, the
people and volunteering to do things and then backing out when they found
out there was actually some work involved and then having to go ahead and do
it yourself, the whispering, the insults, the conspiracies, the backbiting,
the slanders, the people who are your friends only as long as they think
they can get something from you, the self-styled saviors/Führers, the lazy
ingrates who think everything is supposed to be handed to them NOW NOW NOW,
the people who're here a week and think they know us better than ourselves,
the people who've been here forever and think that gives them a free pass,
the people who want to change everything except their own petty powertrip
kingdoms, the people who are too impatient to let the system work, the
people who never cease telling you this or that email should have been
worded differently, the people who can't even be bothered to click on a
website to VOTE, the professional victims who go around looking for excuses
to be insulted or wounded, the people who think that Nova Roma is going to
be exactly the way they imagined it and then try to tear the whole thing
apart when they realize it isn't, the endless tantrums because My Issue
Isn't Being Addressed, the people who are seething with resentment and
jealousy because they didn't think of something like this first, the truly
stupid ideas that have to be addressed seriously because if you don't an
equally stupid crowd of people will chime in and say what a wonderful idea
it is, the people who just try to collect titles and pout for weeks if
they're denied, and of course one-- count them, ONE-- email in all that time
thanking you for the good job and hard work you're doing.

But don't tell me you "will not have" this or that.

Germanicus

Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Question on the new Lex Vedia change
From:	Marcus Octavius Germanicus <haase@-------->
Date:	Thu, 1 Nov 2001 11:51:13 -0600 (CST)

Salve,

> > This is, to me, completely unacceptable. I will not have chance deciding
> > the way our nation is run.
>
> You will not have.
>
> YOU will not have?
>
> Just who the Hell do you think YOU are? It's unacceptable? Fine! Don't
> accept it! Feel free to leave if you don't like it.

He is a voter. But now, because of an unnecessary and poorly-thought-out
law, his vote has a good chance of being completely ineffectual (even if
no one else in his century votes).

> Even better-- run for Consul your own damn self,

Why not? Thanks to the randomness element, just about everyone has an
equal chance of being Consul next year.

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




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

Subject:	[novaroma] Fwd: Nova Britannia--Annual Budget
From:	jmath669642reng@--------
Date:	Thu, 1 Nov 2001 13:04:28 -0500 (EST)

Citizens of the Militarium and of Nova Roma;

I am pleased to forward this budget to all in Nova Roma for your
information, just as in the past I have provided you with the
anticipated program of the Nova Britannia Province and the first 100 Day
Report for said Provincia, upon my appointment to this honored position.
It is due to the support of the Citizens of Nova Roma that I owe any
position of honor or responsibillity that I now hold, and in my sharing
of my few efforts in this venue, I wish it to be known that I understand
and am humbled by your very kind recognition of me in this way.

In addition I direct this Budget to my colleague, the ProPraetor of
Britannia for his use as he may see fit.

Respectfully;
Marcus Audens
ProConsul -- Nova Britannia -- Nova Roma

Fair Winds and Following Seas!!!


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



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

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] The Comitia Centuriata will be called soon
From:	"Decimus Iunius Silanus" <danedwardsuk@-------->
Date:	Thu, 1 Nov 2001 18:06:36 -0000

Salvete,

Might I suggest that positive abstentions (as opposed to centuries that fail to vote at all) do count towards the determination of the majority thus retaining a greater degree of historical accuracy.

Thus a majority of 50%+1 of ALL voting centuries is required to pass a lex and only those that fail to vote are discounted. This is in keeping with the spirit of 97 out of 193 actual voting centuries.

Valete,

Decimus Iunius Silanus
----- Original Message -----
From: Flavius Vedius Germanicus
To: novaroma@--------
Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2001 9:55 PM
Subject: RE: [novaroma] The Comitia Centuriata will be called soon


Salve;

>
> Salvete Consul et Omnes,
>
> It isn't clear if "cast valid votes" includes a
> century that returns a no preferance vote, a distinct
> possibility if only one citizen votes in his century.

A good point. Perhaps adding another paragraph will close that particular
loophole:

-----

LEX VEDIA DE RATIONE COMITIORUM CENTURIATORUM

I. The Lex Vedia de Ratione Comitiorum Centuiatorum of August 2754 is hereby
amended to read as follows:

II. In Paragraph V.B. and its sub-paragraphs, the phrase "97 of the 193
centuries" shall be replaced with the phrase "a majority (50% +1) of those
centuries which cast valid votes" wherever it occurs.

III. A Paragraph V.B.3. shall be added which reads "Only votes either for a
particular candidate for office, or in favor of or against a lex, shall be
counted towards the determination of a majority. Votes received as
abstentions shall not count towards the determination of a majority.

-----

Vale,

Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
Consul

Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Question on the new Lex Vedia change
From:	"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 1 Nov 2001 13:56:05 -0500

Salve;

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Marcus Octavius Germanicus [mailto:haase@--------]
> Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 12:51 PM
>
> He is a voter. But now, because of an unnecessary and poorly-thought-out
> law, his vote has a good chance of being completely ineffectual (even if
> no one else in his century votes).

> Why not? Thanks to the randomness element, just about everyone has an
> equal chance of being Consul next year.

Ah, the pleasures of Monday-morning quarterbacking! I note that, between the
time the lex in question was originally posted to this list (7/20/01) and
when the vote was officially called (7/30/01) neither you nor anyone else
bothered to voice any opinion, point out any foreseen flaws, or label it
"unnecessary" or "poorly-thought-out". Indeed, it passed by an overwhelming
margin. Yet now, after the fact, a termite such as yourself crawls out of
the woodwork casting aspersions. How brave! How thoughtful! How helpful!

Anyone have a time machine? I need to go back to February 1998 and scream
"DON'T DO IT!!!" to myself...

Valete,

Germanicus

Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Question on the new Lex Vedia change
From:	Marcus Octavius Germanicus <haase@-------->
Date:	Thu, 1 Nov 2001 13:05:24 -0600 (CST)

Salve Consul,

> Ah, the pleasures of Monday-morning quarterbacking! I note that, between the
> time the lex in question was originally posted to this list (7/20/01) and
> when the vote was officially called (7/30/01) neither you nor anyone else
> bothered to voice any opinion, point out any foreseen flaws, or label it
> "unnecessary" or "poorly-thought-out".

You're right. We're all to blame. I voted "yes" on the original law
because I didn't read it carefully enough. I realized it would be a
problem only when rereading it during the recent election to see if
the vote-counting program needed updating.

> Indeed, it passed by an overwhelming
> margin. Yet now, after the fact, a termite such as yourself crawls out of
> the woodwork casting aspersions. How brave! How thoughtful! How helpful!

It's at least as helpful as your pointless knee-jerk rant against
Titus Octavius Pius for his having dared to label your error as
unacceptable.


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

Subject:	[novaroma] Offline
From:	Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix <alexious@-------->
Date:	Thu, 01 Nov 2001 10:41:28 -0800

Ave,

I will be offline for the next 4 days at least because I will be in
Riverside. My mother, as some of you know, has been in the hospital for
the past 4 weeks and the Doctors are not optimistic about her status.
They are moving her to ICU, today. So I will be staying in Riverside
with my family. I hope this wont cause too much of an inconvenience.

Respectfully,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
Censor



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

Subject:	[novaroma] moveing
From:	"william wheeler" <holyconelia@-------->
Date:	Thu, 01 Nov 2001 20:00:47 +0000

I am moved to a new home as of Nov 1st
the olny way to get a hold of me for most of you people will be via the
email addy for up to 6 months ( and or till i get a phone in my name)







wheeler known by some as
Marcus Cornelius Felix
Pontitff
Legate America Boreoccidentalis Minore
Sacerdos Primus America Boreoccidentalis
Gens Sacerdos Cornelia


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

Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Question on the new Lex Vedia change
From:	labienus@--------
Date:	Thu, 1 Nov 2001 14:01:21 US/Central

Salvete

> > How helpful!
>
> It's at least as helpful as your pointless knee-jerk rant...

I tend to agree on both counts. Please, Consul Vedi, Curator Octavi, and
anyone else whose dander has risen, let's calm down and direct our energies
toward fixing an unfortunate and unforeseen situation.

Now, it seems to me that Consul Vedius' current proposal of simply changing the
law to require a candidate or law to receive 50%+1 of the voting centuries is
both fairly reasonable and in keeping with the spirit of the ancient practice.
And, it seems that it ought to allow us to elect at least enough officers to be
able to hold elections to appoint their colleagues, if necessary.

Note, BTW, that the government will not grind to a complete halt without
consules. The Senate is mandated with appointing an interrex to hold new
elections when no consul is elected by the centuries. If this fails, then a
dictator could be appointed to assign cives to the position. Only if there are
no magistrates who can call the Senate to order will this fail to be a
recourse. And, note that the tribuni plebis are both capable of calling the
Senate to order and are elected by the tribes.

Now, does anyone have anything useful to bring to the discussion, or are we
reasonably satisfied that Consul Vedius' suggested repair will suffice? And,
does anyone have an idea for fixing the problem in the longer term? So far,
the proposal I am most taken with is L Sicinius' suggestion to reduce the
number of centuries.

Valete
T Labienus Fortunatus





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

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Offline
From:	"Teleri ferch Nyfain" <rckovak@-------->
Date:	Thu, 1 Nov 2001 15:43:29 -0500

Salve,
My best wishes and compassion to you and to your mother in the next few days - may the gods be with you whatever the outcome.
Vale bene,
Helena Galeria
----- Original Message -----
From: Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
To: Gens_Cornelia@-------- ; novaroma@-------- ; censors@novaroma.org
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 1:41 PM
Subject: [novaroma] Offline


Ave,

I will be offline for the next 4 days at least because I will be in
Riverside. My mother, as some of you know, has been in the hospital for
the past 4 weeks and the Doctors are not optimistic about her status.
They are moving her to ICU, today. So I will be staying in Riverside
with my family. I hope this wont cause too much of an inconvenience.

Respectfully,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
Censor

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



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




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

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] The Comitia Centuriata will be called soon
From:	Michael Loughlin <qccaesar@-------->
Date:	Wed, 31 Oct 2001 13:57:11 -0800 (PST)

Ave,
After reading this idea I was thinking maybe we
COULD operate under a 2/3 majority voting system and
set a margin that if that 2/3 majority is not reached.
By that I am saying 66% of the voter percentile in
favor is the ideal. However, if that voter percentile
were not reached then maybe a margin could be created
whereby if the voter percentile is in this margin the
lex would still pass. So lets say 66% is the ideal
and a margin of (just to make of a margin) 56%-66% is
in place and only 52% of the voters favor the
legislation and though there is a 2% majority the lex
would not pass because a clear and distinct majority
was not present nor was the majority within the
percentile created by that margin. That is a
possibility. I also understand that the ideal of Nova
Roma is to create a system that adheres to or comes as
close as possible to the Roman system. However, with
time Nova Roma must be willing to adjust and not be so
rigid.
vale,
Quintus Cornelius Caesar
--- tiberius.ann@-------- wrote:
> Please excuse my dropping in like that, but I am
> kind of puzzled by this
> discussion.
>
> If 50%+1 is not a clear majority and 2/3 is too much
> because maybe only
> 65% vote for it and then the situation would be
> almost the same as at the
> moment, why not go for something in the middle and
> say 60% or maybe 55%
> of the votes have to be in favour to pass a lex?
>
> Please don't feel annoyed by this, but I can't see
> the problem, so this
> is just a proposal.
>
> Curate ut semper valeatis, Tiberius Annaeus Otho
> Scriba legata legati germaniae superioris
>
> -- Original-Nachricht --
>
> >Salve,
> >
> >> Okay I can see your point but there should be
> more
> >> of a margin than 50%+1 to show a distinct
> majority
> >> amongst tho voting body. If 49% are a against
> >> something and 51% are for it that really does not
> show
> >> that a clear and distinct majority of the
> citizens are
> >> in favor of that something.
> >
> >No, but it shows that a sufficiency of those
> citizens who care to vote
> >are for (or against) it.
> >
> >> Maybe a margin could be
> >> created for a system of proportions to work. But
> To
> >> me 50%+1 does not show a clear and distinct
> majority.
> >> Plus lets say you operated under a 2/3 system.
> >
> >That would allow 40% of the voters to thwart the
> will of 60%. Is that
> >really desireable?
> >
> >Additionally, it's non-historical. Our forebears
> did not require a
> >2/3rds supermajority to enact a lex.
> >
> >Vale, Octavius.
> >
> >--
> >M. Octavius Germanicus
> >Propraetor, Lacus Magni
> >Curator Araneum et Senator
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> ________________________________________
> E-Mail for everyone! http://www.bluemail.ch/ powered
> by Bluewin!
>
>
>


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
http://personals.yahoo.com

Subject:	[novaroma] R: The Comitia Centuriata will be called soon
From:	"Franciscus Apulus Caesar" <sacro_barese_impero@-------->
Date:	Thu, 1 Nov 2001 01:26:45 +0100

Salvete,
you're talking about new laws of Comitia Centuriata: math fraction,
percentuals, time to vote, century points, etc.
The ideas of anyone are good and reasonable.
But are you thinging what is the problem of "low voter turnout"?
Maybe this low quorum is because a lot of cives don't interest Nova Roma.
Maybe Nova Roma lost strong contents to discuss, the cives don't vote and
partecipate in the social life because there are aims.
Maybe Nova Roma must thing about new advertising and stimulate the members
with new topics ... and change the vote laws.
In my gens there are many cives don't like NR now because it's not
affecting.
Maybe .... :-)

Valete
Franciscus Apulus Caesar
-------------------------------------------
Provincia Italia
Paterfamilias Gens Apula
www.provinciaitalia.f2s.com/apula
----------------------------------------
Alme Sol ... Possis Nihil Urbe Roma Visere Maius




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

Subject:	[novaroma] roman halloween
From:	"Franciscus Apulus Caesar" <sacro_barese_impero@-------->
Date:	Thu, 1 Nov 2001 01:40:49 +0100

Salvete,
I wish you a marry Halloween, beacuse this festivity is roman too.
When in the first century the Romans took the Britain, they knew the celtic
Samhain festivity. At 1° November the Romans honoured Pomoma, fruits and
gardens' Goddess: in this period they offered fruits (apples) for the
fertility. Now this ancient rite is in the pumpkins.

Marry Halloween and peace in the world.

Valete
Franciscus Apulus Caesar
-------------------------------------------
Provincia Italia
Paterfamilias Gens Apula
www.provinciaitalia.f2s.com/apula
----------------------------------------
Alme Sol ... Possis Nihil Urbe Roma Visere Maius

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Question on the new Lex Vedia change
From:	"L. Sicinius Drusus" <lsicinius@-------->
Date:	Wed, 31 Oct 2001 19:17:53 -0800 (PST)

--- Fortunatus <labienus@--------> wrote:
> Salvete
>
> > Since elections are coming up it is likely we
> might have numerous candidates
>
> > run for Censor, Consul or Praetor.
>
>
> Odd logic, that.
>
>
> > What if we have 4 candidates for Consul next year.
> > Say one candidate gets 50 centuries
> > another candidate gets 48 centuries
> > a third candidate gets 28 centuries
> > and a final candidate gets 14 centuries
> >
> > The remainder of the Centuries either fail to vote
> or tie. What happens
>
> > in this situation given any changes on the Lex
> Vedia?
>
>
> If the proposed changes are enacted, then we don't
> have any consules,
> assuming that 140 centuries actually voted.
> However, since each century
> casts as many votes as open positions, it's
> impossible to say how many
> centuries actually cast votes purely from the votes
> that each candidate
> received. For example, let's say that:
>
> centuries 1-48 vote for candidate A and candidate B
> centuries 49-50 vote for candidate A and candidate C
> centuries 51-63 vote for candidate C and candidate D
> centuries 65-77 vote for candidate C and no one else
> centuries 78-193 fail to vote
>
> In this case, only 77 centuries have voted but each
> candidate has
> received exactly as many votes as in L Cornelius'
> scenario. And,
> candidates A and B are the senior and junior consul
> respectively since
> they have each received more than 39 votes (77/2 + 1
> = 39).
>
> Therefore, it's difficult to say that there will be
> a problem with
> certainty.
>
>
> > I guess my main question is will we have
> magistrates if a situation
>
> > like the one listed above occurs?
>
>
> One thing to keep in mind is that the ancient
> elections ended without
> electing all the necessary officers relatively
> frequently. In our
> ancestors' case, they simply held another election
> on the following
> comitial day. Unlike us, they had the luxury of
> holding one-day
> elections. This is something to think about, and it
> may be that we will
> find it better to simply give the election to the
> candidates who receive
> the most and second-most centuries (perhaps so long
> as they receive a
> certain minimum).
>
> Valete
> T Labienus Fortunatus
> --
> Quicquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur.
>
>

Salvete Omnes,

According to the LEX VEDIA DE RATIONE COMITIORUM
CENTURIATORUM

IV C
"Each Citizen shall have the opportunity to vote for a
single candidate for each office for which a vacancy
exists...."

This means that a citizen will cast a single vote for
Consul.

IF that citizen is the only person in his Century who
votes (A VERY common occurance) no one will come in
second and therefor that Centry will NOT be casting a
second place vote.

The same result will occur if only two citizens in a
century vote and both of them vote for thae same
canidate. NO second place canidate to recieve the
Centuries other vote.

The first and Second Classes will have the fewest
citizens per Century they are the most likely to fall
in the above situations, while the fifth class is the
most likely to have a first and second place canidate
and cast two votes.

Given our historic turnout, I think it's likely that
in addition to the Centuries that don't return any
votes we shall see a great many Centuries that only
have one person voting and only returning a single
vote for Consul, etc. With multiple popular canidates
this will result in either none or only one canidate
recieving enough votes to pass the 50% +1 threshold.

The system would work if we had fewer Centuries. We
have enough active Citizens to make it work with
around 25 Centuries. We DON'T have enough active
citizens to reasonably expect a majority of votes from
two canidates with 193 Centuries.

Next Year when Taxes are imposed we might not even
have enough taxpayers to have 1 citizen each in 193
Centuries.

Valete,
L. Sicinius Drusus

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
http://personals.yahoo.com



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

Subject:	=?iso-8859-1?Q?RE=3A=20=5Bnovaroma=5D=20Re=2DFormatting=20H=2E=20D=2E?=
From:	tiberius.ann@--------
Date:	Thu, 1 Nov 2001 10:06:34 +0100

Salvete omnes,

I only just had to do the same thing! Good luck. It's a lot of work but
it helped me!

By the way, I take this chance to excuse my uncle and pater familias Caius
Annaeus Lucanus Otho, better known as CALO. He, too, has a major problem
with his Computer. He's got a virus, but it's not on the HD. It's somewhere
on the printer or some other piece of hardware and he has to find that first
before beeing able to take action. He hopes that you will understand that
under these circumstances he is not able to confer with NR and his powers
of pater familias will be taken over by myself, Tiberius Annaeus Otho, for
the time until he can get online again. Please take the necessary actions
so that I can take over this responcibility for the time beeing.

If somebody can't use his Computer, he can also not vote. Therefore my uncle
tells me to make his excuses for not voting in the last comitia. He feels
disturbed, not hurt by the fact that so many people didn't vote and he does
not want to be looked at in the same way as all those who just forgot to
do so.

For your own thoughts, he told me to post the following citation from Augustus:

If a lex is not followed or respected by the majority of the citizens, it
is not the citizens who are wrong but the lex.

Take it as something to think about, not as anything else, please!!!!

So, that's it for the moment, Valete omnes, Tiberius Annaeus Otho

-- Original-Nachricht --

>Salvete Omnes: I am going to re-format my hard-drive and re-load Windows.
>This is an attempt to clear up a major computer problem.





________________________________________
E-Mail for everyone! http://www.bluemail.ch/ powered by Bluewin!

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Hello!
From:	"Erik van der Heijden" <marcellusdecianusbatavius@-------->
Date:	Thu, 01 Nov 2001 14:59:50 +0100

>Salve!
>
>I don't know what Paterfamilias you'd sent your 'application" to...was it
>Marcellus Decianus Batavius? 'cause I know he is still an active civis.

MDB: Yep! I sure am! Just back from a nice holliday though, so that could
explain my silence;-)

>Since I live in the Netherlands as well, perhaps I can help you with this.
>Just let me know! :-) (by the way...you're free to choose the gens you like
>it doesn't have to be a dutch paterfamilias. I, p.e. am very happy to be a
>member of the gens Iulia!:-) )

MDB: Oooh...fishing in my pond now mi Pina :-)))?! Just kidding. You're free
to choose any gens/family you like. I doesn't have to be my gens all
together. Anyway: the Gens Iulia is a very noble and outstanding gens so if
you decide to become a Iulius there will be no hard feelings as far as I'm
concerned.

By the way: I posted a reply to your original message on November 1. Have
you read it yet?

>Vale bene!
>
Marcellus Decianus Batavius
>
>
> >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
> >
> >
>
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
>
>


_________________________________________________________________
Download MSN Explorer gratis van http://explorer.msn.nl/intl.asp

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Hello!
From:	"Erik van der Heijden" <marcellusdecianusbatavius@-------->
Date:	Thu, 01 Nov 2001 14:44:26 +0100

Salvete!

My name is Marcellus Decianus Batavius and I'm the pater familias of the
Gens Deciana. After reading your message I strongly think that I'm the
person/pater familias your refering to.

If you're indead looking for me and you want to join my gens I must
apologize for the time it took me to take some action. Mea culpa, mi amice!
You see, a few months ago I saw that someone by the name of Antonius
Decianus Validus wanted to join my gens but when I tried to open his file by
clicking onto his name I got the message an error had occured (non-existing
person or something like that). I tried several times but still ended up
with nothing.

To tell you the truth this bothered me quite a lot. I take my
responsibilities as a pater very seriously! So I wrote a message to a censor
(who shall remain nameless...)as I thought this to be the most appropriate
action. After all, we are talking about pending membership and according to
the NR main page all questions about membership should be directed to the
censors Au contraire apperently, because the good censor was not very
friendly and less than helpful.

So I still had no way of knowing who Antonius Decanius Validus was (and
hopefully still is)what kind of man he is and how I could contact him.

After reading your message I believe I've found my man! Finally:-)))!
Are you Antonius and am I the pater familias you are looking after?
And if so: do still wish to join my gens? I would be most honoured;-)

Please let me know asap! My e-mailaddress is:
marcellusdecianusbatavius@--------


Vale optime!
Marcellus Decianus Batavius
Pater familias Gens Deciana



>From: "Earl Luther Carr" <S.Stroexarr@-------->
>Reply-To: novaroma@--------
>To: <novaroma@-------->
>Subject: [novaroma] Hello!
>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
>
>


_________________________________________________________________
Download MSN Explorer gratis van http://explorer.msn.nl/intl.asp




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

Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Question on the new Lex Vedia change
From:	Michel Loos <loos@-------->
Date:	01 Nov 2001 18:21:50 -0200

On Thu, 2001-11-01 at 12:01, labienus@-------- wrote:
> Salvete
>
> > > How helpful!
> >
> > It's at least as helpful as your pointless knee-jerk rant...
>
> I tend to agree on both counts. Please, Consul Vedi, Curator Octavi, and
> anyone else whose dander has risen, let's calm down and direct our energies
> toward fixing an unfortunate and unforeseen situation.
>
> Now, it seems to me that Consul Vedius' current proposal of simply changing the
> law to require a candidate or law to receive 50%+1 of the voting centuries is
> both fairly reasonable and in keeping with the spirit of the ancient practice.
> And, it seems that it ought to allow us to elect at least enough officers to be
> able to hold elections to appoint their colleagues, if necessary.
>
> Note, BTW, that the government will not grind to a complete halt without
> consules. The Senate is mandated with appointing an interrex to hold new
> elections when no consul is elected by the centuries. If this fails, then a
> dictator could be appointed to assign cives to the position. Only if there are
> no magistrates who can call the Senate to order will this fail to be a
> recourse. And, note that the tribuni plebis are both capable of calling the
> Senate to order and are elected by the tribes.
>
> Now, does anyone have anything useful to bring to the discussion, or are we
> reasonably satisfied that Consul Vedius' suggested repair will suffice? And,
> does anyone have an idea for fixing the problem in the longer term? So far,
> the proposal I am most taken with is L Sicinius' suggestion to reduce the
> number of centuries.
>
Salve,

I think the proposed amendment is possibly dangerous. We are speaking of
the constitution which should be a document that prevents malevolent
magistrates of ruining our democracy. With a simple 50%+1 majority it
could be of the interrest of a united 1st class NOT to conduct a census
in order to be able to decide alone with absent 2nd and 3rd class.
Id on t say this is the case now, just that a constitution should be
written in order to take into account the worst case, not the best.

L. Sicinius proposition would really solve the problem. Make the number
of centuries 1/20 of the population (rounded to the upper uneven number)
with a maximum of 193. This could be done right now. It would give a
little work to the censors in order to reattribute the citizens to the
new centuries, but that will be done anyway before the next elections.
AND this would be totally historic, Rome did not start with the 193
centuries, Rome arrived to this number gradually while growing.

Vale,

Manius Villius Limitanus






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