| Subject: |
[Nova-Roma] Re: absent people |
| From: |
"quintuscassiuscalvus <richmal@attbi.com>" <richmal@attbi.com> |
| Date: |
Fri, 13 Dec 2002 00:19:06 -0000 |
|
Salve,
--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Gnaeus Equitius Marinus
<equitius_marinus@y...>" <equitius_marinus@y...> wrote:
> Q. Cassius Calvus writes:
>
> [concerning a 'benchmark' for citizenship]
> > There already exists just such a benchmark. According to the LEX
> > CORNELIA DE CENSO
> > http://www.novaroma.org/tabularium/leges/2002-06-05-ii.html
>
> Woah! You're conflating the requirements for "censi" with those
> for citizenship. They are not, and were not intended to be, the
> same.
I merely stated what the law states as the requirements for "active
citizenship." If you have a problem with the wording of the Lex
Cornelia De Censo I suggest you take it up with next year's Consuls
for amendment.
> > then the minimum requirement is to respond in the affirmative
when
> > contacted by the Censors.
This is the minimum (or benchmark) requirement to maintain
citizenship in Nova Roma as an inactive citizen as per section V. of
the Lex Cornelia De Censo. If you have a problem with the wording of
the Lex Cornelia De Censo, again, I suggest you take it up with next
year's Consuls for amendment.
> The issue you're overlooking is that of citizens who do feel
> part of Nova Roma, but don't choose to participate in the online
> aspects of our community. They joined under conditions which
> made them citizens without having to do any of the things
> listed above. To make the censi conditions applicable to >
citizenship
I don't recall saying anything other than what the law states.
Again, just to make myself clear, if you have a problem with the Lex
Cornelia De Censo take it up with next year's Consuls.
I don't have a problem with citizens who are designated inactive as
per the Lex Cornelia De Censo but since they consider themselves
still citizens of Nova Roma and would respond to a Census to maintain
their citizenship, that is money well spent so they are not just
summarily axed from the citizenship roster.
> in general would be to create an ex post facto condition.
> I think that would be a very bad idea, as well as breaking
> faith with the citizens it would impinge upon.
Since I merely stated what the Lex Cornelia De Censo states, then
your problem is with the message not the messenger. I have a
problem with people who took the time and effort to join Nova Roma
but didn't have the courtesy to take a minute to inform the Censors
of their decision to leave Nova Roma. As a result they are merely
names and numbers in a database that will wind up costing Nova Roma
money in mailing/phone costs.
Vale,
Quintus Cassius Calvus
P.S. I looked it up, technically the word is censui, not censi.
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
[Nova-Roma] Senate doors |
| From: |
"Diana Moravia Aventina" <diana@pandora.be> |
| Date: |
Fri, 13 Dec 2002 01:44:00 +0100 |
|
Salve A. Apollonius Cordus,
Salvete citizens of Nova Roma,
My apologies for the late response. I am a bit behind on my emails.
> As I say, I don't know how debates actually take place, but the easiest
solution
> would seem to me to be for the Tribunes to publish (not to the main
list, > because the <message would be tediously large, but on the
website) the minutes of every meeting > after the <end of the meeting.
This would be consistent with their function as set out in the
<Constitution IV.a.7.b, to whit, 'To be privy to the debates of the Senate,
and keep the citizens <informed as to the subjects and results thereof'.
While I personally would not mind putting together the Minutes of Senate
meetings, I think that this would not be a good idea. In their very nature,
'Minutes' are brief, and in their briefness can cause people to
misunderstand the entire intent of the person being quoted. For example if
Senator X made an impassioned speech against any punishment for voter fraud,
the minutes would leave out 7/8 of the details of his/her speech. This COULD
lead a citizen to believe that Senator X had reasons for not wanting anyone
to investigate voter fraud, etc.enz., which again COULD give the citizens a
wrong impression of the Senator in question.
And if arguments do take place in the Senate, I think that it is better that
the citizens of Nova Roma are not aware of details. We have seen many
arguments here in the past and things quickly snowball and splinter off into
other discussion. Most times, it reaches the point where we can't even
recognize the original subject anymore.
I think the system is good as it stands. Some of the Senators add their
comments when they vote. I think that all Senators should be encouraged to
do the same, rather than opening the doors to the Senate entirely.
And while I think that it is a brilliant initiative that the Eagle has been
restarted (and have already supported it by sending in an article), I think
that an Open Door report on the Senate's meetings will come across more as
gossip ( 'look what HE said!!' ) rather than being something productive for
the citizens of Nova Roma.
Vale,
Diana Moravia Aventina
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
[Nova-Roma] The Second & Third Consular Proposals |
| From: |
"Diana Moravia Aventina" <diana@pandora.be> |
| Date: |
Fri, 13 Dec 2002 02:01:10 +0100 |
|
Salve Gnaeus Salix Astur,
Salvete citizens,
Again my apologies for the late response.
> a) Why do we have to be so lenient? Do we really want to allow someone
<to actually commit *three* voting frauds? To me, one voting fraud seems
<one too many. This is a very serious offence, because it is an attack
<against the legitimacy of the political system of Nova Roma.
<2.- If someone requests several citizenships intentionally, then that
<individual would be a danger to Nova Roma. He should be expulsed for life.
I agree with you on both of your statements above. I do not at all believe
in leniency when someone has gone out of their way to be deceitful and
disrupt the balance. One chance is more than enough. Nova Roma is filled
with wonderful honorable people who would not think of committing voter
fraud or duplicating their citizenship. If we find one rotten apple amongst
our shiny bunch, he/she should be banned. They undermine the hard work of
other people and are an insult to Nova Roma.
Of course we should be 100% sure that the person is guilty of the charges
set against him/her before resorting to such rash action. But a hard line
policy regarding fraudulent citizenships, which is stated clearly on the
citizen application form would indeed discourage people from even trying
this.
The above was of course, just my opinion...
Vale,
Diana Moravia Aventina
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
[Nova-Roma] Chatroom |
| From: |
"L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@earthlink.net> |
| Date: |
Thu, 12 Dec 2002 17:04:13 -0800 |
|
Avete Omnes,
If anyone would like to chat please feel free to join me in the chatroom.
Vale,
Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
Re: [Nova-Roma] Quiet Citizens |
| From: |
"=?iso-8859-1?q?A.=20Apollonius=20Cordus?=" <cordus@strategikon.org> |
| Date: |
Fri, 13 Dec 2002 01:07:56 +0000 (GMT) |
|
A. Apollonius Cordus to all citizens and peregrines,
greetings.
Abstract: I disagree with the identification of quiet
citizens as parasites; and ask why we should take away
the citizenship of those who do no harm.
I'm very glad to be able to voice my agreement with
such illustrious citizens as Fabius Maximus, Minucius
Audens and Equitius Marinus on this issue. The word
'parasite' has been used to refer to 'inactive'
citizens - a strong word, which conjures an image of a
person who derives personal benefit by taking unfair
advantage of the generosity or hard work of others. It
is a word which is used by some people in other
nations to refer to immigrants or the unemployed.
What can possibly justify its use in this case? Are
inactive citizens costing the state any money? Are
they deriving any benefit which has not been freely
offered them? Are they indeed deriving any material
benefit at all from being a citizen which they could
not derive without being one? The only argument anyone
has put forward to suggest that they are a drain on
the resources of the State is that the State has to
spend money on finding out whether they are active so
that it can kick them out if not - but the State could
simply decline regard them as 'parasites' in the first
place, and then would have no need to spend any money
on tracking them down!
I was for some time in an unusual position, in some
ways quite the opposite of an inactive citizens - I
was an active non-citizen. I regarded myself during
that time as a 'resident alien', or 'peregrinus' in
Roman terminology (this is what I mean when I offer
greetings to citizens and 'peregrines'): I lived in
the community, but without citizenship.
Phrased like this, in terms usually applied to
questions of immigration in other nations, the issue
becomes rather clearer. Imagine that Nova Roma were a
community residing in a single physical location.
There might be both citizens and non-citizens
(peregrines) living there, all active in various
different areas of community life, to varying extents.
I, a citizen who often visits and converses in the
Forum, might see nothing of another citizen who
dislikes the bustle of the Forum but frequents the
Tavern, or prefers to stay at home altogether. I might
suggest to the government that that citizen ought to
be struck off the citizen rolls. The government would
laugh in my face: this citizen may not visit the Forum
- he / she may not even live in the city any more -
but he / she is still a citizen, unless he / she has
died or been deprived of citizenship for some specific
reason.
Let us consider the Main List, the other lists, the
Sodalitates, and the other electronic arenas of Nova
Roma as places equivalent to the streets and squares
of the city. To be a citizen one doesn't have to be
seen in the streets and squares: if we don't see
someone in the street or the square, we assume they're
at home or on holiday, not that they're dead or
ignominiously disenfranchized. Every so often, when it
can be afforded, we can have a census, and then those
who we discover to have died since the last census can
be removed from the list of citizens, but otherwise,
what harm does it do us to assume that everyone who
was a citizen when we last saw them is still a
citizen?
Land may not come for a long long time; sovereignty is
even further off; but if our nation is not to be
caught completely unprepared when it comes, we must
behave as much as we can like a nation now and from
now on. If a real nation would not deprive its
citizens of citizenship simply because they haven't
been seen around recently, why should we?
Thanks for your time.
Cordus
=====
www.strategikon.org
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Everything you'll ever need on one web page
from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
http://uk.my.yahoo.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
Re: [Nova-Roma] Senate doors |
| From: |
Fortunatus <labienus@novaroma.org> |
| Date: |
Thu, 12 Dec 2002 21:04:10 -0600 |
|
Salvete Aule Apolloni omnesque
> This is why I'm very interested in Cassius Calvus'
> researches, for which many thanks. If it was indeed
> the case, as his research suggests, that the opening
> or closing of the doors was at the discretion of the
> presiding magistrate,...
This is, as far as I know, true. It is also my understanding that the
doors were usually open. However, it is important to note that this did
not mean that every civis in Roma was aware of the contents of the
Senate's debates. The Senatores met in either the curia or a templum.
The surviving curia's doorway is not so big as to allow a very large
crowd to listen to what went on inside. Roman templa likewise weren't
particularly designed to display their interiors to a crowd.
Additionally, only the very wealthy or the indigent would be capable of
spending much time loitering about outside the Senate. Important people
might assign a slave to pay attention to debates that impacted them.
However, the average civis very likely would not have the luxury to pay
much attention to the Senate's deliberations, even if he or she were so
inclined.
Instead, the tribuni plebis acted, at least in theory, as the eyes and
ears of the cives in the Senate, and they spread the word of important
Senatorial goings-on. Originally, the tribuni were only allowed to sit
in the vestibule of the curia or templum; later, they were admitted to
the meeting room itself. Considering the Senatorial order's bitter
fight with the ordo plebeius, I expect that ordinary cives were not even
allowed to occupy the vestibule (though I don't know of any proof of
that), further restricting their ability to eavesdrop on the Senatores.
Also, Suetonius points out that Divus Iulius' first act as a consul was
to have the Senate's debates published publicly on a daily basis. This
implies that such publication was unusual, especially as it is stated as
part of a list of the odd and outrageous behavior that led Caesar's
collega to effectively retire from office. (Suet. Iul. XX) It's
certainly true that Augustus reversed the policy, limiting access to the
Acta senatus to Senatores.
All of the preceding is to say that the vast majority of Romans were
probably utterly oblivious to the Senate's debates. They certainly
didn't have the minutes of every Senate session mailed directly to their
doorsteps, which is effectively what happens with a mailing list. So,
it seems to me that our current practice of having the tribuni plebis
announce the outcomes of the Senate's deliberations in whatever detail
they feel is most appropriate is a reasonable compromise between the
realities of the ancient practice and our desire to keep our cives
involved and informed.
Valete
T Labienus Fortunatus
--
"Since death alone is certain and the time of death uncertain, what
should I do?"
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
[Nova-Roma] Consular Proposals - Tax Payment |
| From: |
"Chantal G. Whittington" <aerdensrw@yahoo.com> |
| Date: |
Thu, 12 Dec 2002 20:09:35 -0800 (PST) |
|
Salve, Decime Iuni Silane--
Silanus said: Unfortunately, this gift exposes Nove
Roma to the very real threat of voter fraud.
Renata: Hm...As in, if someone applies for and
receives multiple NR citizenships and has the status
of Assidui in all of them, that would give his votes
an unfair weight in the elections? But if his status
were Capite Censi in all of them, his multiple votes
would have less weight and therefore affect the
election results to a lesser degree?
In that case, though, it seems to me that the problem
lies with that person having multiple citizenships,
and not so much with his status as either Assidui or
Capite Censi--though yes, being considered Assidui
would make the situation worse.
Or am I missing some other method of voter fraud that
could result from the first-year Assidui status?
Thanks for commenting. As a rogator-elect, I do want
to understand.
Vale,
---
Renata Corva
=====
Chantal
http://www.theranweyr.org
"Yesterday, it worked.
Today, it is not working.
Windows is like that."
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
[Nova-Roma] Re: Consular Proposals: My Final Comments |
| From: |
"deciusiunius <bcatfd@together.net>" <bcatfd@together.net> |
| Date: |
Fri, 13 Dec 2002 08:22:39 -0000 |
|
--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Gnaeus Salix Astur
<salixastur@y...> wrote:
> Salvete Quirites.
Salve G. Salix,
I have read your comments with interest. My responses are below.
> It seems that my comments have arisen a lot of support for the
>latest consular proposals. I would like to make my final comments
>here, to let you know what I think.
>
> 1.- The first proposal aims to eliminate the hypothetical
possibility
> of duplicated citizenships by placing new citizens among the Capita
> Census.
>
> In my opinion, this proposal is not complete. Not only does it
>*fail* to avoid duplicated citizenships (it just makes them more
>expensive); it does not address many other problems (minors posing
>as adults, lies about gender, lies about age, lies about address)
> that are very serious indeed. Such a system will necessarily need
>the cooperation of our
> provincial institutions, which are close enough to the citizenry to
> perform this much needed service.
As has been mentioned to you already, this law does not attempt to do
all you have pointed out. That is not its function. Its function is
simply to place into the Capita Census new citizens who do not pay a
tax when they join Nova Roma. If do they pay when they join, they
will become assidui. It would not entirely eliminate voter fraud but
it would make it less likely by making it more expensive. Right now,
someone can create duplicate citizenships and vote with them until
the next year at no cost. Not until the following year when the tax
is not paid would that duplicate citizen be put into the head count.
Then, someone intent on voter fraud could simply create more
duplicate citizenships.
> Besides, it places our new citizens in a situation where many of
>them will probably feel alienated and estranged, and it will raise
>the percentage of capita census, thus putting the democratic
>legitimacy of our institutions at stake.
This is demagoguery at its best. I salute you for raising the level
of hyperbole in this discussion through such creative scare tactics!
However, let's be honest, our democratic institutions are not being
put in danger by these laws. Rather, they are being protected by
making it more difficult (or more expensive certainly) for people to
commit voter fraud at the expense of the Nova Roman voter. New
citizens could still become assidui upon joining simply by paying
their tax. Otherwise, if they wish to "try us out" without paying
their tax initially, they will be put in the head count. There they
will still receive all the benefits of citizenship and will still be
able to vote, just with less voting power. This is fair. As for your
claim elsewhere that our institutions are at risk by potentially
putting 80% of our citizens into the head count, I should point out
that is already the case, except the percentage is higher. Most of
our current citizens do not pay their tax, so they are put into the
head count. They are put there by THEIR choice, by not paying their
tax. New citizens would receive the same choice.
> We need a comprehensive system to check our citizens' identity. This
> "patch" is not enough, and it is not desiderable.
>
> 2.- The second proposal does not define proxies with the necessary
> precision. Elections are a serious business; a "private agreement"
is
certainly not enough to ensure the fairness of our electoral system.
As Consul Octavius pointed out, preventing proxy voting is
impossible, nor I would add is it desirable. We are simply
recognizing the reality that proxy voting exists and are giving some
guidelines as to how it should be carried out.
> 3.- The third proposal presents a too lenient penalty for
intentional
> duplicate citizens, and does not contemplate the case of
unintentional
> duplicate citizens.
This is hardly a compelling reason to oppose a law. Right now there
is no law governing this situation, this will remedy that. If later
the law is in practice found to be too lenient, it can be amended. I
would rather start out too lenient at first until the law has been in
effect for awhile.
> It has been stated by the iunior consul that some of the issues I
>have raised should be modified by future administrations. In my
>opinion, that is not the way to do things. When someone drafts a
>legislative proposal, that proposal must be thought well, so as to
>make sure that it will not be necessary to ammend it in the
>foreseeable future. What is the point of making a proposal while
>recommending its revocation? Either a proposal is a good proposal,
>or it is not.
In theory, what you say sounds reasonable. In practice I think you
will find once you have a little more experience as a magistrate that
sometimes it is simply impossible to foresee all possible
ramifications of a law until it is put into effect and has time to
work. This is especially true in Nova Roma, when quite often a law is
the first law of its kind regulating a particular situation. Once a
proposal has been a law for awhile, circumstances may and probably
will arise that were impossible to foresee before. That is when a law
is amended to encompass the new situations. Also, one can make the
error of trying to do too much in a potential law. In general with
laws of this sort I think it is better to take small steps and do it
well rather than try to do too much and stumble. These laws are quite
reasonable. They are first steps that in tandem regulate potential
voter fraud. As other circumstances arise later, the laws can be
amended.
Decius Iunius Palladius Invictus,
Senator Consularis,
Candidate for Praetor
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
[Nova-Roma] Apollonia Acta -- Weekly Roman News And Archeology |
| From: |
Sextus Apollonius Scipio <scipio_apollonius@yahoo.com> |
| Date: |
Fri, 13 Dec 2002 00:44:52 -0800 (PST) |
|
Salvete Omnes,
this week some interesting news:
- A new tale of Masada?
- Was soccer brought to Britain by Julius Caesar?
- and more...
You will find them at:
http://www.fr-novaroma.com/Archeology/
Valete,
=====
Sextus Apollonius Scipio
Propraetor Galliae
Sodalitas Egressus, Praefectus for France
Scriba Explorator Primus et Scriba Fiscalis Primus Academiae Thules
NRLandProject, acting Praefectus Pecuniae
French Translator
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
Re: [Nova-Roma] Senate doors |
| From: |
qfabiusmaxmi@aol.com |
| Date: |
Fri, 13 Dec 2002 04:20:45 EST |
|
In a message dated 12/12/02 7:08:28 PM Pacific Standard Time,
labienus@novaroma.org writes:
> I expect that ordinary cives were not even
> allowed to occupy the vestibule (though I don't know of any proof of
> that), further restricting their ability to eavesdrop on the Senatores.
>
Appinus mentions that when the ex soldiers stormed the Senate house, during
Marius consulship, they were executed. I don't believe ordinary citizens
were even let in the house.
Petitions were pressed upon Senators when they were walking to and from the
house.
Q. Fabius Maximus
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
Re: [Nova-Roma] Consular Proposals - Tax Payment |
| From: |
=?iso-8859-1?q?Decimus=20Iunius=20Silanus?= <danedwardsuk@yahoo.co.uk> |
| Date: |
Fri, 13 Dec 2002 10:00:41 +0000 (GMT) |
|
Salve Renata Corva,
> Hm...As in, if someone applies for and receives
> multiple NR citizenships and has the status of
> Assidui in all of them, that would give his votes an
> unfair weight in the elections? But if his status
> were Capite Censi in all of them, his multiple votes
> would have less weight and therefore affect the
> election results to a lesser degree?
The degree is actually pretty substantial. Century 83,
which is reserved for the capiti censi, currently has
891 citizens. The remainding classes in the 5th
century have about 15 citizens.
Currently, if a perpetrator applies for and attains 20
citizenships (costing him nothing, remember), these
will all automatically be given assidui status. Lets
assume that these 20 fake citizens are distributed
randomly amongst the 5th class (and to be honest I'm
not sure how this works), then we may end up with the
following situation:
If 1 citizens is placed in 20 different classes, this
one individual will contol 6.7% of 20 classes (ie 1/15
x 20).
If 5 citizens are placed in 4 different classes, this
individual will control 33% of 4 classes (ie 5/15 x
4).
If 10 citizens are placed in 2 different classes, this
individual will control 67% of 2 classes (ie 10/15 x
2).
Further, were this individual to be caught, there is
currently no recourse by law by which this individual
could be punished.
Under these proposals, this individual will currently
have to pay $240 in taxes to get all twenty fake
citizens assigned assidui status. If not, all these
citizens will be assigned to the 83rd century. His
share of the vote will now equate to 2.2% of 1 class
(ie 20/891).
As you can appreciate, quite a substantial difference.
I hope my maths isn't confusing :-)
And, if he is caught, the necessary legislation is in
place to bring a prosecution.
> In that case, though, it seems to me that the
> problem lies with that person having multiple
> citizenships, and not so much with his status as
> either Assidui or Capite Censi--though yes, being
> considered Assidui would make the situation worse.
You are right of course, but practically speaking,
restricting multiple memberships will be very
difficult to implement. Various methods have been
discussed and they all have associated problems. I
have no doubt that one day we will get there, but in
the meantime we need to protect the republic and her
voters.
Vale
Decimus Iunius Silanus.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Everything you'll ever need on one web page
from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
http://uk.my.yahoo.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
Re: [Nova-Roma] Quiet Citizens |
| From: |
"G.Porticus Brutis" <celtic4usa@yahoo.com> |
| Date: |
Fri, 13 Dec 2002 03:04:52 -0800 (PST) |
|
Look I agree with you what is the harm?There is no
need to push those out that may have join because of
there love-ones or just don't have the time to
write.My wife,kids,brothers,mom and dad are those
members whom you call "parasites".This brings great
anger to me,knowing some NRomans feel they have to use
such a word.I ask you all,will you stand up to my
family and tell them that they're not worthy of such
an honor of being a NRoman?
This souldn't happen here in a world we're trying to
build.Yes I understand the time that goes in to
finding out if some are still in to NR, but where will
you stop? Will you now throw me out for not writing
everyday or flying to events?Like I've said don't open
doors that you can not close.
After all the dust has settles how many true romans
will you have,I mean the ones who post everyday and
goes to all the gatherings and pays every dues?I ask
where will you stand in this line?I don't feel any law
that takes away a persons right to be Nova Roman a
true a standing law,this should be removed and
replaced.
G.Porticus Brutis
--- "A. Apollonius Cordus" <cordus@strategikon.org>
wrote:
> A. Apollonius Cordus to all citizens and peregrines,
> greetings.
>
> Abstract: I disagree with the identification of
> quiet
> citizens as parasites; and ask why we should take
> away
> the citizenship of those who do no harm.
>
> I'm very glad to be able to voice my agreement with
> such illustrious citizens as Fabius Maximus,
> Minucius
> Audens and Equitius Marinus on this issue. The word
> 'parasite' has been used to refer to 'inactive'
> citizens - a strong word, which conjures an image of
> a
> person who derives personal benefit by taking unfair
> advantage of the generosity or hard work of others.
> It
> is a word which is used by some people in other
> nations to refer to immigrants or the unemployed.
>
> What can possibly justify its use in this case? Are
> inactive citizens costing the state any money? Are
> they deriving any benefit which has not been freely
> offered them? Are they indeed deriving any material
> benefit at all from being a citizen which they could
> not derive without being one? The only argument
> anyone
> has put forward to suggest that they are a drain on
> the resources of the State is that the State has to
> spend money on finding out whether they are active
> so
> that it can kick them out if not - but the State
> could
> simply decline regard them as 'parasites' in the
> first
> place, and then would have no need to spend any
> money
> on tracking them down!
>
> I was for some time in an unusual position, in some
> ways quite the opposite of an inactive citizens - I
> was an active non-citizen. I regarded myself during
> that time as a 'resident alien', or 'peregrinus' in
> Roman terminology (this is what I mean when I offer
> greetings to citizens and 'peregrines'): I lived in
> the community, but without citizenship.
>
> Phrased like this, in terms usually applied to
> questions of immigration in other nations, the issue
> becomes rather clearer. Imagine that Nova Roma were
> a
> community residing in a single physical location.
> There might be both citizens and non-citizens
> (peregrines) living there, all active in various
> different areas of community life, to varying
> extents.
> I, a citizen who often visits and converses in the
> Forum, might see nothing of another citizen who
> dislikes the bustle of the Forum but frequents the
> Tavern, or prefers to stay at home altogether. I
> might
> suggest to the government that that citizen ought to
> be struck off the citizen rolls. The government
> would
> laugh in my face: this citizen may not visit the
> Forum
> - he / she may not even live in the city any more -
> but he / she is still a citizen, unless he / she has
> died or been deprived of citizenship for some
> specific
> reason.
>
> Let us consider the Main List, the other lists, the
> Sodalitates, and the other electronic arenas of Nova
> Roma as places equivalent to the streets and squares
> of the city. To be a citizen one doesn't have to be
> seen in the streets and squares: if we don't see
> someone in the street or the square, we assume
> they're
> at home or on holiday, not that they're dead or
> ignominiously disenfranchized. Every so often, when
> it
> can be afforded, we can have a census, and then
> those
> who we discover to have died since the last census
> can
> be removed from the list of citizens, but otherwise,
> what harm does it do us to assume that everyone who
> was a citizen when we last saw them is still a
> citizen?
>
> Land may not come for a long long time; sovereignty
> is
> even further off; but if our nation is not to be
> caught completely unprepared when it comes, we must
> behave as much as we can like a nation now and from
> now on. If a real nation would not deprive its
> citizens of citizenship simply because they haven't
> been seen around recently, why should we?
>
> Thanks for your time.
>
> Cordus
>
> =====
>
>
> www.strategikon.org
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Everything you'll ever need on one web page
> from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
> http://uk.my.yahoo.com
>
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
RE: [Nova-Roma] Quiet Citizens |
| From: |
"Diana Moravia Aventina" <diana@pandora.be> |
| Date: |
Fri, 13 Dec 2002 13:00:30 +0100 |
|
Salve G.Porticus Brutis,
>After all the dust has settles how many true romans
>will you have,I mean the ones who post everyday and
>goes to all the gatherings and pays every dues?
I don't exactly know what you are repsonding too, because I have about 50
unread NR emails in my box (but I am reading them today, promise).
Anyway, I don't think there is any harm done if someone is a 'quiet
citizen'. These 'quiet citizens' may not be active on this lists, but in my
experience they still 'promote' NR when they can.
For example, Demetreus Moravius accompanied me to the NR Rally in Belgium
and had a great time. Later he joined NR but hasn't said a word on the
lists. For him, it's a language problem. He's fluent in English (his accent
is more American than mine) but prefers to write in his own. Anyway, he is
active in macronational politics. Last week, we went to a reception and 4 of
Belgium's well known politicians seperately asked me if I won the tribunis
election in NR and also mentioned how impressed they were with the NR
website. They had heard about NR from Demetreus and not me. So even when a
citizen is 'quiet' they may still be valuable to Nova Roma albeit in a
different way than those of us who are living behind our computers answering
emails :-)
Greetings to your family!
Vale,
Diana Moravia Aventina
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
[Nova-Roma] Re: Quiet Citizens |
| From: |
"William Rogers <wlr107@yahoo.com>" <wlr107@yahoo.com> |
| Date: |
Fri, 13 Dec 2002 13:48:20 -0000 |
|
--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "G.Porticus Brutis"
<celtic4usa@y...> wrote:
> Look I agree with you what is the harm?There is no
> need to push those out that may have join because of
> there love-ones or just don't have the time to
> write.My wife,kids,brothers,mom and dad are those
> members whom you call "parasites".This brings great
> anger to me,knowing some NRomans feel they have to use
> such a word.I ask you all,will you stand up to my
> family and tell them that they're not worthy of such
> an honor of being a NRoman?
*****I see and concede your point. Maybe a more clarified method of
determining and "active" and "non-active" membership could be better
explained to clarify.
Example: The Eagle. If you do not pay taxes, I believe you should not
get a copy in any format. That would be a benefit of a tax-paying
member? I do not see the real problem of antying up the fees,
expecially here in the US!
Maybe parasite was not the BEST choice of word, but it DID get us all
to notice, and consider the issue more, didn't it? Maybe we need to
work just a bit more in the new members area to clarify points like
this one a bit...but I am not one who would know the best method to
assist in that measure, but I am willing to do what I can.
Please do NOT assume the comments were personal attacks, I VERY
seriously doubt that was the intent.
Take care!
Publius Tarquitius Rufus
> This souldn't happen here in a world we're trying to
> build.Yes I understand the time that goes in to
> finding out if some are still in to NR, but where will
> you stop? Will you now throw me out for not writing
> everyday or flying to events?Like I've said don't open
> doors that you can not close.
> After all the dust has settles how many true romans
> will you have,I mean the ones who post everyday and
> goes to all the gatherings and pays every dues?I ask
> where will you stand in this line?I don't feel any law
> that takes away a persons right to be Nova Roman a
> true a standing law,this should be removed and
> replaced.
> G.Porticus Brutis
>
>
>
>
>
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
[Nova-Roma] Consular Proposals - Tax Payment |
| From: |
"Chantal G. Whittington" <aerdensrw@yahoo.com> |
| Date: |
Fri, 13 Dec 2002 06:16:42 -0800 (PST) |
|
Salve, Decime Iuni Silane--
Thank you very much for your explanation! I had
noticed the huge number of capiti censi in Century 83,
whereas my own century has about 19 members, but I
hadn't connected that with the voting percentage until
you pointed it out to me. Having the math laid out in
front of me makes things much clearer. It's one of
these things that was right in front of my nose all
the time, but I didn't see it.
Multas gratias!
Renata Corva
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: absent people |
| From: |
"Chris Lino" <chrislino777@hotmail.com> |
| Date: |
Thu, 12 Dec 2002 23:57:52 -0600 |
|
Salve,
I agree with Q. Fabius Maximus. I for example am a new citizen, I love
everything about ancient Rome, and feel that Nova Roma can help connect me
to them somehow by allowing me to participate in and learn about all things
Roman. However I have been in the process of moving for the last few weeks,
and still am not settled in...in the meantime I have had no time to be very
"active" I still read the boards however, as you can see. To complicate my
situation my Gens is actually on the other side of the country with a few
members in my state. To further complicate that I have no idea how to get in
touch with them to try and see what is going on etc. Because I just don't
have much time to find out. In the end, every great nation has a mix of
citizens from active to inactive to criminals to great senators etc. it is
what makes a nation a nation.Do you think Rome cast it's citizens out who
were not proving their "activity"?
Vale
Decimus Cornelius Romanus
By the way, to my bros. and siters who might be reading this, please write
me and let me know how I can get in touch with you :)
>From: qfabiusmaxmi@aol.com
>Reply-To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
>To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: absent people
>Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 14:15:24 EST
>
>In a message dated 12/12/02 9:24:00 AM Pacific Standard Time,
>equitius_marinus@yahoo.com writes:
>
>
> > I must respectfully disagree with you. If you'll review the
> > history of the discussion about whether or not to even have a
> > tax, there was a huge concern about it becoming mandatory. It
> > is not, and it's not intended to be. Citizenship is not
> > contingent on payment of taxes, and I would oppose any effort
> > to tie the two together.
> >
> >
>
>In Nova Roma like old Rome the Roman citizen enjoys protection under the
>law.
> While paying your tax (dues) allows more voice in the government, your
>voice
>is not stilled only diminished, while you retain your protections if you
>chose not to pay taxes (dues).
>This is what was decided when the Senate set forth the SC on taxation.
>
>I believe that many here are inactive citizens, and the exact number is
>awaiting our census to discover them. Would it be fair to strike them from
>the rolls? Some say yes, I say that an inactive citizen is one has the
>potential to be active again. Since NR is a voluntarily joined
>organization,
>not everybody has unlimited time to spend on it. After the five years of
>existence we are starting to see slow ripples of involvement moving across
>our citizenry.
>There will be, like in old Rome, citizens that will enter public office, a
>small core of men and women who dedicate their lives to the service of the
>Republic. Then there will be the larger group who wish to be involved, but
>cannot, another needs keeps this from happening. Yet they remain
>interested,
>and talk loudly about the Republic in the Forum.
>Then there are those who are silent, who are members of Nova Roma, and
>worship her gods and carry out their Romanitas in utter secrecy. They are
>good citizens, vote in every election, and pay their taxes, just see no
>reason to tell anyone about it.
>Finally there are those citizens who are in NR, but cannot be involved at
>the
>present time.
>We don't know their situation. They may have joined because of the movie
>"Gladiator" or they needed a homework assignment completed, or they like
>Roman art, or they like studying Rome in their spare time. But does it
>matter? Why eliminate such a pool of people? Just because they are not
>active now, does not mean they will be inactive in the future.
>They may step up when they have the opportunity and Rome needs them. We
>should we deprive them of that? It is not like they are draining us. I
>say
>determine the number of inactive civvies here in Rome, then leave them
>alone.
> They will reconnect us when they are ready.
>
>Valete
>Q. Fabius Maximus
>
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
_________________________________________________________________
Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online
http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
[Nova-Roma] Iuramenta/Juramento/Oath |
| From: |
"Titus Arminius Genialis" <tagenialis@yahoo.com.br> |
| Date: |
Fri, 13 Dec 2002 11:50:33 -0200 |
|
IVRAMENTA
Ego, Titus Arminius Genialis hoc ipso facto sollemniter iuro Novae Romae
decus defendere et semper pro Novar Romae Populo atque Senatu agere.
Ut Novae Romae magistratus ego Titus Arminius Genialis Romae deos
deasquecolere iuro in omnibus publicae vitae temporibus atque Romanas
virtutes et publica et privata vita persequi.
Ego Titus Arminius Genialis Romanam religionem favere et defendere iuro ut
Novae Romae Reipublicae religionem et numquam agere ita ut eius status
publicae religionis aliquid detrimenti capiat.
Praeterea ego Titus Arminius Genialis iuro quam optime fungi officium
muneris scriba propraetoris Brasiliae Provinciae.
Meo Novae Romae civis honore et coram Populi Romani deis atque deabus
eteorum voluntate et favore, munus scriba propraetoris Brasiliae Provinciae
accipio una cum iuribus, privilegiis, munera atque officiae quae meum munus
comportat.
In Paulicea Regio, Brasilia Provincia, Idus Decembras, MMDCCLV a.u.c.
JURAMENTO
Eu, Titus Arminius Genialis, por meio deste, solenemente juro guardar a
honra de Nova Roma e trabalhar sempre para os melhores interesses do Senado
e Povo de Nova Roma.
Como um magistrado de Nova Roma, eu, Titus Arminius Genialis, juro honrar os
deuses e deusas de Roma nas minhas atividades públicas, bem como almejar as
virtudes públicas romanas na minha vida pública e privada.
Eu, Titus Arminius Genialis, juro sustentar e defender a Religio Romana como
a religião estatal de Nova Roma e juro nunca agir de forma que vá ameaçar
sua posição como religião oficial.
Eu, Titus Arminius Genialis, juro proteger e defender a Constituição de Nova
Roma.
Eu, Titus Arminius Genialis, no mais juro cumprir as obrigações e
responsabilidades do cargo de scriba propraetoris Brasiliae Provinciae no
melhor de minhas habilidades.
Pela minha honra como cidadão de Nova Roma, na presença dos deuses e deusas
do Povo Romano, pelas suas mercês e favores, aceito a magistratura de scriba
propraetoris Brasiliae Provinciae bem como todos seus direitos, privilégios,
obrigações e responsabilidades decorrentes de agora em diante.
Dado em Paulicea Regio, Brasilia Provincia, Idus Decembras, MMDCCLV a.u.c.
OATH
I, Titus Arminius Genialis, do hereby solemnly swear to uphold the honor of
Nova Roma, and to act always in the best interests of the People and the
Senate of Nova Roma.
As a magistrate of Nova Roma, I, Titus Arminius Genialis, swear to honor de
gods and goddesses of Rome in my public dealings, and to pursue the Roman
Virtues in my public and private life.
I, Titus Arminius Genialis swear to uphold and defend the Religio Romana as
the State Religion of Nova Roma and swear never to act in a way that would
threaten its status as the State Religion.
I, Titus Arminius Genialsi, further swear to fulfill the obligations and
responsibilities of the office of scriba propraetoris Brasiliae Provinciae
to the best of my abilities.
On my honor as a Citizen of Nova Roma, and in the presence of the gods and
goddesses of the Roman People and by their will and favor, do I accept the
position of scriba propraetoris Brasiliae Provinciae and all the rights,
privileges, obligations, and responsibilities attentant thereto.
At Paulicea Regio, Brasilia Provincia, Idus Decembras, MMDCCLV a.u.c.
Valete bene.
______________________________________________
Titus Arminius Genialis
Apparitor Salutis Publicae Templi Concordiae
Scriba Retiarius Brasiliae Provinciae
tagenialis@yahoo.com.br
http://geocities.yahoo.com.br/tagenialis
ICQ#: 75873373
______________________________________________
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Mensagem enviada está livre de vírus.
Enviada por GNBS através do MSO2K.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.422 / Virus Database: 237 - Release Date: 20/11/2002
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
Re: [Nova-Roma] Consular Proposals - Tax Payment |
| From: |
labienus@novaroma.org |
| Date: |
Fri, 13 Dec 2002 09:04:31 US/Central |
|
Salvete Deci Iuni omnesque
> Further, were this individual to be caught, there is
> currently no recourse by law by which this individual
> could be punished.
This is not entirely true. While no law specifically targets voter fraud, any
civis may petition the praetores in order to sue any other civis who has harmed
him or her. Voter fraud harms the entire electorate. Were I to have
reasonable proof of voter fraud on the part of any civis, I would most
certainly bring suit against this person. And, I would encourage each and
every other voter to do likewise. After failing to win any one trial, the
perpetrator of the fraud would almost certainly fail all. Since the praetor
may declare by edictum penalties for failing to pay whatever fine was
stipulated in the suits, the fraudulent civis would either be substantially
poorer, or s/he would, I hope, soon be facing a trial for expulsion from Nova
Roma in the Comitia Centuriata for flagrant disregard of Nova Roman practice,
continued harm against the whole voting populace, and violating the spirit of
our election laws.
In cases of high crimes, the Senate could also enact a senatusconsultum
directing the praetores to hold an extraordinary trial for expulsion even
without a specific lex outlawing the act. Yes, this is a dangerous proposition
that would require great care, but it is a recourse open to the Res Publica.
Personally, I would consider any large scale voter fraud to constitute treason.
In any case, I do agree that it is preferable to have good leges on the books
to explicitly make voter fraud illegal. (That said, I feel compelled to point
out that Roma had no police detectives and no district attorney. The burden of
gathering evidence and witnesses falls upon the plaintiff, not the state.)
> Under these proposals, this individual will currently
> have to pay $240 in taxes to get all twenty fake
> citizens assigned assidui status. If not, all these
> citizens will be assigned to the 83rd century. His
> share of the vote will now equate to 2.2% of 1 class
> (ie 20/891).
This is only true if all members of the capite censi vote. The vast majority
of them won't, so the actual impact of 20 votes in centuria LXXXIII is likely
to be much higher than you predict. Of course, not all assidui vote and it
takes more than one centuria to win an election. Therefore, the value of
owning centuria LXXXIII is still fairly small when compared to having an impact
upon ten or twenty other centuriae.
> And, if he is caught, the necessary legislation is in
> place to bring a prosecution.
Again, prosecution is performed by cives, not magistrates acting as police
officers or prosecuting attorneys. All that is necessary to bring suit against
another civis now is some reasonable evidence that that civis has harmed you.
Leges give further reasons to bring suit and provide penalties other than
financial damage to bear.
Valete
T Labienus Fortunatus
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
[Nova-Roma] Attention Voters! Invalid voter code |
| From: |
"Julilla Sempronia Magna <curatrix@villaivlilla.com>" <curatrix@villaivlilla.com> |
| Date: |
Fri, 13 Dec 2002 15:57:48 -0000 |
|
The civis with the following voter tracking codes has a malformed or
inaccurate voter code:
#28060
Please remember to enter your code exactly as it is given, and if you
are unsure of your new code, follow my instructions posted previously
to obtain your current voter code by e-mail:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nova-Roma/message/5339
Or you may write the censors: censors @ novaroma.org
---
cura ut valeas,
@____@ Julilla Sempronia Magna
|||| www.villaivlilla.com/
@____@ Daily Life in Ancient Rome
|||| Rogatrix, MMDCCLV
Scriba, Nova Roma Curator Araneae
Curatrix Araneae,
America Boreoccidentalis
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
[Nova-Roma] election |
| From: |
"Gaius Galerius Peregrinator" <gaiusgalerius@hotmail.com> |
| Date: |
Fri, 13 Dec 2002 16:41:52 +0000 |
|
Isn't there supposed to be a runoff for praetor as well, or is that a
separate election? I just voted for aedilis and tribunus, but not praetor.
Galerius Peregrinator.
_________________________________________________________________
Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online
http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
Re: [Nova-Roma] Consular Proposals - Tax Payment-To Iunius |
| From: |
PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@aol.com |
| Date: |
Fri, 13 Dec 2002 13:49:06 -0500 |
|
>From F. Galerius Aurelianus Secundus to D. Iunius Silanus. Salve.
I find your email fascinating and informative plus slightly frightening. However, I also feel that you may have too much time of your hands (small joke). You should apply to one of the consuls for a position as an accensi; I think you have the right skills for that kind of work (really serious). Vale.
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
[Nova-Roma] Re: election |
| From: |
"Gnaeus Equitius Marinus <equitius_marinus@yahoo.com>" <equitius_marinus@yahoo.com> |
| Date: |
Fri, 13 Dec 2002 18:50:11 -0000 |
|
Gaius Galerius Peregrinator writes:
> Isn't there supposed to be a runoff for praetor as well?
Yes, but that election won't begin until the 15th.
-- Marinus
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
[Nova-Roma] REMINDER: Market Day chat, 16 Dec |
| From: |
"Gnaeus Equitius Marinus <equitius_marinus@yahoo.com>" <equitius_marinus@yahoo.com> |
| Date: |
Fri, 13 Dec 2002 18:53:36 -0000 |
|
Our next market day will be next Monday, the 16th of December.
All citizens and interested guests are invited to join the
market day chat at
http://www.novaroma.org/bin/chat/chat
--
ex officio
Gnaeus Equitius Marinus
Curule Aedile
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
Re: [Nova-Roma] Quiet Citizens-A Moderate Response |
| From: |
PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@aol.com |
| Date: |
Fri, 13 Dec 2002 14:02:39 -0500 |
|
>From F. Galerius Aurelianus Secundus to G. Porticus Brutis. Salvete.
I think that my fellow citizen may have inadvertently used the word "parasite" in place of "hanger-on." According to the leges and traditions, if anyone votes, answers the census, etc., then they are active whether or not they reply/contribute to the main list or not. Children are a special case as there status is usually known when their parents apply for them.
I believe there has been a little too much heat generated over this original post. It seems that most citizens are getting hot over the single word "parasite" and are missing the underlying message that we should all make contributions to NR, no matter how small or seldom.
Let us remember that Cato the Censor was a grumpy, opinionated, tight-fisted, xenophobic, religiously conservative old man who just happened to be good with a pen and a turn of phrase (and whose books stayed in print for 2200 years).
Let us all take a deep breath before we make a reply based on a gut reaction. Let us consider that a perceived insult was just a slip of the tongue (or keyboard). Let us remember that some of our brethren are long on smarts and short on sense. Let us all consider that even a genius can be a blockhead on occasion. May you all have a Happy Saturnalia. Vale.
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
RE: [Nova-Roma] The Second Consular Proposal |
| From: |
"Diana Moravia Aventina" <diana@pandora.be> |
| Date: |
Fri, 13 Dec 2002 20:17:26 +0100 |
|
Salvete,
Decimus Iunius Silanus responding to Gnaeus Salix Astur said :
> I think we all agree that punishment should be
> harsher, but as Consul Sulla has pointed out, degrees
< of punishment can be ammended by next years elected
> magistrates. Surely you do not advocate voting against
> this proposal because it is too leniant.
After reading the above comment, I realize that I may have sounded like I
was against the second and third consular proposals. To make it clear, I am
in favor of both proposals, I just thought they both could have been harsher
regarding voter fraud and intentional duplicate citizenships. And as you
pointed out, it could, if necessary, be amended in the future.
Vale,
Diana Moravia Aventina
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Quiet Citizens and the Eagle |
| From: |
"Stephen Gallagher" <spqr753@msn.com> |
| Date: |
Fri, 13 Dec 2002 15:44:33 -0500 |
|
Salve, Fellow Nova Romans:
Even taxpaying citizen will not get the Eagle if they have not paid the subscription rate of $12.00 per year. This is one dollar per issue and postage will likely cost more than that, not to mention copying, set-up computer programs, web sit etc. There are about 55-60 people who over the past year or so that have paid and will get the next 12 Eagles. The Eagle will be given to all citizens for one month ( which Issue yet to be determined) so they can see what they are missing. If any citizen has a business (Roman oriented or not) think about placing an ad in the Eagle. We are also thinking about asking the Senate to allow the Eagle staff to sell a special tee shirt or two to help make the Eagle self-financing. Also are there any citizens that own a PRINTING company (another reason we need a real census)?
Vale
Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
Curator Differium-Elect &
Candidate for Quaestor
Fortuna Favet Fortibus
----- Original Message -----
From: William Rogers
Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 9:16 AM
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: Quiet Citizens
--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "G.Porticus Brutis"
<celtic4usa@y...> wrote:
> Look I agree with you what is the harm?There is no
> need to push those out that may have join because of
> there love-ones or just don't have the time to
> write.My wife,kids,brothers,mom and dad are those
> members whom you call "parasites".This brings great
> anger to me,knowing some NRomans feel they have to use
> such a word.I ask you all,will you stand up to my
> family and tell them that they're not worthy of such
> an honor of being a NRoman?
*****I see and concede your point. Maybe a more clarified method of
determining and "active" and "non-active" membership could be better
explained to clarify.
Example: The Eagle. If you do not pay taxes, I believe you should not
get a copy in any format. That would be a benefit of a tax-paying
member? I do not see the real problem of antying up the fees,
expecially here in the US!
Maybe parasite was not the BEST choice of word, but it DID get us all
to notice, and consider the issue more, didn't it? Maybe we need to
work just a bit more in the new members area to clarify points like
this one a bit...but I am not one who would know the best method to
assist in that measure, but I am willing to do what I can.
Please do NOT assume the comments were personal attacks, I VERY
seriously doubt that was the intent.
Take care!
Publius Tarquitius Rufus
> This souldn't happen here in a world we're trying to
> build.Yes I understand the time that goes in to
> finding out if some are still in to NR, but where will
> you stop? Will you now throw me out for not writing
> everyday or flying to events?Like I've said don't open
> doors that you can not close.
> After all the dust has settles how many true romans
> will you have,I mean the ones who post everyday and
> goes to all the gatherings and pays every dues?I ask
> where will you stand in this line?I don't feel any law
> that takes away a persons right to be Nova Roman a
> true a standing law,this should be removed and
> replaced.
> G.Porticus Brutis
>
>
>
>
>
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: absent people |
| From: |
qfabiusmaxmi@aol.com |
| Date: |
Fri, 13 Dec 2002 15:59:12 EST |
|
In a message dated 12/13/02 6:22:03 AM Pacific Standard Time,
chrislino777@hotmail.com writes:
Salvete
> I agree with Q. Fabius Maximus.
A rare occurence :-)
for example am a new citizen, I love > everything about ancient Rome, and
> feel that Nova Roma can help connect me to them somehow by allowing me to
> participate in and learn about all things Roman.
However I have been in the process of moving for the last few weeks, > and
> still am not settled in...in the meantime I have had no time to be very
> "active" I still read the boards however, as you can see. To complicate my
> situation my Gens is actually on the other side of the country with a few
> members in my state. To further complicate that I have no idea how to get
> in touch with them to try and see what is going on etc. Because I just
> don't have much time to find out. In the end, every great nation has a mix
> of citizens from active to inactive to criminals to great senators etc. it
> is what makes a nation a nation.Do you think Rome cast it's citizens out
> who were not proving their "activity"?
Of course not. Which was my entire point, which you restated so eloquently,
Decimus Cornelius Romanus .
If this pool of people were taking our money, or refusing to join the levy,
or intriquing to overturn the republic, such an action would make sense.
Since they are not, leave them be.
>
>
> By the way, to my bros. and siters who might be reading this, please write
> me and let me know how I can get in touch with you :)
You are a member of a great gens. They have a mailing list which you should
be subscribed to.
Valete
Q. Fabius Maximus
>
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
Re: [Nova-Roma] Consular Proposals - Tax Payment |
| From: |
"M. Octavius Solaris" <scorpioinvictus@hotmail.com> |
| Date: |
Fri, 13 Dec 2002 19:39:46 +0100 |
|
Salve Decime Iuni,
<< The degree is actually pretty substantial. Century 83,
which is reserved for the capiti censi, currently has
891 citizens. The remainding classes in the 5th
century have about 15 citizens.
Currently, if a perpetrator applies for and attains 20
citizenships (costing him nothing, remember), these
will all automatically be given assidui status. Lets
assume that these 20 fake citizens are distributed
randomly amongst the 5th class (and to be honest I'm
not sure how this works), then we may end up with the
following situation: >>
(snipped)
MOS: How likely is this to happen? I can't realistically imagine someone actually doing this.
Vale bene,
Solaris
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
Re: [Nova-Roma] Senate doors |
| From: |
"M. Octavius Solaris" <scorpioinvictus@hotmail.com> |
| Date: |
Fri, 13 Dec 2002 21:40:55 +0100 |
|
Marcus Octavius Solaris Quiritibus SPD,
Catching up with old mail...
Quinte Fabi, scripsisit:
(in response to Aulus Apollonius) It is a bad point. The Senate is the advisory body. What the Senate
discusses is really not the peoples' business until they are asked to ratify the Consuls and Senate's decision. Then they can agree or deny, by using their power of the franchise. Polybios makes that very clear in his "Discussion of the forms of States"
MOS: The Senate in Nova Roma is not merely an advisory body. It creates provinciae, appoints, prorogues and dismisses governors, has the power to declare a state of emergency, can engage in official diplomacy and oversees financial matters. Those are not pieces of advice but decisions.
I do agree, by the way, that Senate discussion should remain behind closed doors and that the system works fine the way it is. However, it seems almost a tradition that the Tribuni only report the votes and comments of the Senators and no real discussions. The only instance where it ever happened was quite a while ago about a storm in a glass of water.
Optime vale,
M. Octavius Solaris
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
Re: [Nova-Roma] Senate doors |
| From: |
"M. Octavius Solaris" <scorpioinvictus@hotmail.com> |
| Date: |
Fri, 13 Dec 2002 22:24:15 +0100 |
|
Salvete,
<<... Quinte Fabi, scripsisit: ...>>
Woah! that should've been "scripsisti" of course. Sorry for the error.
Solaris
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Re:_[Nova-Roma]_Re:_Historical_evi?= |
| From: |
me-in-@disguise.co.uk |
| Date: |
Fri, 13 Dec 2002 21:52:00 +0000 (GMT) |
|
-----Original Message-----
>From : “Lucius Arminius Faustus <lafaustus@yahoo.com.br>“
>
>Sure not. A christian pontiff represents also the will of its god, as
>well as an augurian adress. (But there is a change: the pagan gods
>choose places, while the christian god want churches everywhere, it
>is EVER His Will building churches).
>
God is everywhere - so he needs churches everywhere!
Caesariensis.
--
Personalised email by http://another.com
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
Re: [Nova-Roma] The Eagle |
| From: |
me-in-@disguise.co.uk |
| Date: |
Fri, 13 Dec 2002 22:01:44 +0000 (GMT) |
|
-----Original Message-----
>From : PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@aol.com
>
to make that claim. Unfortunately, this has become a political hot potato for the Irish government as if it can be proven, it could very well re-write the role of Rome in Irish history. I will keep you informed as other news develops. Vale.
>
It's not so recent. It was a hot potato and they managed to hide it but it resurfaced a couple of years ago. The role of *everything* in Irish history is being re-assessed thanks to Irish history's being closer to the kind Tacitus was trying to avoid based on the wishful thinking of Yeats (who belonged to the Golden Dawn and saw fairies), Pearse (who wrote the National Anthem while under fire in the Post Office against rebel orders being cursed by all the women he was stopping from drawing their service husbands'allowance) and the Great Dev, who was a part-Spanish New Yorker. In short, Irish history has a lot in common with Russian circa 1970.
Caesariensis.
--
Personalised email by http://another.com
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
[Nova-Roma] Vale, Julilla! |
| From: |
"Julilla Sempronia Magna <curatrix@villaivlilla.com>" <curatrix@villaivlilla.com> |
| Date: |
Fri, 13 Dec 2002 23:09:00 -0000 |
|
Julilla Sempronia Magna omnibus SPD
I will be away until latish Sunday. My fellow Rogatores will be
minding the Cista and, doubtless, notifying cives of voting problems.
Vale!
---
cura ut valeas,
@____@ Julilla Sempronia Magna
|||| www.villaivlilla.com/
@____@ Daily Life in Ancient Rome
|||| Rogatrix, MMDCCLV
Scriba, Nova Roma Curator Araneae
Curatrix Araneae,
America Boreoccidentalis
http://ambor.konoko.net
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
