Forum Romanum


Subject:	[novaroma] Taxes and Students?
From:	"Sybil Leek" <DolanAp@-------->
Date:	Mon, 12 Nov 2001 17:49:25 -0800

Salve Omnes,

I have noticed as of late, talk about Nova Roma taxes. I was wondering if
there would be a provision set for students? I am a part time student
currently and I live on an income (financial aid) that is below the poverty
level in the USA. Unfortunately my dyslexia and learning disability
adversely affects my capacity to learn new languages. As a result while I am
studying a language I have to devote considerable time to my studies and
find it difficult to work and also maintain a passing grade, hence I choose
a good grade and a hungry stomach.

I am also the materfamilius of the gens Ritulia and one of my two gens
members is also a student at a university. I do believe that the opinion
that gens heads should pay a greater tax is viable, if those gens heads
could then draw on taxes to host Nova Roman events. I also believe that gens
members should be entitled to pay lower taxes if they are volunteering their
time to host events on behalf of Nova Roma. However, if an equal standing in
tax payment is being desired shouldn’t all Nova Roman citizens pay similar
taxes whether or not they are a gens head or a member? I am also asking
about provisions for students and Nova Roman taxes because as a student in
the USA I do not have to pay taxes to my government while I am a student.

Personally I would rather see a membership fee for citizens and gens heads
that is paid annually depending on their status within Nova Roma. Such a
membership fee would create a base of money that Nova Roma could draw on and
operate on throughout the coming year. A basic membership fee would
guarantee not only such a fund but would also draw into Nova Roma people who
are interested in maintaining its status as a nation. I would also suggest
that after membership fees generated such a fund a taxes could be applied if
needed but it maybe unnecessary at that point.

Traditionally a tax is paid to a nation for specific reasons, such as a war
effort, public buildings and access ways (road tariffs), maintenance of
physical property owned by the state/people of that government etc…. To the
best of my knowledge Nova Roma does not own property because it is
registered as a non-profit organization that governs itself, please correct
me if I am wrong on this one? Also to the best of my knowledge a non-profit
organization cannot own property outright (under its own name) or legally
charge a tax to its members because it cannot own property. However, a
non-profit organization that is registered as an educational organization
can charge its members a supporting fee (a membership fee).

I am suggesting to the nation of Nova Roma that a supporting membership fee
may be a better choice to raise general operating funds with, than a tax. I
am also suggesting that if a tax is viable for Nova Roma to charge to its
members, that tax (donation) could be set as a fund, which its citizens can
draw on, to host events with on behalf of Nova Roma’s grow and support. I am
not suggesting that my idea is right or the only possibility but that I am
concerned in the growth and further development of my nation as a citizen of
it and I would like to see my nation prosper.

Vale Prima Nocta Ritulia
It is better to govern yourself in virtue, than to burden your nation with
the need of law.

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


Subject:	[novaroma] The Comitia Centuriata Will Be Called To Order - 11/13/2001
From:	cassius622@--------
Date:	Mon, 12 Nov 2001 20:58:55 EST

Salvete Omnes,

Under the authority vested in me by the Constitution of Nova Roma, the
auspices having been taken and no ill signs observed, the Comitia Centuriata
is hereby convened to vote upon those items which I herein put before it.

The timing of the vote shall be (all times given in official NR time;subtract
6 hours to get EST):* The contio, or discussion period, shall last from now
until 9:00 PM November 21st. Voting shall take place between 6:00 PM
November 21st and 9:00 PM November 29th. The voting agenda is as follows:

VOTE AGENDA

Item 1 - The Lex Vedia de Ratione Comitiorum Centuriatorum is hereby amended:

I. Paragraph V.A.1 is altered to read as follows:

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 or the number of candidates who received individual votes
from members of that century, whichever is less. 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 either all the century's votes have been
assigned, or there are no remaining candidates who received votes
from citizens in that century.

[ COMMENTARY: This is needed for logical consistency with the
next change; see below for the explanation. ]

II. The following paragraph is inserted after Paragraph V.A.3.

4. No candidate may win a century unless he or she has received at
least one vote from a citizen within that century.

[ COMMENTARY: Items I and II establish that only candidates who were
actually voted for by members of a century should receive that
century's vote. Without these changes, if all members of a century
vote for one candidate for an office with two vacancies, one of the
other candidates (desired by no one in that century) would be selected
by lot to receive the other vote. Or, if no one in a century votes
at all, both positions would be given to random candidates undeservedly -
possibly overwhelming the selections made by other voters. ]

III. In paragraph V.B.1, the phrase "97 of the 193 centuries" shall be
replaced with "a simple majority of the centuries casting votes".

IV. In paragraph V.B.2, the phrase "97 of the 193 centuries" shall be
replaced with "a simple majority of the centuries casting votes".

[ COMMENTARY: Currently, a candidate or proposal must receive 97
affirmative votes to be elected or enacted. This is extremely
difficult due to our small number of active centuries. Items with
very high levels of support can fail (and have failed) because of
this requirement. Until we actually do have 193 active centuries,
we need a less unobtainable threshold. ]

V. Paragraph V.B.3 is added:

3. "A simple majority" is hereby defined as "one half of the number
of centuries casting votes, plus one".

Item II - Lex Cassia De Cratione Sodalitatum

I. A group or association, cultural, social, historical or political, created
by or involving
Nova Romans shall be considered officially a part of Nova Roma only by
official recognition/approval by the Republic. Any such group that wishes
official recognition or status within Nova Roma must make a formal
application for inclusion. Until such an application is placed and granted
by the Senate or through vote in any one of the Comitia, all such groups are
considered completely separate from Nova Roma.

II. The above clause is also binding to all Religious groups, organizations
and associations involving Nova Roma Citizens, with the exception that they
may only apply to and be approved by the Collegium Pontificum. This is in
accord with section IV of the Nova Roma constitution which places all
religious associations under the authority of the Collegium Pontificum.

II. Organizations applying for recognition by Nova Roma must present a formal
charter and outline of intent before the Senate or to one of the Comitiae (or
if a religious group to the Collegium Pontificum.)

II. The charter for any group, organization or association applying for
recognition within Nova Roma must include:
A. A statement of intent (what the organization is about, and what it
is trying to achieve.)
B. An action plan outlining how it intends to achieve its goals.
C. An outline of its internal organization, hierarchy and offices.

IV. A group, organization or association approved for official inclusion
into the infrastructure of Nova Roma must adhere to the Constitution and Laws
of Nova Roma. An application for official recognition is therefore considered
a binding statement of intent to be governed by Nova Roma's laws,
constitution and legal government.

[Commentary - Nova Roma has currently has no official policy defining what
is part of our legal corporate structure and what is not. There are potential
legal and/or insurance issues that could rise from this. As an example, let's
say a few Citizens form a local reenactor legion but choose not to become
officially Sponsored. If they were to put on an event and mention Nova Roma,
and someone were hurt or killed in an accident, Nova Roma might be held
legally responsible. There would be no means of proving they were not an
official part of Nova Roma beyond a denial by the Senate. While Nova Roma is
prepared to host/insure events, we must have a legal definition as to what is
'official' and what is not. A legal procedure for this will be proof in case
of problems.]

Item III - "The Lex Iunia Iusiurando is hereby amended so that the following
preface will be placed before the Oath of Office:

Lex Iunia de Iusiurando

The Lex Iunia Iusiurando is hereby enacted to put in place an Oath of
Office for any citizen assuming any magistracy of Nova Roma, whether
elected or appointed.

The following oath must be taken publicly in the major public forums
of Nova Roma before someone elected or appointed to any magistracy
can assume his or her office. It must be taken on the day that the
office is to be assumed and the office shall be considered vacant
until the oath is taken."

[Commentary: This was the originally intended text of this Lex, but some text
was lost when the item was posted for vote. Proconsul Decius Iunius Palladius
has asked that it be restored to the text to make the law more clear.]

Valete,

Marcus Cassius Julianus
Consul

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


Subject:	[novaroma] Gens reduction/ideas?
From:	"Sybil Leek" <DolanAp@-------->
Date:	Mon, 12 Nov 2001 18:39:44 -0800

Salve Omnes,

Both have good points to the discussion concerning gens and taxes. An idea
concerning both points might be such:

Per year:
A membership fee for citizenship: $10.00
A gens registration fee: $10.00 or $15.00
A tax per gens member: $1.00 to $5.00

An example in application thus:
New citizen with no gens affiliation: $10.00 (maintains general operating
fund, no use privilege of funds for events)
New citizen in a preexisting gens: $10.00 + tax = (acknowledgment of
support)
Gens head: $10.00 (for self) + $10.00 (for status of gens) + tax = X$ (for
each citizen in gens) = (maintains general fund, and use of funds, plus
acknowledgment of support)

I understand that we as a nation have a need for a general use fund for
basic operations of Nova Roma (maintaining our web site, paying for basic
fees associated with running the organization of the nation etc.). However,
I also believe that we need to do more than just maintain our group with
money and volunteered time. We need to encourage recognition and exposure
for our nation and create support for our nation by creating gatherings at
which our citizens can meet face to face without creating a financial burden
on individuals within our group.

Hence, we need a general fund to maintain the nation as a whole for whatever
financial bills we have to pay as a group. However, we also need a pool of
funds that can be drawn on to create and maintain group recognition without
burdening any single individual within our nation. Perhaps, a congregate
fund could be created which citizen or gens’ (or preferably a governor or
other Nova Roman representative) can drawn on to host general gatherings for
citizens to meet at face to face without financially burdening the
individual organizing the event/meeting.

Just a few thoughts Prima Nocta Ritualia

>Salvete T. Labiene Fortunate et omnes,
>
>You talk about a policy that requires new gentes to be founded by cives
>with at least 6 months in Nova Roma.
>
>Do you mean that those 6 months experienced cives would change their name
>to create their own gens and be paterfamilias of it ? If so, isn't there a
>problem, consequence of this change ?
>
>I mean, let's say you join Nova Roma. You first have a nomen from an
>existing gens. With time being you meet people, and acheive things.. your
>name is becoming famous, maybe not in the whole respublica but at least in
>your cercle of knowings.
>
>Roman names are already something which is a bit hard to get use of for new
>citizens. What if those names can changed ?
>
>Valete,
>
>Lucius Maximus Serranus.
>
> Salvete Cai Putee et omnes
>
> > Despite my defense of the taxes, I ask all of you: is there another
>way to
> > make the number of gentes decline?
>
> Yes, there is. Combine a policy that forces gentes to be registered
>yearly by
> patres or matres familias with a policy that requires new gentes to be
>founded
> by cives with at least 6 months in Nova Roma. Each year, those gentes
>which
> consist of only an inactive pater or mater familias will simply
>disappear.
> And, the creation of new gentes will be dramatically slowed as only
>cives who
> really want their own gens despite having formed some bonds with an
>existing
> gens will be allowed to form them.
>
> This system does not require an active census, constitutional
>amendments, or
> taxation. What Censor Equitius proposes is to attach taxation to
>registration,
> which is not necessary.
>
> Valete
> T Labienus Fortunatus

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

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


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] gentes/familiae
From:	"Gaius Marius Merullus" <c_marius_m@-------->
Date:	Mon, 12 Nov 2001 23:39:15 -0500

Salvete Numeria et alii

:
:Local familiae under an international gens is one possible formation.
:Somewhat autonomous familiae under the general supervision of a gens is
:another possibility. In any case, I think that some people who would be
:tempted to form a new gens might be just as happy forming a new familia in
:an older, larger gens.

In some gentes, I believe that this is exactly what happens. The joining of
a new citizen into the gens, which usually entails the choice of a unique
combination of nomen and cognomen, creates a new familia, which has the
potential of growing as the gentilis may marry, have children, and/or adopt.
In my own case, I belong to gens Maria and to familia Maria Merulla. Maria
gens contains many familiae, in several different countries, while familia
Maria Merulla is just my daughters and me.

If we rename all existing gentes "familiae" now, we lose this distinction,
without replicating ancient Roman family structure any more accurately than
we currently do, in my opinion (even in terms of naming conventions -- our
"familiae" will still contain many different cognomina, for instance). I
realize that others here are living very different lives, and intend to see
their gentiles often and try to achieve a close-knit, familial atmosphere
within their gentes. I believe that that is a worthy idea, and anyone so
inclined should have the right to pursue that kind of lifestyle. On the
other hand, some of our gentes have been adopting new citizens from around
the world for quite some time, and I don't think that we can have that kind
of closeness among our gentiles. The system that we currently have allows
different types of gentes to coexist and pursue their own course, and should
therefore be maintained for now. In the future, when the rate of population
growth by birth approaches that by adoption from outside, we probably will
have to sort out our family structure and define it more carefully; by then
we should have no further need for patresfamiliae of our current model, who
are responsible for the growth of entire gentes. I believe that the gentes
will eventually be decentralized, officially recognizing the many familiae
within them, and placing the patria potestas in the hands of those citizens
heading Nova Roman households. Such a process, though, is not yet necessary
or even desirable.

The creation of new gentes can, and should in my view, be limited. While I
was serving as suffect censor, I recognized that we had a lot of small
gentes, containing a lot of singular and paired gentiles who seemed to come
and go quietly. I tried therefore to encourage people with questions about
their names to seek existing gentes rather than start their own. But, some
newcomers don't want to be associated by name with groups of people whom
they'll likely never meet, while others have religious reasons to want to
create their own gentes. I believe that these considerations make precise
legislation in this area impractical and undesirable.
:
Valete

C Marius Merullus


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] The Comitia Centuriata Will Be Called To Order -
From:	Kristoffer From <from@-------->
Date:	Tue, 13 Nov 2001 10:52:45 +0100

cassius622@-------- wrote:
> It must be taken on the day that the office is to be
> assumed and the office shall be considered vacant
> until the oath is taken.

Salve, Marce Cassi Juliane.

This part seems somewhat excessive. If I'm reading it right, it states
that if I'm unable to take the oath on the same day as I should assume
office, whatever process got me appointed for that office is forfeit.
How about this wording instead:

"It must be taken before the office can be assumed and the office shall
be considered vacant until the oath is taken."

Maintaining (I think) the original purpose, but bypassing some technical
problems which may otherwise arise.

Good idea? Bad?

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:	[novaroma] Senate e - mail
From:	"Jozef Duhacek" <coriolanus@-------->
Date:	Tue, 13 Nov 2001 10:33:05 -0000

Salvete

I need to contact senate and each mail sended to senate@--------
has returned back with failure message. I've tried three diferent
servers (yahoo.com, hotmail.com, centrum.sk) and it was still the
same. I don't know novaroma.org webmaster but I would like to ask
him/her to check it and if there is problem to resolve it.

Vale et Gratias Multas

Gaius Marcius Coriolanus
Paterfamilias Gentis Marciae
Legatus Pannoniae Inferioris


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Gens reduction/ideas?
From:	"Jozef Duhacek" <coriolanus@-------->
Date:	Tue, 13 Nov 2001 10:51:22 -0000

--- In novaroma@--------, "S-------- Leek" <DolanAp@h...> wrote:
> Salve Omnes,
>
> Both have good points to the discussion concerning gens and taxes.
An idea
> concerning both points might be such:
>
> Per year:
> A membership fee for citizenship: $10.00
> A gens registration fee: $10.00 or $15.00
> A tax per gens member: $1.00 to $5.00
>
> An example in application thus:
> New citizen with no gens affiliation: $10.00 (maintains general
operating
> fund, no use privilege of funds for events)
> New citizen in a preexisting gens: $10.00 + tax = (acknowledgment
of
> support)
> Gens head: $10.00 (for self) + $10.00 (for status of gens) + tax =
X$ (for
> each citizen in gens) = (maintains general fund, and use of funds,
plus
> acknowledgment of support)
>
> I understand that we as a nation have a need for a general use fund
for
> basic operations of Nova Roma (maintaining our web site, paying for
basic
> fees associated with running the organization of the nation etc.).
However,
> I also believe that we need to do more than just maintain our group
with
> money and volunteered time. We need to encourage recognition and
exposure
> for our nation and create support for our nation by creating
gatherings at
> which our citizens can meet face to face without creating a
financial burden
> on individuals within our group.
>
> Hence, we need a general fund to maintain the nation as a whole for
whatever
> financial bills we have to pay as a group. However, we also need a
pool of
> funds that can be drawn on to create and maintain group recognition
without
> burdening any single individual within our nation. Perhaps, a
congregate
> fund could be created which citizen or gens' (or preferably a
governor or
> other Nova Roman representative) can drawn on to host general
gatherings for
> citizens to meet at face to face without financially burdening the
> individual organizing the event/meeting.
>
> Just a few thoughts Prima Nocta Ritualia

Salve Prima Nocta

I guess that's pretty good idea, but it needs to be improved.

1. The gens registration fee should vary on number of members. Did
you mean periodic registration just one fee?

2. I don't know if taxes payed to nr should be composed as you've
desribed. The fixed fee equal for each cititizen is more democratic
and I see it better.

3. Remember that taxation in nr in it's begining will not be
mandatory for all (as I know). It's based on idea pay and you'll get
more than no payer.

And I don't know if we really need tu reduce number of gens. Maybe it
will be good to stop new gens creation until it will be really
necessary. We hope that nr will evolve forth and number of cives will
increase. Let them opportunity to pick gens they like.

Gaius Marcius Coriolanus
Paterfamilias Gentis Marciae
Legatus Pannoniae Inferioris

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


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: running for office of tribunus plebis
From:	jmath669642reng@--------
Date:	Tue, 13 Nov 2001 06:56:24 -0500 (EST)

Citizen C.P. Germanicus;

I applaud your desire to wish to help Nova Roma grow. However, the
rules established regarding longivity and age are rules which have been
established out of experience in the last 3+ years and are well
documented.

There are many activities in the various Sodalitas and Provinces to
which you may turn your talents and energies, and by which you may prove
your suitabilty for higher office. For example I have advertised
extensively on this list, as have many others, for Senatorial, and
ProConsular Aides, to assist in programs waiting for research and
development with very little response.

Such, is where I started 3+ years ago, and gave notice through my
service to the Citizens of Nova Roma, that I was qualified for thier
consideration of me as a Magistrate. In my humble view that is where I
expect all new Citizens to start. Of course, in all probability, I do
not have your administrative cleverness, political insight, and
determined drive to put Nova Roma in a class all by herself, yet in
spite of those admirable attributes, I believe some prior indication of
all those talents would be in order, prior to your selection as a
Tribune representing 1000+ citizens, in th best and biggest micronation
now in existance.

Respectfully
Marcus Audens
Senator and ProConsul

Fair Winds and Following Seas!!!

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


Subject:	[novaroma] Book help wanted
From:	=?iso-8859-1?q?Craig=20Stevenson?= <gaiussentius@-------->
Date:	Tue, 13 Nov 2001 23:27:22 +1100 (EST)

Salvete Omnes,

I need help finding certain books, and I was wondering
whether anyone out there can help.

The first topic of books I am looking for are anything
on the Vandals (where they came from, their history,
social structure etc.).

The second lot of books I am looking for are Appian's
Roman Histories. I have tried to find them, but they
are often scattered and on either normal history or
the Civil Wars. If anyone can tell me where I can
aquire a copy of all of the books of the histories, I
would be most grateful.

Thanks in advance,

Valete bene omnes,

Gaius Sentius Bruttius Sura

"Cogito Ergo Sum" - Descartes

http://briefcase.yahoo.com.au - Yahoo! Briefcase
- Manage your files online.


Subject:	[novaroma] THE COMITIA CENTURIATA IS CONVENED
From:	cassius622@--------
Date:	Tue, 13 Nov 2001 07:39:25 EST

Salvete,

The Comitia Centuriata is formally convened for discussion on the following
agenda: (Sorry for the repost folks, but I'm hoping to make sure there is a
good turnout for voting this time.)

The timing of the vote shall be (all times given in official NR time;subtract
6 hours to get EST):* The contio, or discussion period, shall last from now
until 9:00 PM November 21st. Voting shall take place between 6:00 PM
November 21st and 9:00 PM November 29th. The voting agenda is as follows:

VOTE AGENDA

Item 1 - The Lex Vedia de Ratione Comitiorum Centuriatorum is hereby amended:

I. Paragraph V.A.1 is altered to read as follows:

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 or the number of candidates who received individual votes
from members of that century, whichever is less. 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 either all the century's votes have been
assigned, or there are no remaining candidates who received votes
from citizens in that century.

[ COMMENTARY: This is needed for logical consistency with the
next change; see below for the explanation. ]

II. The following paragraph is inserted after Paragraph V.A.3.

4. No candidate may win a century unless he or she has received at
least one vote from a citizen within that century.

[ COMMENTARY: Items I and II establish that only candidates who were
actually voted for by members of a century should receive that
century's vote. Without these changes, if all members of a century
vote for one candidate for an office with two vacancies, one of the
other candidates (desired by no one in that century) would be selected
by lot to receive the other vote. Or, if no one in a century votes
at all, both positions would be given to random candidates undeservedly -
possibly overwhelming the selections made by other voters. ]

III. In paragraph V.B.1, the phrase "97 of the 193 centuries" shall be
replaced with "a simple majority of the centuries casting votes".

IV. In paragraph V.B.2, the phrase "97 of the 193 centuries" shall be
replaced with "a simple majority of the centuries casting votes".

[ COMMENTARY: Currently, a candidate or proposal must receive 97
affirmative votes to be elected or enacted. This is extremely
difficult due to our small number of active centuries. Items with
very high levels of support can fail (and have failed) because of
this requirement. Until we actually do have 193 active centuries,
we need a less unobtainable threshold. ]

V. Paragraph V.B.3 is added:

3. "A simple majority" is hereby defined as "one half of the number
of centuries casting votes, plus one".

Item II - Lex Cassia De Cratione Sodalitatum

I. A group or association, cultural, social, historical or political, created
by or involving
Nova Romans shall be considered officially a part of Nova Roma only by
official recognition/approval by the Republic. Any such group that wishes
official recognition or status within Nova Roma must make a formal
application for inclusion. Until such an application is placed and granted
by the Senate or through vote in any one of the Comitia, all such groups are
considered completely separate from Nova Roma.

II. The above clause is also binding to all Religious groups, organizations
and associations involving Nova Roma Citizens, with the exception that they
may only apply to and be approved by the Collegium Pontificum. This is in
accord with section IV of the Nova Roma constitution which places all
religious associations under the authority of the Collegium Pontificum.

II. Organizations applying for recognition by Nova Roma must present a formal
charter and outline of intent before the Senate or to one of the Comitiae (or
if a religious group to the Collegium Pontificum.)

II. The charter for any group, organization or association applying for
recognition within Nova Roma must include:
A. A statement of intent (what the organization is about, and what it
is trying to achieve.)
B. An action plan outlining how it intends to achieve its goals.
C. An outline of its internal organization, hierarchy and offices.

IV. A group, organization or association approved for official inclusion
into the infrastructure of Nova Roma must adhere to the Constitution and Laws
of Nova Roma. An application for official recognition is therefore considered
a binding statement of intent to be governed by Nova Roma's laws,
constitution and legal government.

[Commentary - Nova Roma has currently has no official policy defining what
is part of our legal corporate structure and what is not. There are potential
legal and/or insurance issues that could rise from this. As an example, let's
say a few Citizens form a local reenactor legion but choose not to become
officially Sponsored. If they were to put on an event and mention Nova Roma,
and someone were hurt or killed in an accident, Nova Roma might be held
legally responsible. There would be no means of proving they were not an
official part of Nova Roma beyond a denial by the Senate. While Nova Roma is
prepared to host/insure events, we must have a legal definition as to what is
'official' and what is not. A legal procedure for this will be proof in case
of problems.]

Item III - "The Lex Iunia Iusiurando is hereby amended so that the following
preface will be placed before the Oath of Office:

Lex Iunia de Iusiurando

The Lex Iunia Iusiurando is hereby enacted to put in place an Oath of
Office for any citizen assuming any magistracy of Nova Roma, whether
elected or appointed.

The following oath must be taken publicly in the major public forums
of Nova Roma before someone elected or appointed to any magistracy
can assume his or her office. It must be taken on the day that the
office is to be assumed and the office shall be considered vacant
until the oath is taken."

[Commentary: This was the originally intended text of this Lex, but some text
was lost when the item was posted for vote. Proconsul Decius Iunius Palladius
has asked that it be restored to the text to make the law more clear.]

Valete,

Marcus Cassius Julianus
Consul

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


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: The Comitia Centuriata Will Be Called To Order - 11/13/2001
From:	"Marcus Cassius Julianus" <cassius622@-------->
Date:	Tue, 13 Nov 2001 12:41:51 -0000

Salvete,

I agree with this, and will pass it on directly to Proconsul Decius
Iunius Palladius to get more feedback from the creator of this
particular law. Thanks for the suggestion!

Valete,

Marcus Cassius Julianus

--- In novaroma@--------, Kristoffer From <from@d...> wrote:
> c--------us622@-------- wrote:
> > It must be taken on the day that the office is to be
> > assumed and the office shall be considered vacant
> > until the oath is taken.
>
> Salve, Marce Cassi Juliane.
>
> This part seems somewhat excessive. If I'm reading it right, it
states that if I'm unable to take the oath on the same day as I
should assume office, whatever process got me appointed for that
office is forfeit. How about this wording instead:
>
> "It must be taken before the office can be assumed and the office
shall be considered vacant until the oath is taken."
>
> Maintaining (I think) the original purpose, but bypassing some
technical problems which may otherwise arise.
>
> Good idea? Bad?
>


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Senate e - mail
From:	Marcus Octavius Germanicus <haase@-------->
Date:	Tue, 13 Nov 2001 07:31:14 -0600 (CST)

Salve Gai Marci,

Please send me a copy of the failure message.

senate@-------- forwards to 18 addresses, and if any one of those
has a problem you'll get a bounce message - but it still goes through
to the other 17 Senators.

We did receive three copies of this message from you:

From: coriolanus@--------
To: senate@--------
Subject: Ask

...so the mail is working for most of us.

Vale, Octavius.

> Salvete
>
> I need to contact senate and each mail sended to senate@--------
> has returned back with failure message. I've tried three diferent
> servers (yahoo.com, hotmail.com, centrum.sk) and it was still the
> same. I don't know novaroma.org webmaster but I would like to ask
> him/her to check it and if there is problem to resolve it.
>
> Vale et Gratias Multas
>
> Gaius Marcius Coriolanus
> Paterfamilias Gentis Marciae
> Legatus Pannoniae Inferioris
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

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


Subject:	[novaroma] Enthusiastic Practicioners of the Religio Wanted
From:	quintusluliustibullus@--------
Date:	Tue, 13 Nov 2001 13:25:27 -0000

Salvate Omnes!

Congratulations on a wonderful organization. I hope to become a
citizen someday. May the glories of the old Republic be reborn.

I am writing to inform you of a growing religious community which may
be of interest to the sincere followers of the Religio Romana. On <a
href="http://www.beliefnet.com/"> Beliefnet </a>, a multi-faith
website, there is a growing body of Reconstructionists, those
dedicated to restoring the pre-Christian, polytheistic religions of
the greater Indo-European area. This includes those of the ancient
Germanic, Celtic, Egyptian, Slavic, Hellenic, and yes, Roman
persuasion.

This body of growing Reconstructionists is warm, scholarly, erudite,
sincere, and invites all serious members of a Reconstructionist
religion to join in on the discussions. In particular we need
followers of the Religio Romana and the Hellenic traditions, as those
two groups are currently somewhat under-represented. The address for
the Greco-Roman discussion board can be found at <a
href="http://www.beliefnet.com/boards/discussion_list.asp?
boardID=13978"> Greco-Roman Religions </a>. Some of the members
there are, or like myself are considering becoming, members of Nova
Roma. But we would like to expand our community of believers,
citizens of Nova Roma or otherwise.

I deeply apologize if this message is in anyway inappropriate for
this list. I assumed it might be of worthy interest to many Nova
Romans. If I assumed wrongly, please forgive me.

Long Live the glories of ancient Rome!

Valete!

Q. Lulius Tibullus


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: THE COMITIA CENTURIATA IS CONVENED
From:	trog99@--------
Date:	Tue, 13 Nov 2001 14:37:47 -0000

--- Salvete Honoured Consul Cassius et Omnes:

Re: Lex Vedia Ratione.....

II 4. Perhaps I am being 'picky' here, and I don't mean to be, just
viewing an area of potential controversy down the road: Should it not
perhaps be 'spelled out' exactly who is responsible for executing any
decision arrived at by 'lot', should the need arise: Rogators,
Senators, Consuls?

Just a thought.

Valete,
Pompeia Cornelia Strabo
Canada Orientalis

In novaroma@--------, cassius622@a... wrote:
> Salvete,
>
> The Comitia Centuriata is formally convened for discussion on the
following
> agenda: (Sorry for the repost folks, but I'm hoping to make sure
there is a
> good turnout for voting this time.)
>
> The timing of the vote shall be (all times given in official NR
time;subtract
> 6 hours to get EST):* The contio, or discussion period, shall last
from now
> until 9:00 PM November 21st. Voting shall take place between 6:00
PM
> November 21st and 9:00 PM November 29th. The voting agenda is as
follows:
>
>
> VOTE AGENDA
>
>
> Item 1 - The Lex Vedia de Ratione Comitiorum Centuriatorum is hereby
amended:
>
> I. Paragraph V.A.1 is altered to read as follows:
>
> 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 or the number of candidates who received individual
votes
> from members of that century, whichever is less. 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 either all the century's votes have been
> assigned, or there are no remaining candidates who received
votes
> from citizens in that century.
>
> [ COMMENTARY: This is needed for logical consistency with the
> next change; see below for the explanation. ]
>
> II. The following paragraph is inserted after Paragraph V.A.3.
>
> 4. No candidate may win a century unless he or she has received
at
> least one vote from a citizen within that century.
>
> [ COMMENTARY: Items I and II establish that only candidates who
were
> actually voted for by members of a century should receive that
> century's vote. Without these changes, if all members of a
century
> vote for one candidate for an office with two vacancies, one of
the
> other candidates (desired by no one in that century) would be
selected
> by lot to receive the other vote. Or, if no one in a century
votes
> at all, both positions would be given to random candidates
undeservedly -
> possibly overwhelming the selections made by other voters. ]
>
> III. In paragraph V.B.1, the phrase "97 of the 193 centuries" shall
be
> replaced with "a simple majority of the centuries casting
votes".
>
> IV. In paragraph V.B.2, the phrase "97 of the 193 centuries" shall
be
> replaced with "a simple majority of the centuries casting
votes".
>
> [ COMMENTARY: Currently, a candidate or proposal must receive 97
> affirmative votes to be elected or enacted. This is extremely
> difficult due to our small number of active centuries. Items
with
> very high levels of support can fail (and have failed) because
of
> this requirement. Until we actually do have 193 active
centuries,
> we need a less unobtainable threshold. ]
>
> V. Paragraph V.B.3 is added:
>
> 3. "A simple majority" is hereby defined as "one half of the
number
> of centuries casting votes, plus one".
>
>
> Item II - Lex Cassia De Cratione Sodalitatum
>
> I. A group or association, cultural, social, historical or
political, created
> by or involving
> Nova Romans shall be considered officially a part of Nova Roma only
by
> official recognition/approval by the Republic. Any such group that
wishes
> official recognition or status within Nova Roma must make a formal
> application for inclusion. Until such an application is placed and
granted
> by the Senate or through vote in any one of the Comitia, all such
groups are
> considered completely separate from Nova Roma.
>
> II. The above clause is also binding to all Religious groups,
organizations
> and associations involving Nova Roma Citizens, with the exception
that they
> may only apply to and be approved by the Collegium Pontificum. This
is in
> accord with section IV of the Nova Roma constitution which places
all
> religious associations under the authority of the Collegium
Pontificum.
>
> II. Organizations applying for recognition by Nova Roma must present
a formal
> charter and outline of intent before the Senate or to one of the
Comitiae (or
> if a religious group to the Collegium Pontificum.)
>
> II. The charter for any group, organization or association applying
for
> recognition within Nova Roma must include:
> A. A statement of intent (what the organization is about, and
what it
> is trying to achieve.)
> B. An action plan outlining how it intends to achieve its
goals.
> C. An outline of its internal organization, hierarchy and
offices.
>
> IV. A group, organization or association approved for official
inclusion
> into the infrastructure of Nova Roma must adhere to the Constitution
and Laws
> of Nova Roma. An application for official recognition is therefore
considered
> a binding statement of intent to be governed by Nova Roma's laws,
> constitution and legal government.
>
> [Commentary - Nova Roma has currently has no official policy
defining what
> is part of our legal corporate structure and what is not. There are
potential
> legal and/or insurance issues that could rise from this. As an
example, let's
> say a few Citizens form a local reenactor legion but choose not to
become
> officially Sponsored. If they were to put on an event and mention
Nova Roma,
> and someone were hurt or killed in an accident, Nova Roma might be
held
> legally responsible. There would be no means of proving they were
not an
> official part of Nova Roma beyond a denial by the Senate. While
Nova Roma is
> prepared to host/insure events, we must have a legal definition as
to what is
> 'official' and what is not. A legal procedure for this will be proof
in case
> of problems.]
>
>
>
> Item III - "The Lex Iunia Iusiurando is hereby amended so that the
following
> preface will be placed before the Oath of Office:
>
> Lex Iunia de Iusiurando
>
> The Lex Iunia Iusiurando is hereby enacted to put in place an Oath
of
> Office for any citizen assuming any magistracy of Nova Roma, whether
> elected or appointed.
>
> The following oath must be taken publicly in the major public forums
> of Nova Roma before someone elected or appointed to any magistracy
> can assume his or her office. It must be taken on the day that the
> office is to be assumed and the office shall be considered vacant
> until the oath is taken."
>
> [Commentary: This was the originally intended text of this Lex, but
some text
> was lost when the item was posted for vote. Proconsul Decius Iunius
Palladius
> has asked that it be restored to the text to make the law more
clear.]
>
> Valete,
>
> Marcus Cassius Julianus
> Consul
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Subject:	=?iso-8859-1?Q?RE=3A=20=5Bnovaroma=5D=20Taxes=20and=20Students=3F?=
From:	tiberius.ann@--------
Date:	Tue, 13 Nov 2001 15:42:38 +0100

I have received this message at the same time as all the other people on
this list and I am sure it deserves an answer. I find the question not out
of the way, as I myself, as well as my wife, are in a similar position.
However, after having read and heard the discussion about taxes and the
leges leading to the payment of such, I have not dared ask this question
for obvious reasons, since we 'swiss' have allready made 'too much trouble'.

I hope for a speedy and well thought out answer.

May the Gods give all of you health and wisdom, Tiberius Annaeus Otho

-- Original-Nachricht --

>Salve Omnes,
>
>I have noticed as of late, talk about Nova Roma taxes. I was wondering
if
>
>there would be a provision set for students? I am a part time student
>currently and I live on an income (financial aid) that is below the poverty
>
>level in the USA. Unfortunately my dyslexia and learning disability
>adversely affects my capacity to learn new languages. As a result while
I
>am
>studying a language I have to devote considerable time to my studies and
>
>find it difficult to work and also maintain a passing grade, hence I choose
>
>a good grade and a hungry stomach.
>
>I am also the materfamilius of the gens Ritulia and one of my two gens

>members is also a student at a university. I do believe that the opinion
>
>that gens heads should pay a greater tax is viable, if those gens heads

>could then draw on taxes to host Nova Roman events. I also believe that
gens
>
>members should be entitled to pay lower taxes if they are volunteering
their
>
>time to host events on behalf of Nova Roma. However, if an equal standing
>in
>tax payment is being desired shouldn?t all Nova Roman citizens pay similar
>
>taxes whether or not they are a gens head or a member? I am also asking
>
>about provisions for students and Nova Roman taxes because as a student
in
>
>the USA I do not have to pay taxes to my government while I am a student.
>
>Personally I would rather see a membership fee for citizens and gens heads
>
>that is paid annually depending on their status within Nova Roma. Such
a
>
>membership fee would create a base of money that Nova Roma could draw on
>and
>operate on throughout the coming year. A basic membership fee would
>guarantee not only such a fund but would also draw into Nova Roma people
>who
>are interested in maintaining its status as a nation. I would also suggest
>
>that after membership fees generated such a fund a taxes could be applied
>if
>needed but it maybe unnecessary at that point.
>
>Traditionally a tax is paid to a nation for specific reasons, such as a
war
>
>effort, public buildings and access ways (road tariffs), maintenance of

>physical property owned by the state/people of that government etc?. To
the
>
>best of my knowledge Nova Roma does not own property because it is
>registered as a non-profit organization that governs itself, please correct
>
>me if I am wrong on this one? Also to the best of my knowledge a non-profit
>
>organization cannot own property outright (under its own name) or legally
>
>charge a tax to its members because it cannot own property. However, a

>non-profit organization that is registered as an educational organization
>
>can charge its members a supporting fee (a membership fee).
>
>I am suggesting to the nation of Nova Roma that a supporting membership
fee
>
>may be a better choice to raise general operating funds with, than a tax.
>I
>am also suggesting that if a tax is viable for Nova Roma to charge to its
>
>members, that tax (donation) could be set as a fund, which its citizens
can
>
>draw on, to host events with on behalf of Nova Roma?s grow and support.
I
>am
>not suggesting that my idea is right or the only possibility but that I
am
>
>concerned in the growth and further development of my nation as a citizen
>of
>it and I would like to see my nation prosper.
>
>Vale Prima Nocta Ritulia
>It is better to govern yourself in virtue, than to burden your nation with
>
>the need of law.

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


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: THE COMITIA CENTURIATA IS CONVENED
From:	labienus@--------
Date:	Tue, 13 Nov 2001 08:56:38 US/Central

Salvete Pompeia Cornelia omnesque

> II 4. Perhaps I am being 'picky' here, and I don't mean to be, just
> viewing an area of potential controversy down the road: Should it not
> perhaps be 'spelled out' exactly who is responsible for executing any
> decision arrived at by 'lot', should the need arise: Rogators,
> Senators, Consuls?

Section V.A.3 of the Lex Vedia de Ratione Comitiorum Centuriatorum already
establishes this. "Should a tie occur within a given century, the winner shall
be the candidate who is a paterfamilias or materfamilias, or if such shall not
decide the issue, the winner shall be decided by lot. The rogatores may decide
how such decisions by lot shall be made in a fair manner."

Valete
T Labienus Fortunatus


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: THE COMITIA CENTURIATA IS CONVENED
From:	trog99@--------
Date:	Tue, 13 Nov 2001 15:22:06 -0000

--- In novaroma@--------, labienus@t... wrote:
> Salvete Pompeia Cornelia omnesque
>
> > II 4. Perhaps I am being 'picky' here, and I don't mean to be,
just
> > viewing an area of potential controversy down the road: Should it
not
> > perhaps be 'spelled out' exactly who is responsible for executing
any
> > decision arrived at by 'lot', should the need arise: Rogators,
> > Senators, Consuls?
>
> Section V.A.3 of the Lex Vedia de Ratione Comitiorum Centuriatorum
already
> establishes this. "Should a tie occur within a given century, the
winner shall
> be the candidate who is a paterfamilias or materfamilias, or if such
shall not
> decide the issue, the winner shall be decided by lot. The rogatores
may decide
> how such decisions by lot shall be made in a fair manner."

Salve Tribune: Thank you; you are citing from the original lex. I
apologize for the confusion. It is difficult to keep track of what
was part of the original text and the amendments as spelled above; I
wasn't sure if this was being retained. It is hard to keep track of
all the details of what was established vs. what is being amended,
atleast it is for me :)

I'll have another cup of coffee :0)

Pompeia
>
> Valete
> T Labienus Fortunatus

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


Subject:	[novaroma] Interesting news item
From:	Piparskeggr - Venator <catamount_grange@-------->
Date:	Tue, 13 Nov 2001 09:32:52 -0600

Avete Omnes,

From: Science - Reuters - updated 6:53 AM ET Tue Nov 13

Archaeologists Unearth Roman City, Winery in Egypt

CAIRO (Reuters) - Egyptian archaeologists have found a 2,000-year-old Roman city in the Nile
Delta, complete with the remains of an ancient winery, Egypt's antiquities chief Gaballah Ali
Gaballah said on Tuesday.

``The Romans came to Egypt when they beat Cleopatra in 30 BC, and this city dates back to about
the first century AD,'' Gaballah told Reuters, referring to one of ancient Egypt's most famous
queens.

The team made the discovery in Kom Nagierea, near the Mediterranean city of Alexandria.

``A rectangular-shaped building was also unearthed and it turned out that it was part of a
winery,'' he said. Some of the red brick structure was covered by a layer of alabaster.

`This is the area of Egypt where they grew wine even 2,000 years ago,'' he said. Egypt still
produces red and white wines in the Delta.

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

Aut mulsum aut bellum!
(either mead, or war!)
/}
€‡‡‡‡‡‡‡{X|:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::>
\}


Subject:	[novaroma] Propraetoral Appointments
From:	trog99@--------
Date:	Tue, 13 Nov 2001 15:36:23 -0000

Salvete Omnes:

I wish to express congratulations to M. Apollonius Formosanus,
newly-appointed Propraetor of Provincia Venedia. Also,
congratulations to my associate in Militarium, Tribunis M. Scipiadus
Scipio Africanus, who has been appointed by the Senate to assume the
role of Propraetor Laci Magnus as of January 1, 2755.

I wish you all the best as your undertake your new duties.

Bene valete,
Pompeia Cornelia Strabo
Propraetrix Canada Orientalis
Nova Roma


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Propraetoral Appointments
From:	Marcus Octavius Germanicus <haase@-------->
Date:	Tue, 13 Nov 2001 09:38:14 -0600 (CST)

Salve Pompeia Cornelia,

The vote on those items is still in progress.

Vale, Octavius.

> I wish to express congratulations to M. Apollonius Formosanus,
> newly-appointed Propraetor of Provincia Venedia. Also,
> congratulations to my associate in Militarium, Tribunis M. Scipiadus
> Scipio Africanus, who has been appointed by the Senate to assume the
> role of Propraetor Laci Magnus as of January 1, 2755.

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


Subject:	[novaroma] ATTN (Religio Romana): Idibus Novembribus (November 13th)
From:	"Antonio Grilo" <amg@-------->
Date:	Tue, 13 Nov 2001 16:49:22 -0000

ANTONIVS GRYLLVS GRAECVS PONTIFEX OMNIBVS QVIRITIBVS

This is a dies nefastus publicus (NP), a day for special religious
observance on which no legal action can take place.

The Idus of every month are sacred to Iuppiter. An white ewe was sacrificed
to Iuppiter by the Flamen Dialis.

Today is the 10th day of the Ludi Plebeii, held betwee November 4 and
November 17. Today is the main day of the games, the feast of Iuppiter. A
ritual banquet ('lectisternium') organised by the college of the Septemviri
Epulones is held in honour of Iuppiter. In the 'lectisternium', the statue
of the God lies in a 'triclinium' before the table and shares a meal with
the Senators. This banquet makes part of the Ludi Plebeii, marking the
division between the scenic days and the Circus Games; this is first
mentioned for 213 BC when 'the Plebian Games were repeated ('instaurati')
for two days, and on account of the Games a banquet for Iupiter was held'
(Livy, 25.2.10). So once again the Senators gathered their solemn
celebration of Iupiter.

Today is a festival of Goddess Feronia, probably the 'dies natalis' of her
temple. The name of the goddess Feronia may be Etruscan, though Varro
regarded it as Sabine. Her cult was widespread in central Italy, but its
chief centre was at lucus Capenatis which developed into a small town named
Lucus Feroniae in Eturia near Mt Soracte; it was definitely identified with
a site near Scorano in 1953. At Rome Feronia had a grove and later a temple
in the Campus Martius; the latter is attested only in the calendars. Since
her cult at Rome is curiously placed in the middle of the Plebeian Games, it
was probably older than they were, and it could go back to a primitive fair,
as at Lucus Feroniae. It is first mentioned at Rome when expiatory offerings
were ordered by the Sibylline in 217 BC: they were extended even to the
freedwomen (libertiinae), who according to their ability had to contribute
money for a gift to Feronia, while freewomen (matronae) contributed to Iuno
Regina on the Aventine. Though perhaps originally an agricultural goddess
(she received an offering of the first-fruits of the season at Lucus
Feroniae), she appears to have acquired a special association with freedmen
and granting freedom to slaves. In explaining her name Varro called her
Libertas, 'Libertatem deam dicit, Feroniam quasi Fidoniam', and an
inscription on a seat in her temple at Terracina, where freedmen received
the cap of freedom (pilleus) on their shaved heads, runs 'Let the deserving
sit down as slaves and rise as freemen' (Bene meriti servi sedeant, surgant
liberi). It appears that at Terracina slaves could take sanctuary at her
altar: this would be a Greek rather than a Roman custom. That her cult at
Rome had a link with slaves and freedmen is suggested not only by the events
of 217, but also by the fact that the only surviving dedication to her there
was from an ancilla.

Today is also the 'dies natalis' of a temple of Fortuna Primigenia on the
Capitol. This temple is usually identified with that 'in Colle' , but is
more likely to be a different one on the Capitol, since the Colline temple
was dedicated on 25 May. Otherwise it could be the aniversary of a
restoration.

This is probably also the 'dies natalis' of a temple of Pietas (Piety),
since Pietas is mentioned with Fortuna Primigenia in a inscription of the
second century AD. Her temple in the Forum Holitorium was vowed by M.
Acilius Glabrio at Thermolpylae (191) and dedicated by his son ten years
later. In it was a gilded statue of the father, the first of its kind in
Rome.The temple was destroyed in 44 BC to make room for the Theatre of
Marcellus. One aspect of Pietas was the relationship of parent and children,
and this temple was connected with the (Greek) story of a daughter who
supplied her imprisoned father or mother with her own milk. The connection
may have arisen from the nearby Columna (Lactaria), where infants in need of
milk were brought. It is interesting that at about the date of the
foundation of the temple that personification of Pietas was attested by
Plautus in his Asinaria and Curculio.

The month of November is sacred to Diana.

Di incolumem populum romanum servent

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


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] THE COMITIA CENTURIATA IS CONVENED
From:	"Decimus Iunius Silanus" <danedwardsuk@-------->
Date:	Tue, 13 Nov 2001 18:42:51 -0000

Salve,

Just to clarify - it seems to me that this definition of a simple majority includes abstaining centuries. Is that the case? Given the ramifications of either including or excluding abstaining centuries it may be worth making this clearer in the wording of the ammendment.

Vale

Decimus Iunius Silanus.

> V. Paragraph V.B.3 is added:
>
> 3. "A simple majority" is hereby defined as "one half of the number
> of centuries casting votes, plus one".

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


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] THE COMITIA CENTURIATA IS CONVENED
From:	Marcus Octavius Germanicus <haase@-------->
Date:	Tue, 13 Nov 2001 12:58:35 -0600 (CST)

Salve Decime Iuni,

> Just to clarify - it seems to me that this definition of a simple majority
> includes abstaining centuries. Is that the case? Given the ramifications
> of either including or excluding abstaining centuries it may be worth
> making this clearer in the wording of the ammendment.

I would assume that an abstention is usually considered to be the absence
of a vote, and wouldn't be counted.

However, if the Consuls are agreeable to changing the proposal now,
I suggest that the last proposed new paragraph be altered thus:

3. "A simple majority" is hereby defined as "one half of the number
of centuries casting votes, plus one". Abstentions are not considered
votes, and a century in which all voters abstained shall not be counted
toward this total.

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


Subject:	[novaroma] ?????? Propraetoral Appointments
From:	trog99@--------
Date:	Tue, 13 Nov 2001 19:30:17 -0000

Salve Marce Octavi:

The Senatoral Agenda reads, verbatim, as follows: Marcus Apollonius
Formosanus is hereby appointed Propraetor of Provincia Vedia.

After a language issue calling for a Senate vote, we read:

M. Scipiadus Scipio Africanus is hereby appointed.......

Unless my ability to understand English has sadly deteriorated, these
statements mean that the appointments have already been agreed upon.

With this verbage, how on earth am I to perceive otherwise, with due
respect? I don't know the agenda or the course of action the Senate is
taking in any given Senate session; I only read what I am told, and I
can only understand things the way they are stated.

"Hereby appointed" means it's a "done deal". So perhaps if that is not
what is meant, it should have been worded another way.

Bene vale,
Pompeia Cornelia


Subject:	[novaroma] Service Guarantees Citizenship
From:	"Uriel" <uriel@-------->
Date:	Tue, 13 Nov 2001 14:19:43 -0600

I have a new comic panel that Pompeia Cornelia Strabo and I have been working on called 'Service Guarantees Citizenship' on my page. I'd like some opinions on it, if I could.

http://www.geocities.com/sstorm1us/service.html

thanks.
Decia Cornelia Sepulchatia

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


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] THE COMITIA CENTURIATA IS CONVENED
From:	"Decimus Iunius Silanus" <danedwardsuk@-------->
Date:	Tue, 13 Nov 2001 20:49:05 -0000

Vale Marce Octavi,

Given that the opportunity to abstain is an option when voting, consider the following 'worst case' scenario. 100 centuries vote in an election. However, only two centuries vote in favour of a proposal whilst one votes against. 97 centuries voted to abstain (remember that this is a worst case scenario and, however unlikely it is to happen, it is still possible). If abstaining centuries are not counted in the simple majority definition then in this case proposal in question is adopted with only 2% of voting centuries actually voting in favour.

My argument is that abstaining centuries should be counted in the 'simple majority' equation, not only to prevent the possibility of the above scenario from occuring, but also in keeping with historical accuracy. The original law states that 97 out of 193 centuries must vote in favour, no matter how many centuries abstain. This principle should be maintained in the ammendment. Only centuries that fail to vote at all should be discounted.

Vale

Decimus Iunius Silanus.

> I would assume that an abstention is usually considered to be the absence
> of a vote, and wouldn't be counted.
>
> However, if the Consuls are agreeable to changing the proposal now,
> I suggest that the last proposed new paragraph be altered thus:

> 3. "A simple majority" is hereby defined as "one half of the number
> of centuries casting votes, plus one". Abstentions are not considered
> votes, and a century in which all voters abstained shall not be counted
> toward this total.

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


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Service Guarantees Citizenship
From:	trog99@--------
Date:	Tue, 13 Nov 2001 20:58:04 -0000

---Salve Soror:

Well, I feel that full credit goes to you for your drawing and
presentation talents. All I did was toss out a couple of ideas.
Alas, I can't draw a stick figure :)

Bene vale,
Po

In novaroma@--------, "Uriel" <uriel@s...> wrote:
> I have a new comic panel that Pompeia Cornelia Strabo and I have
been working on called 'Service Guarantees Citizenship' on my page.
I'd like some opinions on it, if I could.
>
> http://www.geocities.com/sstorm1us/service.html
>
>
> thanks.
> Decia Cornelia Sepulchatia
>
>
>
> [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] Service Guarantees Citizenship
From:	"Living History Australia" <Admin@-------->
Date:	Wed, 14 Nov 2001 07:03:09 +1000

Decia,

It made me laugh, and I printed it out to show to my roman re-enactment friends, to make them laugh as well!

Just one thing, I get the whole "Starship Troopers" reference, but it's not really relevant for the Roman Legions, because you HAD to be a citizen already to join up. "Service guarantees citizenship" would be an appropriate motto for the auxiliaries, because (at least some of the time) citizenship was one of the rewards for serving in the auxillia.

Just a thought.

Clodia Maria Omega
(awaiting citizenship approval)

The biggest re-enactment event in the Southern Hemisphere..8th & 9th June 2002, Musgrave Park
www.brisbanemedievalfayre.com

Bringing history to life!
www.livinghistory.com.au
----- Original Message -----
From: Uriel
To: Nova Roma ; Gens Cornelia
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 6:19 AM
Subject: [novaroma] Service Guarantees Citizenship

I have a new comic panel that Pompeia Cornelia Strabo and I have been working on called 'Service Guarantees Citizenship' on my page. I'd like some opinions on it, if I could.

http://www.geocities.com/sstorm1us/service.html

thanks.
Decia Cornelia Sepulchatia

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


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Service Guarantees Citizenship
From:	"Uriel" <uriel@-------->
Date:	Tue, 13 Nov 2001 15:17:45 -0600

well, actually, thank you for the information - I wasn't aware of that! I'll
simply have to change the name, although I have no idea as to what I it will
be, anyone have any suggestions? I'm willing to consider anything :-)

Decia
----- Original Message -----
From: "Living History Australia" <Admin@-------->
To: <novaroma@-------->
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 3:03 PM
Subject: Re: [novaroma] Service Guarantees Citizenship

> Decia,
>
> It made me laugh, and I printed it out to show to my roman re-enactment
friends, to make them laugh as well!
>
> Just one thing, I get the whole "Starship Troopers" reference, but it's
not really relevant for the Roman Legions, because you HAD to be a citizen
already to join up. "Service guarantees citizenship" would be an appropriate
motto for the auxiliaries, because (at least some of the time) citizenship
was one of the rewards for serving in the auxillia.
>
> Just a thought.
>
> Clodia Maria Omega
> (awaiting citizenship approval)
>
>
>
> The biggest re-enactment event in the Southern Hemisphere..8th & 9th June
2002, Musgrave Park
> www.brisbanemedievalfayre.com
>
> Bringing history to life!
> www.livinghistory.com.au
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Uriel
> To: Nova Roma ; Gens Cornelia
> Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 6:19 AM
> Subject: [novaroma] Service Guarantees Citizenship
>
>
> I have a new comic panel that Pompeia Cornelia Strabo and I have been
working on called 'Service Guarantees Citizenship' on my page. I'd like some
opinions on it, if I could.
>
> http://www.geocities.com/sstorm1us/service.html
>
>
> thanks.
> Decia Cornelia Sepulchatia
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>


Subject:	[novaroma] gentes/familiae
From:	"Sybil Leek" <DolanAp@-------->
Date:	Tue, 13 Nov 2001 13:39:33 -0800

Salve Ursula Numeria Fortunata

I like your suggestion of familiae being hosted/adopted by a gens, which is
very true to Roman form. On that note, I was wondering if anyone had
considered halting the creation of new gens and implementing adoption of
familiae into existing gens’? Adoption of familiae into pre-existing gens
may not decrease their number, however it would allow smaller gens to grow
in number possibly making them more stable and useful as a whole.

I created my gens a little over a year ago when I joined NR. My gens has
stayed relatively the same size i.e. myself, a roommate of mine, and a
stranger whom now has a dead email addy. I have come to the conclusion that
if you are not a high profile gens or if you personally do not recruit new
members new people to NR do not know who you are or what you are interested
in.

I like the idea of some sort of FAQ for each gens because it would help give
them exposure to new people interested in NR. To do that sort of thing for
each gens and make it easy to access on the NR page may be quite a chore. I
would almost prefer a separate page within NR and not part of our personal
gens info pages because it is to spread out. Instead creating a single page
that has all of the gens listed on it with a brief (a few sentences about
them) then use that brief as a link to the full FAQ.

Just thinking out loud. Prima Ritulia Nocta

>Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2001 09:31:58 -0500
> From: "Mia Soderquist" <ursulanumeria@-------->
>Subject: gentes/familiae
>
>I have been reading the various posts about what to do to reduce the number
>of gentes with some interest. I have a few brief comments to make as
>materfamilias of gens Numeria.
>
>I have no objection to paying a tax on behalf of my gens to remain a gens.
>That seems a reasonable proposal. Likewise, I am in favor of a waiting
>period before forming a new gens, although I did, myself, form a new one
>upon joining.
>
>How would a new person, even after 6 months, decide what gens to join? Some
>gentes, like my own, are active in some way, but not necessarily in a way
>that is very visible. I think it would be a good thing to have some sort of
>FAQ document that explains for new cives the importance and function of the
>gens within Nova Roma, and some sort of "mission statement" or description
>from each active gens might help people choose an existing gens over
>creating a new one.
>
>One might notice that our listing in the Album Gentium says that we are
>accepting new members locally. This is because I envision gens Numeria as a
>face-to-face, "real" world family/organization. I want for us to be able to
>sit at a table together regularly for dinner and project planning. I would
>love to see many new Numerii, and it seems to me that adding a familia
>sub-structure to the gens would make it easier for us to accept members
>from
>everywhere and also maintain the local, "real life" aspect that is
>important
>to me.
>
>Local familiae under an international gens is one possible formation.
>Somewhat autonomous familiae under the general supervision of a gens is
>another possibility. In any case, I think that some people who would be
>tempted to form a new gens might be just as happy forming a new familia in
>an older, larger gens.
>
>Just my two sestertii.
>Ursula Numeria Fortunata

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

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


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] The Comitia Centuriata Will Be Called To Order -
From:	Caeso Fabius Quintilianus <tjalens.h@-------->
Date:	Tue, 13 Nov 2001 23:10:46 +0100

>cassius622@-------- wrote:
>> It must be taken on the day that the office is to be
>> assumed and the office shall be considered vacant
>> until the oath is taken.
>
>Salve, Marce Cassi Juliane.
>
>This part seems somewhat excessive. If I'm reading it right, it states
>that if I'm unable to take the oath on the same day as I should assume
>office, whatever process got me appointed for that office is forfeit.
>How about this wording instead:
>
>"It must be taken before the office can be assumed and the office shall
>be considered vacant until the oath is taken."
>
>Maintaining (I think) the original purpose, but bypassing some technical
>problems which may otherwise arise.
>
>Good idea? Bad?
>
>Vale,
>
>Titus Octavius Pius,
>Senior Legatus Thules,
>Praeco Anarei Thules,
>Scriba to the Curator Araneum

Salve Quirites!

I have read the Lex proposal and I have compared it with the proposal for
this small change made by Honorable Titus Octavius Pius. I have come to the
conclusion that Honorable Titus Octavius Pius seems to be right. Could
Illustrus Marcus Cassius Julianus please comment.

Vale

Caeso Fabius Quintilianus
Quaestor of Nova Roma
Propraetor of Thule

The Opinions expressed are my own,
and not an offical opinion of Nova Roma
************************************************
Join the Main List for Nova Roma
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/novaroma
Join the List for the Thule Provincia in Nova Roma
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ThuleNovaRoma/join
************************************************
The homepage of the Nova Roma Provincia Thule:
http://thule.novaroma.org/
************************************************
Aut inveniam viam aut faciam
"I'll either find a way or make one"
************************************************
"Do not give in to hate. That leads to the dark side."
************************************************
Caeso, he who also is known as Christer Edling.
************************************************
Using a keyboard that don't want to make L! :-(
************************************************
PRIVATE PHONE: +90 - 10 09 10
DOG BOARDING HOUSE PHONE: +90 - 503 56
MOBILE: +70 - 643 88 80


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] The Comitia Centuriata Will Be Called To Order -
From:	Caeso Fabius Quintilianus <tjalens.h@-------->
Date:	Tue, 13 Nov 2001 23:24:45 +0100


Subject:	[novaroma] Gens reduction/ideas?
From:	"Sybil Leek" <DolanAp@-------->
Date:	Tue, 13 Nov 2001 15:04:41 -0800

>Message: 9
> Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2001 10:51:22 -0000
> From: "Jozef Duhacek" <coriolanus@-------->
>Subject: Re: Gens reduction/ideas?

Salve Gaius Marcius Coriolanus

>I guess that's pretty good idea, but it needs to be improved.

Agreed it was an idea and they always need improvement to be viable.

>1. The gens registration fee should vary on number of members. Did
>you mean periodic registration just one fee?

I am not sure I agree with you on a variable gens member’s fee but it might
be possible if a paterfamilias/materfamilias can afford the fee or work out
an internal gens member fee to supplement the registration fee. I also meant
an annual fixed fee for the gens registration, partly to show that the gens
are still active. Also if I have an inactive member in my gens, as its head,
I would rather not be paying for a member who is not there. However, if I
were paying a fixed fee for my gens name to be kept current I personally
would be more likely to pay that fee instead of by number of members that
may not be active or lost, and deal with my internal house affairs as I see
fit.

>2. I don't know if taxes payed to nr should be composed as you've
>desribed. The fixed fee equal for each cititizen is more democratic
>and I see it better.

Yes, I agree with you about a fixed fee for all being more equal. The tax
idea was just another way of possible thinking about the situation at hand.

>3. Remember that taxation in nr in it's begining will not be
>mandatory for all (as I know). It's based on idea pay and you'll get
>more than no payer.

Personally I am a bit confused about the whole tax idea as it stands in NR.
I am not sure if it is a fee, a percentage of my income, a volunteer
donation to NR, or if I have to pay the tax to stay a current citizen in NR.
I am also unclear on what the benefits are for me, if and when, I pay it. If
you understand the tax in NR or know a web page dealing with this mandate I
would really prefer to know more before I act on it in any way.

>And I don't know if we really need tu reduce number of gens. Maybe it
>will be good to stop new gens creation until it will be really
>necessary. We hope that nr will evolve forth and number of cives will
>increase. Let them opportunity to pick gens they like.

I saw a suggestion in another comment that seemed like it might be viable
for reducing or adding to current gens’. I believe it had to do with
familiae adoption into current gens’.

Prima Ritulia Nocta
Materfamilias Gentis Ritulia

>
>--- In novaroma@--------, "S-------- Leek" <DolanAp@h...> wrote:
> > Salve Omnes,
> >
> > Both have good points to the discussion concerning gens and taxes.
>An idea
> > concerning both points might be such:
> >
> > Per year:
> > A membership fee for citizenship: $10.00
> > A gens registration fee: $10.00 or $15.00
> > A tax per gens member: $1.00 to $5.00
> >
> > An example in application thus:
> > New citizen with no gens affiliation: $10.00 (maintains general
>operating
> > fund, no use privilege of funds for events)
> > New citizen in a preexisting gens: $10.00 + tax = (acknowledgment
>of
> > support)
> > Gens head: $10.00 (for self) + $10.00 (for status of gens) + tax =
>X$ (for
> > each citizen in gens) = (maintains general fund, and use of funds,
>plus
> > acknowledgment of support)
> >
> > I understand that we as a nation have a need for a general use fund
>for
> > basic operations of Nova Roma (maintaining our web site, paying for
>basic
> > fees associated with running the organization of the nation etc.).
>However,
> > I also believe that we need to do more than just maintain our group
>with
> > money and volunteered time. We need to encourage recognition and
>exposure
> > for our nation and create support for our nation by creating
>gatherings at
> > which our citizens can meet face to face without creating a
>financial burden
> > on individuals within our group.
> >
> > Hence, we need a general fund to maintain the nation as a whole for
>whatever
> > financial bills we have to pay as a group. However, we also need a
>pool of
> > funds that can be drawn on to create and maintain group recognition
>without
> > burdening any single individual within our nation. Perhaps, a
>congregate
> > fund could be created which citizen or gens' (or preferably a
>governor or
> > other Nova Roman representative) can drawn on to host general
>gatherings for
> > citizens to meet at face to face without financially burdening the
> > individual organizing the event/meeting.
> >
> > Just a few thoughts Prima Nocta Ritualia
>

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


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] THE COMITIA CENTURIATA IS CONVENED
From:	StarVVreck@--------
Date:	Tue, 13 Nov 2001 18:59:37 EST

In a message dated 11/13/01 3:52:12 PM Eastern Standard Time,
danedwardsuk@-------- writes:

<< My argument is that abstaining centuries should be counted in the 'simple
majority' equation, not only to prevent the possibility of the above scenario
from occuring, but also in keeping with historical accuracy. The original law
states that 97 out of 193 centuries must vote in favour, no matter how many
centuries abstain. This principle should be maintained in the ammendment.
Only centuries that fail to vote at all should be discounted. >>

Well, that would make abstaining the same as voting against.