Aulus Apollonius Cordus: Corrections requested by M. Moravius

2006-08-17T11:17:10Z

Corrections requested by M. Moravius

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:17, 17 August 2006
Line 66:		Line 66:

	*[[Franciscus Apulus Caesar (Nova Roma)\|[FAC]]] ''VTI ROGAS''		*[[Franciscus Apulus Caesar (Nova Roma)\|[FAC]]] ''VTI ROGAS''
−	*[[Lucius Arminius Faustus (Nova Roma)\|[LAF]]] ''UTI ROGAS''.
	*[[Marcus Bianchius Antonius (Nova Roma)\|[MBA]]] ''Uti Rogas''.		*[[Marcus Bianchius Antonius (Nova Roma)\|[MBA]]] ''Uti Rogas''.
	*[[Patricia Cassia (Nova Roma)\|[PC]]] ''Uti Rogas''		*[[Patricia Cassia (Nova Roma)\|[PC]]] ''Uti Rogas''
Line 106:		Line 105:

	*[[Franciscus Apulus Caesar (Nova Roma)\|[FAC]]] ''VTI ROGAS''. A term different by micronation could explain better what NR is and give more credits to this organization.		*[[Franciscus Apulus Caesar (Nova Roma)\|[FAC]]] ''VTI ROGAS''. A term different by micronation could explain better what NR is and give more credits to this organization.
−	*[[Lucius Arminius Faustus (Nova Roma)\|[LAF]]] ''UTI ROGAS''.
	*[[Marcus Bianchius Antonius (Nova Roma)\|[MBA]]] ''Uti Rogas''.		*[[Marcus Bianchius Antonius (Nova Roma)\|[MBA]]] ''Uti Rogas''.
	*[[Patricia Cassia (Nova Roma)\|[PC]]] ''Antiquo''.		*[[Patricia Cassia (Nova Roma)\|[PC]]] ''Antiquo''.

Aulus Apollonius Cordus: Content added

2006-08-15T17:03:50Z

Content added

New page

Published {{Aug 8}} {{2006}} by [[Marcus Moravius Piscinus Horatianus (Nova Roma)|M. Moravius Piscinus]] [[Tribuni Plebis (Nova Roma)|''Tribunus Plebis'']].

__TOC__

<div class="scriptum">

''[[Marcus Moravius Piscinus Horatianus (Nova Roma)|M Moravius Piscinus]], [[Tribuni Plebis (Nova Roma)|Tribunus Plebis]], Popularibus Romani, Quiritibus salutem plurinam dicit'':

Senate Voting Results, A. U. C. ante diem VII Idus Sextilas MMDCCLIX (7 August 2006 CE).

The [[Senate (Nova Roma)|Senate]] was called into session by Consul [[Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus (Nova Roma)|G Fabius Buteo Modianus]]. The [[Contio (Nova Roma)|''contio'']] was held from 30 July through 2 August on agenda items previously reported by [[Tribuni Plebis (Nova Roma)|''Tribunus Plebis'']] [[Quintus Suetonius Paulinus (Nova Roma)|Suetonius Paulinus]] on 27 July. Voting then took place from 3 August until 6 August. Twenty-five of thirty-six Senators voted during the session, one voted late, these being the following:

*[[Franciscus Apulus Caesar (Nova Roma)|[FAC]]] Franciscus Apulus Caesar
*[[Marcus Bianchius Antonius (Nova Roma)|[MBA]]] Marcus Bianchius Antonius
*[[Patricia Cassia (Nova Roma)|[PC]]] Patricia Cassia
*[[Marcus Cassius Iulianus (Nova Roma)|[MCI]]] Marcus Cassius Iulianus
*[[Emilia Curia Finnica (Nova Roma)|[ECF]]] Emilia Curia Finnica
*[[Gaius Curius Saturninus (Nova Roma)|[CCS]]] Caius Curius Saturninus
*[[Lucius Equitius Cincinnatus Augur (Nova Roma)|[LECA]]] Lucius Equitius Cincinnatus Augur
*[[Gnaeus Equitius Marinus (Nova Roma)|[GEM]]] Gnaeus Equitius Marinus
*[[Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus (Nova Roma)|[GFBM]]] Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus
*[[Caeso Fabius Buteo Quintilianus (Nova Roma)| [CFBQ]]] Caeso Fabius Buteo Quintilianus [voted by proxy]
*[[Tiberius Galerius Paulinus (Nova Roma)|[TGP]]] Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
*[[Marcus Iulius Perusianus (Nova Roma)|[MIP]]] Marcus Iulius Perusianus
*[[Decius Iunius Palladius Invictus (Nova Roma)|[DIPI]]] Decius Iunius Palladius Invictus
*[[Titus Labienus Fortunatus (Nova Roma)|[TLF]]] Titus Labienus Fortunatus
*[[Lucius Minicius Sceptius (Nova Roma)|[LMS]]] Lucius Minicius Sceptius
*[[Pompeia Minucia Strabo (Nova Roma)|[PMS]]] Pompeia Minucia Strabo
*[[Marcus Minucius Audens (Nova Roma)|[MMA]]] Marcus Minucius Audens
*[[Arnamentia Moravia Aurelia (Nova Roma)|[AMA]]] Arnamentia Moravia Aurelia
*[[Marcus Octavius Germanicus (Nova Roma)|[MOG]]] Marcus Octavius Germanicus
*[[Titus Octavius Pius Ahenobarbus (Nova Roma)|[TOPA]]] Titus Octavius Pius Ahenobarbus
*[[Gaius Popillius Laenas (Nova Roma)|[GPL]]] Gaius Popillius Laenas
*[[Julilla Sempronia Magna (Nova Roma)|[JSM]]] Julilla Sempronia Magna [voted by proxy]
*[[Lucius Sergius Australicus (Nova Roma)|[LSA]]] Lucius Sergius Australicus
*[[Quintus Suetonius Paulinus (Nova Roma)|[QSP]]] Quintus Suetonius Paulinus
*[[Appius Tullius Marcellus Cato (Nova Roma)|[ATMC]]] Appius Tullius Marcellus Cato [Voted too late]
*[[Flavius Vedius Germanicus (Nova Roma)|[FVG]]] Flavius Vedius Germanicus

Senatores not voting during the Senate session were the following:

*[[Sextus Apollonius Scipio (Nova Roma)|[SAS]]] Sextus Apollonius Scipio
*[[Lucius Arminius Faustus (Nova Roma)|[LAF]]] Lucius Arminius Faustus
*[[Marcus Arminius Maior (Nova Roma)|[MAM]]] Marcus Arminius Maior
*[[Manius Constantinus Serapio (Nova Roma)|[MCS]]] Manius Constantinus Serapio
*[[Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix (Nova Roma)|[LCSF]]] Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
*[[Quintus Fabius Maximus (Nova Roma)|[QFM]]] Quintus Fabius Maximus
*[[Gaius Flavius Diocletianus (Nova Roma)|[GFD]]] Gaius Flavius Diocletianus
*[[Gaia Livia (Nova Roma)|[GL]]] Gaia Livia
*[[Gaius Marius Merullus (Nova Roma)|[GMM]]] Gaius Marius Merullus
*[[Gnaeus Salvius Astur (Nova Roma)|[GSA]]] Gnaeus Salvius Astur

==ITEM I: [[Senatus Consultum de Ratione Senatus MMDCCLIX (Nova Roma)|The rules and procedures for debate and the taking of votes in the Senate.]]==

Voting:
Uti Rogas: 23
Antiquo: 0
Abstineo: 2
Total Votes: 25

Item I carried.

*[[Franciscus Apulus Caesar (Nova Roma)|[FAC]]] ''VTI ROGAS''
*[[Lucius Arminius Faustus (Nova Roma)|[LAF]]] ''UTI ROGAS''.
*[[Marcus Bianchius Antonius (Nova Roma)|[MBA]]] ''Uti Rogas''.
*[[Patricia Cassia (Nova Roma)|[PC]]] ''Uti Rogas''
*[[Marcus Cassius Iulianus (Nova Roma)|[MCI]]] ''Uti Rogas''
*[[Emilia Curia Finnica (Nova Roma)|[ECF]]] ''Uti rogas''.
*[[Gaius Curius Saturninus (Nova Roma)|[CCS]]] ''Uti Rogas''.
*[[Lucius Equitius Cincinnatus Augur (Nova Roma)|[LECA]]] ''Vti Rogas''.
*[[Gnaeus Equitius Marinus (Nova Roma)|[GEM]]] ''Uti Rogas''.
*[[Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus (Nova Roma)|[GFBM]]] ''Uti Rogas''.
*[[Caeso Fabius Buteo Quintilianus (Nova Roma)|[CFBQ]]] ''Uti Rogas''.
*[[Tiberius Galerius Paulinus (Nova Roma)|[TGP]]] ''Uti Rogas''.
*[[Marcus Iulius Perusianus (Nova Roma)|[MIP]]] ''Uti Rogas''
*[[Decius Iunius Palladius Invictus (Nova Roma)|[DIPI]]] Abstain.
*[[Titus Labienus Fortunatus (Nova Roma)|[TLF]]] ''UTI ROGAS''
*[[Lucius Minicius Sceptius (Nova Roma)|[LMS]]] ''ABSTINEO''.
*[[Pompeia Minucia Strabo (Nova Roma)|[PMS]]] ''VTI ROGAS''- My thanks to the Senior Consul for attending to this item.
*[[Marcus Minucius Audens (Nova Roma)|[MMA]]] YES (''Uti Rogas'')
*[[Arnamentia Moravia Aurelia (Nova Roma)|[AMA]]] ''Uti Rogas''.
*[[Marcus Octavius Germanicus (Nova Roma)|[MOG]]] ''Uti Rogas''.
*[[Titus Octavius Pius Ahenobarbus (Nova Roma)|[TOPA]]] ''Uti Rogas''. I would much appreciate a complete ruleset, including the rules for quorum and these rules in one document, in the interest of clarity.
*[[Gaius Popillius Laenas (Nova Roma)|[GPL]]] ''Uti Rogas''
*[[Julilla Sempronia Magna (Nova Roma)|[JSM]]] ''Uti Rogas''.
*[[Lucius Sergius Australicus (Nova Roma)|[LSA]]] ''Uti Rogas''
*[[Quintus Suetonius Paulinus (Nova Roma)|[QSP]]] ''Uti rogas''.
*[[Appius Tullius Marcellus Cato (Nova Roma)|[ATMC]]] [Voted Too Late]
*[[Flavius Vedius Germanicus (Nova Roma)|[FVG]]] Yes (''Uti Rogas'')

==ITEM II: [[Senatus Consultum regarding the term Micronation MMDCCLIX (Nova Roma)|Disassociation with the term "Micronation."]]==

Voting
Uti Rogas: 21
Antiquo: 3
Abstineo: 1
Total Votes: 25

Item II carried.

*[[Franciscus Apulus Caesar (Nova Roma)|[FAC]]] ''VTI ROGAS''. A term different by micronation could explain better what NR is and give more credits to this organization.
*[[Lucius Arminius Faustus (Nova Roma)|[LAF]]] ''UTI ROGAS''.
*[[Marcus Bianchius Antonius (Nova Roma)|[MBA]]] ''Uti Rogas''.
*[[Patricia Cassia (Nova Roma)|[PC]]] ''Antiquo''.
*[[Marcus Cassius Iulianus (Nova Roma)|[MCI]]] ''Antiquo''.
*[[Emilia Curia Finnica (Nova Roma)|[ECF]]] ''Uti rogas''.
*[[Gaius Curius Saturninus (Nova Roma)|[CCS]]] ''Uti Rogas''. While term micronation has still value in some circles, in common use it has really lost it's value. For NR it is not anymore advantageous to be associated with this term, and therefore we should disassociate ourselves from it.
*[[Lucius Equitius Cincinnatus Augur (Nova Roma)|[LECA]]] ''Vti Rogas''.
*[[Gnaeus Equitius Marinus (Nova Roma)|[GEM]]] ''Uti Rogas''.
*[[Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus (Nova Roma)|[GFBM]]] ''Uti Rogas''.
*[[Caeso Fabius Buteo Quintilianus (Nova Roma)|[CFBQ]]] ''Uti Rogas''.
*[[Tiberius Galerius Paulinus (Nova Roma)|[TGP]]] ''Uti Rogas''.
*[[Marcus Iulius Perusianus (Nova Roma)|[MIP]]] ''Uti Rogas''
*[[Decius Iunius Palladius Invictus (Nova Roma)|[DIPI]]] ''Uti Rogas''. I almost was convinced by Cassius' argument on this issue, especially as no viable alternative term has been suggested but honestly the term has been an albatross around our neck for too long.
*[[Titus Labienus Fortunatus (Nova Roma)|[TLF]]] ''UTI ROGAS''
*[[Lucius Minicius Sceptius (Nova Roma)|[LMS]]] ''VTI•ROGAS''. It is time to change our mind and take a new path about our conception.
*[[Pompeia Minucia Strabo (Nova Roma)|[PMS]]] ''VTI ROGAS''
*[[Marcus Minucius Audens (Nova Roma)|[MMA]]] NO I have seen no evidence that this term is in any way harmful to Nova Roma. I have heard many opinions but have seen no proof.
*[[Arnamentia Moravia Aurelia (Nova Roma)|[AMA]]] ''Uti Rogas''.
*[[Marcus Octavius Germanicus (Nova Roma)|[MOG]]] ''Uti Rogas''.
*[[Titus Octavius Pius Ahenobarbus (Nova Roma)|[TOPA]]] ''Uti Rogas''. The term hurts our credibility, in particular in academic fields, where we are trying to make contacts. I support the measure to remove it.
*[[Gaius Popillius Laenas (Nova Roma)|[GPL]]] ''Uti Rogas''. Like Senator Palladius, I too was almost convinced by Cassius' arguments, but I feel the "micronation" term carries more negatives than positives.
*[[Julilla Sempronia Magna (Nova Roma)|[JSM]]] ''Uti Rogas''.
*[[Lucius Sergius Australicus (Nova Roma)|[LSA]]] ''Abstineo''. I think this is a frivolous issue.
*[[Quintus Suetonius Paulinus (Nova Roma)|[QSP]]] ''Uti Rogas''. We need to get out of that Dungeon And Dragon type association. Too many micronations that are run as fantasies or ridiculous jokes.
*[[Appius Tullius Marcellus Cato (Nova Roma)|[ATMC]]] [Voted Too Late]
*[[Flavius Vedius Germanicus (Nova Roma)|[FVG]]] Yes (''Uti Rogas'')

==ITEM III: Age Exemption for [[Quintus Caecilius Metellus Pius Postumianus (Nova Roma)|Q. Caecilius Metellus Pius Postumianus]] and [[Titus Octavius Pius Ahenobarbus (Nova Roma)|Titus Octavius Pius Ahenobarbus]].==

===(ITEM III A.) [[Senatus Consultum regarding Age Exemption for Q. Caecilius Metellus Pius Postumianus MMDCCLIX (Nova Roma)|Q. Caecilius Metellus Pius Postumianus]].===

Voting:
Uti Rogas: 14
Antiquo: 7
Abstineo: 4
Total Votes: 25

Item III A carried

*[[Franciscus Apulus Caesar (Nova Roma)|[FAC]]] ''ABSTINEO''. Both the Candidates, Pius specially, are good and skilled citizens but I don't see any reason or urgence for our Res Publica to make exceptions to the law.
*[[Marcus Bianchius Antonius (Nova Roma)|[MBA]]] ''Uti Rogas''.
*[[Patricia Cassia (Nova Roma)|[PC]]] ''Uti Rogas''
*[[Marcus Cassius Iulianus (Nova Roma)|[MCI]]] ''Antiquo''.
*[[Emilia Curia Finnica (Nova Roma)|[ECF]]] ''Uti rogas''.
*[[Gaius Curius Saturninus (Nova Roma)|[CCS]]] ''Uti Rogas''.
*[[Lucius Equitius Cincinnatus Augur (Nova Roma)|[LECA]]] ''Antiquo''.
*[[Gnaeus Equitius Marinus (Nova Roma)|[GEM]]] ''Uti Rogas''.
*[[Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus (Nova Roma)|[GFBM]]] ''Uti Rogas''.
*[[Caeso Fabius Buteo Quintilianus (Nova Roma)|[CFBQ]]] ''Uti Rogas''.
*[[Tiberius Galerius Paulinus (Nova Roma)|[TGP]]] ''Antiquo''. Either the age ( and other) requirements have meaning or they do not. The term of office for all Nova Roman magistrates ( except the Censors) is for one year. This is not a long or burdensome time frame. The Republic will survive until candidates can fulfill the requirements for standing. Exemptions should be for extraordinary cases and circumstances.
*[[Marcus Iulius Perusianus (Nova Roma)|[MIP]]] ''Abstineo''
*[[Decius Iunius Palladius Invictus (Nova Roma)|[DIPI]]] ''Antiquo'' for both. Both are good men but Audens is right, the age exemption should be used in extraordinary circumstances, if during a call for candidates not enough qualified candidates step forward for the office.
*[[Titus Labienus Fortunatus (Nova Roma)|[TLF]]] ''ABSTINEO''.
*[[Lucius Minicius Sceptius (Nova Roma)|[LMS]]] ''ABSTINEO''. I don't really know the fellows who are on this exemption, so I do not make a judgement of their capabilities; however, exemptions are a dangerous tool, no matter who is the person who takes the advantage.
*[[Pompeia Minucia Strabo (Nova Roma)|[PMS]]] ''VTI ROGAS''
*[[Marcus Minucius Audens (Nova Roma)|[MMA]]] NO
*[[Arnamentia Moravia Aurelia (Nova Roma)|[AMA]]] ''Uti Rogas''.
*[[Marcus Octavius Germanicus (Nova Roma)|[MOG]]] ''Uti Rogas''.
*[[Titus Octavius Pius Ahenobarbus (Nova Roma)|[TOPA]]] ''Uti Rogas''. He has been around a long time already and worked endless hours for the republic. If anyone deserves an age exemption, he does.
*[[Gaius Popillius Laenas (Nova Roma)|[GPL]]] ''Antiquo''. I agree with Pallasdiu and Audens. Both men are excellent civies, but why have the requirement if we are going to consistently waive it? If there were a shortage of candidates, perhaps, but there is no evidence such exisits.
*[[Julilla Sempronia Magna (Nova Roma)|[JSM]]] ''Uti Rogas''.
*[[Lucius Sergius Australicus (Nova Roma)|[LSA]]] ''Antiquo''.
*[[Quintus Suetonius Paulinus (Nova Roma)|[QSP]]] ''Uti Rogas''.
*[[Appius Tullius Marcellus Cato (Nova Roma)|[ATMC]]] [Voted Too Late]
*[[Flavius Vedius Germanicus (Nova Roma)|[FVG]]] Yes (''Uti Rogas'')

===(ITEM III B.) [[Senatus Consultum regarding Age Exemption for Titus Octavius Pius Ahenobarbus MMDCCLIX (Nova Roma)|Titus Octavius Pius Ahenobarbus]].===

Voting:
Uti Rogas: 14
Antiquo: 7
Abstineo: 4
Total Votes: 25

Item III B carried.

*[[Franciscus Apulus Caesar (Nova Roma)|[FAC]]] ''ABSTINEO''. Both the Candidates, Pius specially, are good and skilled citizens but I don't see any reason or urgence for our Res Publica to make exceptions to the law.
*[[Marcus Bianchius Antonius (Nova Roma)|[MBA]]] ''Uti Rogas''.
*[[Patricia Cassia (Nova Roma)|[PC]]] ''Uti Rogas''
*[[Marcus Cassius Iulianus (Nova Roma)|[MCI]]] ''Antiquo''.
*[[Emilia Curia Finnica (Nova Roma)|[ECF]]] ''Uti rogas''.
*[[Gaius Curius Saturninus (Nova Roma)|[CCS]]] ''Uti Rogas''. Even while there isn't pressing crises in our republic to motivate such exemption, there isn't any pressing reason either to reject request from citizens who are as active as these two gentlemen are. Let people decide that are they up to the challenge by voting for or against them in the elections.
*[[Lucius Equitius Cincinnatus Augur (Nova Roma)|[LECA]]] ''Antiquo''.
*[[Gnaeus Equitius Marinus (Nova Roma)|[GEM]]] ''Uti Rogas''.
*[[Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus (Nova Roma)|[GFBM]]] ''Uti Rogas''.
*[[Caeso Fabius Buteo Quintilianus (Nova Roma)|[CFBQ]]] ''Uti Rogas''.
*[[Tiberius Galerius Paulinus (Nova Roma)|[TGP]]] ''Antiquo''.
*[[Marcus Iulius Perusianus (Nova Roma)|[MIP]]] ''Abstineo''
*[[Decius Iunius Palladius Invictus (Nova Roma)|[DIPI]]] ''Antiquo''.
*[[Titus Labienus Fortunatus (Nova Roma)|[TLF]]] ''ABSTINEO''.
*[[Lucius Minicius Sceptius (Nova Roma)|[LMS]]] ''ABSTINEO''.
*[[Pompeia Minucia Strabo (Nova Roma)|[PMS]]] ''Uti Rogas''. In the interest of objectivity, I must as a voting Senator make a clarification: this is not a formal endorsement in itself for their respective candidacies in the future....this vote is to say that these citizens are on record as having worked very hard , and have generally demonstrated their worthiness in my view of being granted age exemptions to run for these offices. I think it is important to make this distinction.
*[[Marcus Minucius Audens (Nova Roma)|[MMA]]] NO (''Antiquo''). The rule about age limits is a good one. It is one way to assure (hopefully) both Maturity and Integrity of candidates. I have nothing against the above candidates, however, I see no emergency that merits the need to overturn our laws, and there are a plethora of positions that these individuals may serve in to advance Nova Roma at their present age. If both are as good as the Senior Consul has indicated, I look forward to seeing a great improvement in the areas where these individuals labor for Nova Roma.
*[[Arnamentia Moravia Aurelia (Nova Roma)|[AMA]]] ''Uti Rogas''.
*[[Marcus Octavius Germanicus (Nova Roma)|[MOG]]] ''Uti Rogas''.
*[[Titus Octavius Pius Ahenobarbus (Nova Roma)|[TOPA]]] ''Uti Rogas''. I would vote abstineo, but before Item I has been approved, that could equate voting against myself.
*[[Gaius Popillius Laenas (Nova Roma)|[GPL]]] ''Antiquo''.
*[[Julilla Sempronia Magna (Nova Roma)|[JSM]]] ''Uti Rogas''.
*[[Lucius Sergius Australicus (Nova Roma)|[LSA]]] ''Antiquo''. Without prejudice against either of these gentlemen, I think we should either follow the law or change it, but not make a practice of granting exemptions from it as long as it remains law.
*[[Quintus Suetonius Paulinus (Nova Roma)|[QSP]]] ''Uti Rogas''.
*[[Appius Tullius Marcellus Cato (Nova Roma)|[ATMC]]] [Voted Too Late]
*[[Flavius Vedius Germanicus (Nova Roma)|[FVG]]] Yes (''Uti Rogas'')

==ITEM IV: [[Senatus Consultum regarding Appius Claudius Priscus MMDCCLIX (Nova Roma)|The Senate of Nova Roma recognizes Appius Claudius Priscus as a potential threat to Nova Roma and declares him "''inimicus''," an enemy of Nova Roma.]]==

Voting:
Uti Rogas: 12
Antiquo: 10
Abstineo: 2
Total Votes: 24

Item IV was declared carried.

*[[Franciscus Apulus Caesar (Nova Roma)|[FAC]]] ''VTI ROGAS''. It's not enough but this is the first step to impose the official position against fascism, nazism and any totalitarian political ideology.
*[[Marcus Bianchius Antonius (Nova Roma)|[MBA]]] ''Uti Rogas''.
*[[Patricia Cassia (Nova Roma)|[PC]]] ''Uti Rogas''
*[[Marcus Cassius Iulianus (Nova Roma)|[MCI]]] ''Uti Rogas''
*[[Emilia Curia Finnica (Nova Roma)|[ECF]]] ''Antiquo''. Citizen Priscus has apparently committed a crime and should be convicted accordingly by the Nova Roman law.
*[[Gaius Curius Saturninus (Nova Roma)|[CCS]]] ''Antiquo''. I see no need for the Senate to take any official stand in this matter. We have laws and if any citizen has broken them, there's a process to follow. If our citizens see that our law has flaws and cannot handle crimes as they should be handled, then let the law be modified according to the will of the people. In either case Senate shouldn't have any need to take measures like this.
*[[Lucius Equitius Cincinnatus Augur (Nova Roma)|[LECA]]] ''Antiquo''.
*[[Gnaeus Equitius Marinus (Nova Roma)|[GEM]]] ''Uti Rogas''.
*[[Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus (Nova Roma)|[GFBM]]] ''Uti Rogas''.
*[[Caeso Fabius Buteo Quintilianus (Nova Roma)|[CFBQ]]] ''Uti Rogas''.
*[[Tiberius Galerius Paulinus (Nova Roma)|[TGP]]] ''Antiquo''. If this was a recommendation to the Comitia Centuriata to strip Appius Claudius Priscus of his citizenship based on his past actions I would vote for this. Declaring Appius Claudius Priscus "''Inimicus''" has no legal effect because there is no such thing as an "''Inimicus''" of the state and ''Hostis'' would be a better word to use than "''inimicus''," in any case. In the 477± years of the Roman Republic the Senate declared someone a "''hostes populi Romani''" a total of nine times and all of these were during the last decades of its existence. Not only did these actions not preserve law and order they helped to complete the on going destruction of the constitutional order. In Nova Roma when Nova Roman law is silent Roman law can be used. No ''lex'' or constitutional provision grants any organ of the state with the power to declare anyone, citizen or not as, "''hostes populi Romani''." Under Roman law a Roman citizen could not be declared a "''hostes populi Romani''" because it would have had the effect of stripping them of their citizenship and only the Comitia Centuriata could do that. The Senate is, according to the constitution the "supreme policy" making authority for Nova Roma" and can issue a ''Senatus consulta'' " on those topics upon which it shall see fit to comment". I suggested that we make a recommendation to the ''Comitia Centuriata'' , based on Tribune Marcus Horatius post that summarizes Appius Claudius Priscus actions to date, that he should be stripped of his citizenship and expelled from Nova Roma for life. The ''Comitia Centuriata'' is empowered "To try legal cases in which the defendant is subject to permanent removal of citizenship". By hearing the recommendation of the Senate and his defence the ''Comitia Centuriata'' can then vote on that recommendation and can either acquit Appius Claudius Priscus and allow him to remain a citizen or they can vote to strip him of his citizenship.
*[[Marcus Iulius Perusianus (Nova Roma)|[MIP]]] ''Abstineo''.
*[[Decius Iunius Palladius Invictus (Nova Roma)|[DIPI]]] ''Antiquo''. Besides being an unpleasant person who holds vile, unpopular views, what has this person really done? One should be held accountable for one's actions, not opinions. Now we decide what opinions one may or may not hold in Nova Roma. This is as bad as so called hate crime legislation in the macroworld but without any crime other than "thoughtcrime" to justify it.
*[[Titus Labienus Fortunatus (Nova Roma)|[TLF]]] ''ANTIQUO''.
*[[Lucius Minicius Sceptius (Nova Roma)|[LMS]]] ''VTI•ROGAS''. Although is not the best solution, it is maybe a first step. But naming the problem doesn't make it dissapear; so let's work another solution for this problem.
*[[Pompeia Minucia Strabo (Nova Roma)|[PMS]]] ''VTI ROGAS''. Although I believe this measure in itself is insufficient.
*[[Marcus Minucius Audens (Nova Roma)|[MMA]]] NO. While I neither like nor agree with this citizen of Nova Roma, I cannot see where he has broken our laws. If he had he would have been prosecuted per the laws of Nova Roma. Instead of that means it has been given to the Senate to do the job of the courts. I fully understand the Dislike and Disgust of some of our citizens for this individual. I have had E-Mail contact with him myself and do not relish a repeat. However, as I understand it, he has broken no law, and he has not been prosecuted in accordance with our laws. My questions were not answered, and so I must vote accordingly.
*[[Arnamentia Moravia Aurelia (Nova Roma)|[AMA]]] ''Uti Rogas''.
*[[Marcus Octavius Germanicus (Nova Roma)|[MOG]]] ''Uti Rogas''.
*[[Titus Octavius Pius Ahenobarbus (Nova Roma)|[TOPA]]] ''Abstineo''. I may be called on to officiate against Priscus in an eventual trial. As such, I will not take a public stand for or against this measure.
*[[Gaius Popillius Laenas (Nova Roma)|[GPL]]] ''Antiquo''. Once again I agree with Palladius and Audens. I believe the correct procedure should be a trial and I am unsure why it was aborted.
*[[Julilla Sempronia Magna (Nova Roma)|[JSM]]] ''Uti Rogas''.
*[[Lucius Sergius Australicus (Nova Roma)|[LSA]]] ''Antiquo''. I have not changed my thoughts or feelings about this individual, but I am persuaded that this is not the best way to proceed.
*[[Quintus Suetonius Paulinus (Nova Roma)|[QSP]]] ''Antiquo''. I have given this some careful thought over the last week and I have to say that the points illustrated by Senator Audens and Senator Maximus have made me reluctant to say yes. In my opinion the moderators have done a great job in making sure that the doctrines of Priscus are not hitting the lists and offending many citizens here. I have not heard that he has repeated his offences by writing to government authorities without our permission. The best approach for now is to control the posts of anyone who slipped through the system and to ferret out such controversial figures right at our gates before they get in as was done for "blackshirt".
*[[Flavius Vedius Germanicus (Nova Roma)|[FVG]]] Did not vote

''Sis bonus felixque''
''Consilibus Fabio Modiano et Minuciae Straboni''

</div>

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:16, 24 June 2024
Line 1:		Line 1:
		+	{{HistoricalDocument}}
	Published {{Aug 8}} {{2006}} by [[Marcus Moravius Piscinus Horatianus (Nova Roma)\|M. Moravius Piscinus]] [[Tribuni Plebis (Nova Roma)\|''Tribunus Plebis'']].		Published {{Aug 8}} {{2006}} by [[Marcus Moravius Piscinus Horatianus (Nova Roma)\|M. Moravius Piscinus]] [[Tribuni Plebis (Nova Roma)\|''Tribunus Plebis'']].

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:14, 3 March 2008
Line 254:		Line 254:

	[[Category: Senate reports (Nova Roma)]]		[[Category: Senate reports (Nova Roma)]]
		+	[[Category:MMDCCLIX]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:05, 17 August 2006
Line 253:		Line 253:
	</div>		</div>

−	[[Category: Senate ~~Reports~~ (Nova Roma)]]	+	[[Category: Senate reports (Nova Roma)]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:28, 15 August 2006
Line 254:		Line 254:

	</div>		</div>
		+
		+	[[Category: Senate Reports (Nova Roma)]]

Senate report MMDCCLIX August 6 (Nova Roma) - Revision history

Decimus Aurelius Ingeniarius: Adding HP tag

M. Lucretius Agricola: cat

Aulus Apollonius Cordus: Senate report MMDCCLIX August 3 (Nova Roma) moved to Senate report MMDCCLIX August 6 (Nova Roma): More logical to use final date of voting.

Aulus Apollonius Cordus: Senate Report MMDCCLIX August 3 (Nova Roma) moved to Senate report MMDCCLIX August 3 (Nova Roma): Capitals

Aulus Apollonius Cordus at 19:05, 17 August 2006

Aulus Apollonius Cordus: Corrections requested by M. Moravius

Aulus Apollonius Cordus: Category

Aulus Apollonius Cordus: Content added