Addenda to the Census 2005 Report

Addenda to the Census 2005 Report

Officina Census CFBQ

Caeso Fabius Buteo Quintilianus, Censor Gaius Moravius Laureatus Armoricus, Caput Censoris Officinae Ductus CFBQ Marcus Moravius Piscinus Horatianus, Scriba Censoris Census Primus

Scribae Censoris Officinae Census: Quintus Cassius Calvus; Marcus Octavius Germanicus; Marca Hortensia Maior; Aulus Apollonius Cordus; Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus; Marcus Antonius Biachius; Marcus Curiatius Complutensis; Manius Constantinus Serapio; and Marcus Lucretius Agricola.

The census was intended to determine the number of active cives remaining in Nova Roma. These are distinct from the socii who had joined previously but who had become inactive. Of all 4332 membership files only 662 could be classified as active at the time the census was taken, representing a loss of 85% of the membership over the past five years. In the final report cives were broken down into assidui and capiti censi. The number of provisional cives was also recorded in the final report. During the census proconsules and propraetores were encouraged to attain a proportion of 30% cives among their provincia’s total members. Determined as a minimum acceptable provincia profile was to have 30% cives, 60% socii, and 10% probationary cives. The chart below indicates how far the proconsules and propraetores were able to meet these goals. The figures color-coded in BLUE met or exceeded the goal of 30% cives and below 60% socii. Those color-coded in RED had below 25% cives and 75% socii or above.

Chart 1 Total Cives Prob Socii Cives / Socii %

Britannia 134 28 15 91 21 / 70 %

Dacia 23 13 4 6 57 / 26 %

Gallia 69 15 5 49 22 / 71 %

Germania 72 15 7 50 21 / 69 %

Hibernia 11 3 0 8 27 / 73 %

Hispania 205 69 20 116 34 / 57 %

Italia 269 36 12 221 13 / 82 %

Pannonia 39 10 4 25 27 / 64 %

Samartia 6 1 0 5 17 / 83 %

Thule 52 28 3 21 54 / 40 %

Venedia 25 0 1 24 0 / 94 %

Unorganized 20 2 1 17 10 / 85 %

_________________________________

Europa 925 220 72 633 24 / 68 %

Canada Occid. 41 9 1 31 22 / 77 %

Canada Orient. 66 13 4 49 20 / 74 %

Austroccident. 165 44 5 116 27 / 70 %

Austrorientalis 209 64 15 130 31 / 62 %

Boreoccidentalis 74 19 5 50 26 / 68 %

California 168 35 16 117 21 / 70 %

Lacus Magni 120 43 7 70 36 / 58 %

Mediatlantica 288 66 18 204 23 / 71 %

Mediocc. Super 79 22 2 55 28 / 70 %

Nova Britannia 110 31 5 74 28 / 67 %

_________________________________

North America 1320 346 78 896 26 / 68 %

Argentina 43 14 1 28 33 / 65 %

Brasilia 103 34 10 59 33 / 57 %

Mexico 35 11 8 16 31 / 46 %

Unorganized 28 10 6 12 36 / 43 %

_________________________________

Latin America 209 69 25 115 33 / 55 %

Africa (Unorg.) 29 4 5 20 14 / 69 %

Asia Occident.: 23 8 0 15 35 / 65 %

Asia Orientalis: 21 5 3 13 24 / 62 %

_________________________________

Asia 44 13 3 28 30 / 64 %

Australia 61 9 1 51 15 / 84 %

NZ (Unorg) 7 1 0 6 14 / 86 % _________________________________

Pacific 68 10 1 57 15 / 84 %

Totals 2595 662 184 1749 26 / 67 %

Reworked to exclude socii who have disappeared offers a more accurate profile of provinciae and of Nova Roma itself during the month of October 2005. Provinciae that met the goals are color-coded Blue, those that did not are seen in Red, while others had mixed results.

Chart 2 Total Cives Prob Socii Cives / Socii %

Britannia 100 28 15 57 28 / 57 %

Dacia 21 13 4 4 62 / 19 %

Gallia 48 15 5 28 31 / 58 %

Germania 54 15 7 32 28 / 59 %

Hibernia 7 3 0 4 43 / 57 %

Hispania 178 69 20 89 39 / 50 %

Italia 221 36 12 173 16 / 78 %

Pannonia 31 10 4 17 32 / 55 %

Samartia 4 1 0 3 25 / 75 %

Thule 48 28 3 17 58 / 35 %

Venedia 20 0 1 19 0 / 95 %

Unorganized 17 2 1 14 12 / 82 %

_________________________________

Europa 749 220 72 457 29 / 61 %

Excluding Venedia, Samartia and those from unorganized regions:

Europa 708 217 70 421 31 / 59 %

Canada Occid. 29 9 1 19 31 / 66 %

Canada Orient. 48 13 4 31 27 / 65 %

Austroccident. 137 44 5 88 32 / 64 %

Austrorientalis 166 64 15 87 39 / 52 %

Boreoccidentalis 61 19 5 37 31 / 61 %

California 131 35 16 80 27 / 61 %

Lacus Magni 102 43 7 52 42 / 51 %

Mediatlantica 242 66 18 158 27 / 65 %

Mediocc. Super 58 22 2 34 40 / 59 %

Nova Britannia 84 31 5 48 37 / 57 %

_________________________________

North America 1058 346 78 634 33 / 60 %

Argentina 35 14 1 20 40 / 57 %

Brasilia 79 34 10 35 43 / 44 %

Mexico 33 11 8 14 33 / 42 %

Unorganized 28 10 6 12 36 / 43 %

_________________________________

Latin America 175 69 25 81 39 / 46 %

Africa (Unorg.) 28 4 5 19 14 / 68 %

Asia Occident 19 8 0 11 42 / 58 %

Asia Orientalis 16 5 3 8 31 / 50 %

_________________________________

Asia 35 13 3 19 37 / 54 %

Australia 42 9 1 32 21 / 76 %

NZ (Unorg) 7 1 0 6 14 / 86 % _________________________________

Pacific 49 10 1 38 20 / 78 %

Totals 2094 662 184 1248 32 / 60 %

Comparing the results between the two charts above gives an indication of whether a provincia had problems more so in the past with retaining members than recently. Such is implied when a provincia shifted into a blue provincia in the second chart. Where provinciae remained with mixed results this too implies previous problems that still effect the results. Where instead a provincia shifted into a red provincia there is implied a more recent or an ongoing problem.

The individual provincia were then rated in different areas. Participation gives the percentage of assidui among a provincia’s full cives. A goal of 40% was set for the Participation rating. The Retention rating compares the percentage of cives among all members. Color-coded BLUE is where the figure exceeded 25%, RED are those that fell below 20%. The Recruitment rating considers the number of probationary cives among all current members (excluding socii). Color-coded RED are those that fell below the goal of 10%, while those in BLUE are at 35% or above. A provincia’s Level is then the percentage of full and probationary cives among all members. Considered as a normal Level for Internet communities is 30-33%. Provincial Levels are thus color-coded as they fall outside this range. Bold type shows where provinciae exceeded the ratings for Nova Roma overall.

Chart 3 Participation Recruit

Retention Level

Britannia 43% 24% 35% 33%

Dacia 46% 68% 24% 76%

Gallia 27% 23% 25% 35%

Germania 33% 23% 32% 32%

Hibernia 33% 27% 0% 43%

Hispania 38% 37% 22% 44%

Italia 39% 14% 25% 16%

Pannonia 40% 29% 29% 37%

Samartia 0% 17% 0% 17%

Thule 32% 57% 10% 62%

Venedia 0% 0% N/A 0%

Unorganized 0% 11% 33% 13%

____________________________________________

Europa 37% 26% 25% 32%

23 Oct. Participation Recruit

Retention Level

Canada Occid. 67% 23% 10% 32%

Canada Orient. 31% 21% 24% 30%

Austroccident. 39% 28% 10% 33%

Austrorientalis 27% 34% 19% 42%

Boreoccidenta 32% 28% 21% 34%

California 26% 23% 31% 30%

Lacus Magni 35% 38% 14% 45%

Mediatlantica 44% 24% 21% 29%

Mediocc Supr 18% 29% 8% 39%

Nova Britanni 71% 30% 14% 39%

______________________________

North Americ 37% 29% 18% 35%

23 Oct. Participation Recruit

Retention Level

Argentina 0% 33% 7% 41%

Brasilia 59% 37% 23% 49%

Mexico 10% 41% 42% 44%

Unorganized 40% 45% 38% 45%

_____________________________

Latin Amer 36% 38% 27% 46%

23 Oct. Participation Recruit

Retention Level

Australia 0% 15% 10% 22%

NZ (Unorg) 0% 14% 0% 14%

____________________________

Pacific 0% 15% 10% 21%

Africa (Unorg) 50% 17% 56% 17%

Asia Occident 0% 35% 0% 42%

Asia Orient 25% 28% 38% 38%

_______________________________

Asia 8% 32% 19% 41%

23 Oct. Participation Recruit

Retention Level

Totals 36% 27% 22% 35%

.

A provincia’s Level relates to the results found in the first two charts. A Level gives the percentage of Active cives among all members of a provincia. Where the Level is shown in red in chart 3, and both the percentage for cives and socii are in red in Chart 2 identifies where the greatest concern should be given towards membership problems. In Europa these provinciae are Italia, Venedia, and Samartia. In all three charts Australia performed poorly. And in North America there are then Canada Orientalis and provincia California

The viability of any organization is dependent upon recruitment of new members, retention of members, and then on the level of active participation by its members. To a limited extent we can assess how an individual provincia was doing by considering the various ratings for Participation, Retention and Recruitment in comparison to the Level. (PxRxRx1000 > L). That is, if the combination of the three ratings would exceed the provincia’s Level, it could indicate that membership in the provincia was still potentially growing. Such evaluations would have to be regularly made in order to confirm such a trend. Otherwise a provincia is probably only replacing the members it loses through recruiting new members, and where any of the ratings are low in addition to the Level a provincia may be declining in membership. Only three provinciae show promise of expanding. These are Britannia, Brasilia, and Medioccidentalis Superior. Hispania, Dacia and Pannonia also show some promise of further growth. In areas where provinciae have not yet been organized, the Latin America region is doing exceptionally well and shows the greatest promise for Nova Roma expanding its membership. Already small provincia could be organized for Chile, Uruguay, Peru, and the Caribbean areas.

Overall Nova Roma compares favorably with other Internet communities. A normal level of active participants among total subscribers to email lists is about 32%. Nova Roma slightly exceeds that norm in its Participation rating and Level. Its ability to attract new subscribers and retain them as active members seems a little low but not outside of a normal range of similar Internet communities. However Nova Roma aspires to be more than just an Internet community. In that sense the overall ratings are not promising for Nova Roma’s future. In order to grow further Nova Roma must greatly improve upon its ability to retain members. Its reliance upon passive recruitment is not sufficient to replace members it is losing, and therefore developing a program for actively recruiting new members may be necessary. Obviously if Nova Roma would do better in retaining members, then any new members it recruits would result in a growth of membership. Participation becomes an important factor in both areas since a higher level of participation among cives would suggest that social bonds were being formed to build a community in the provincia. Such social bonds tend to hold individuals to the group. An active social community tends to attract new members, and your more active members are the ones most likely to recruit new members. Thus even where the Recruitment rating may be better in a provincia compared to others, a low Participation rating could signal that a problem exists that will result in the disaffection of members. Venedia and Samartia provide examples of what can happen when key members become disaffected and leave Nova Roma. With only one probationary member today, Venedia practically no longer exists, and Samartia is in danger of becoming extinguished. Assuming that the ratings do not change, in five years Nova Roma's cives will slip from 846 today to 601 cives in 2010. Even Britannia, as well as it seems to be doing in overcoming previous problems, if nothing changes, will decline in membership. In five years Nova Roma could look like this:

Provincia 2005 2010

Britannia 43 34

Dacia 13 33

Gallia 20 11

Germania 22 20

Hispania 89 141

Italia 48 16

Pannonia 14 10

Thule 32 25

Canana Occidentalis 10 3

Canada Orientalis 17 8

Austroccidentalis 49 19

Austrorientalis 79 53

Borneoccidentalis 24 14

California 51 33

Lacus Magni 50 31

Mediatlantica 84 42

Medioccintalis Superior 24 10

Nova Britannia 36 18

Argentina 14 6

Brasilia 34 36

Mexico 11 26

Asia Orientalis 5 4

Australia 9 2

Africa 4 6

Other 64 0

Total 846 601

By this projection only Dacia and Hispania in Europa and some parts of Latin America will grow over the next five years, while other provinciae will likely struggle just to maintain the same levels of membership that they have today.

The ability to retain members is critical for Nova Roma to improve upon active participation by its members and also to improve its ability to recruit new members. Currently Nova Roma acquires one new member for every 3.6 cives. Over five years every 3.6 cives could expand into 11 members, except that with only 27% retention the net result declines to 3.1 members. Thus Nova Roma fails to grow and may even decline. The provinciae that are doing poorest in this regard are Argentina with 14 cives to every new member, Medioccidentalis Superior (11), Thule (9.3), and Canada Occidentalis (9). Interesting here is that Thule is the only active provincia in Europa that encompasses such a large area, from Iceland to Finland and is multinational. Britannia did best of any provinciae with 1.9 cives to every new member. In North America California did well with 2.2 cives for every new member. Here we may note that California is composed of only two states, while the worst performing provinciae of the region, Medioccidentalis Superior and Canada Occidentalis encompass very large areas. This suggests that the size of some provinciae inhibit not only the retention of members but also the recruitment of new members.

What the census figures above reveal is that Nova Roma has had serious problems in the past with the retention of members and this has affected Nova Roma in developing in other areas as well. This has been supported by anecdotal information received from former members during the course of conducting the census. The former members indicated that the main cause for their departure was the confrontational atmosphere on Nova Roma lists. That cause may directly account for as many as 300 members leaving, but does not fully explain the loss of over three thousand members over the past five years. From the limited available information what was found is that 42% of those who left due directly to confrontations with other members were educators (university professors and secondary school teachers). The inability to retain educators greatly inhibits Nova Roma from fulfilling its role of being an educational organization, and this may better explain why so many members have left. It should be emphasized that the figures only reflect past events, and therefore do not necessarily indicate what may happen in the future. That is certainly the case with certain provinciae, and the census figures should not be taken to reflect poorly on most current propraetores.

Recent changes to the laws have made the provinciae, rather than gentes, the primary social units within Nova Roma. More attention might therefore be given to how provinciae are organized and managed in order to address the two main problem areas of retaining members and recruiting new members. The Census 2005 Report offers a baseline that each provincia can use to judge their future performance in the areas of Participation, Recruitment and Retention of members. To get a more accurate baseline consideration should be given to adjusting the number of current socii. Included among the socii, and thus affecting some of the census figures, are a number of individuals who no longer have any association with Nova Roma. Also since the conclusion of the census it has been revealed that some cives did not realize they needed to register with the Officina Census in order to retain their status as an active civis. The profile for Nova Roma for today, when adjusted, would probably come to 790 cives, around 1000 socii, and have 184 probationary members or roughly 50% of the membership would be potential cives. Considering the original baseline at 850 cives and probationary cives in summer of 2000, the fact remains that with 846 cives and probationary cives in October 2005 Nova Roman has not grown in the past five years.