> Salve Druse!
>
> > How intresting that a Tribune of the Plebs would
> > approve of an attempt by a Patrician to browbeat a
> > Plebian into silence.
>
> How interesting that you would introduce
> Patrician/Plebeian into the
> discussion. Do you see a chance to sow discord here
> as well?
>
> Tribunes are here for the protection of the rights
> of all citizens,
> including Patricians who have served Nova Roma well.
> But as you may
> have noticed I signed this not as a Tribune but as a
> disgusted
> citizen. The defense of the public honour is in the
> hands of the
> Censors and this is where your have caused more
> concern than anyone
> else in the recent discussions.
>
> You have always had a taste for the extreme and your
> arguments always
> seem to jump effortleesly from Stalin to Pol Pot
> back to Hitler and
> then over the pond to McCarthy again and certainly
> always so when you
> are describing people that are not in agreement with
> you. Please bear
> with me if I declare publicly that I cannot stand
> this any longer.
> Get out of your tiny wooden box of a mind and come
> to your senses
> again.
>
> Ave et Vale
>
> Marcus Marcius Rex
>
>

> Salve Senator Druse,
>
> "L. Sicinius Drusus" <lsicinius@...> wrote:
> I Have enough faith in our citizens to beleave that
> given a free choice and knowledge allmost all of
> them
> will opt for a historic Gens within a short time, a
> year or two, and do so without Nova Roma going
> through
> yet another painful battle where one side seeks to
> impose it's will apon the other.
>
> I really shouldn't continue to stir this can of
> worms (mixed metaphor, anyone?), but I do not share
> your faith that almost all of us will opt for
> historicity. I will certainly attempt to do so
> myself, as well as help anyone who wishes to do so.
>
>
> I do, however, agree with you that we shouldn't pass
> legislation to enforce a Gens restructure. Some of
> our citizens are here for valid reasons that may not
> include recreating family and gens structure. I
> believe we are better off for their presence and if
> cumbersome legislation will force them to take their
> talents and insight elsewhere, I will oppose it.
>
> I will support legislation that allows it and as you
> have described it.
>
> Vale,
> LCS
>
>

> Salve Censor Octavius! Salvete omnes!

> I know I have stood at the sidelines of these policy discussions. I
> believe a Tribune, who may be called upon to check the
> constitutionality of any proposal put to the Commitiae, should not
> commit to any position but rather keep his/her independence and
> neutrality. I would advise my colleagues to do likewise.
>
> But the limits of informed silence have been reached. When someone
> attacks a Censor, Consular and Senator who undoubtedly has done far
> more than enough to deserve the honorary title of Pater Patriae next
> to the founder of this micronation it is time to speak out and take
> sides.
>
> Censor Octavius, I believe your honour and dignitas stand intact. I
> could not say the same thing about your opponent. Please accept my
> deep appreciation for not backing down but rather fighting back in a
> gentlemanlike way when attacked with such rabid madness as I have
> witnessed over the last few days. Your clarity and reasonable style
> are an example to follow for all of us.

On Tue, Jul 01, 2003 at 08:01:51AM +0200, Diana Moravia Aventina wrote:
> Salve Tiberius!
>
> ----I would like to increase the amount on advertising in the Eagle even if
> that means giving away a <few FREE ads to get things going.
>
> <So it you have something to sell here is your chance at a free ad.
>
> How about the photo of me from Roman Days '6 Senators and a Tribune' with a
> text underneath that says "For a good time call Diana Moravia Aventina: A
> Tribune who is for ALL the people...." :-)

Well! They do say that politics makes for some odd bedfellows... :)


Vale,
Caius Minucius Scaevola
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Primum est non nocere.
First of all, do no harm.
-- Hippocrates; The maxim has become an ethical guiding principle in medicine.

> On Tue, Jul 01, 2003 at 02:35:47AM -0000,
> rexmarciusnr wrote:
> > Salve Censor Octavius! Salvete omnes!
>
> Salvete, Marcus Marcius Rex et omnes -
>
> > I know I have stood at the sidelines of these
> policy discussions. I
> > believe a Tribune, who may be called upon to check
> the
> > constitutionality of any proposal put to the
> Commitiae, should not
> > commit to any position but rather keep his/her
> independence and
> > neutrality. I would advise my colleagues to do
> likewise.
> >
> > But the limits of informed silence have been
> reached. When someone
> > attacks a Censor, Consular and Senator who
> undoubtedly has done far
> > more than enough to deserve the honorary title of
> Pater Patriae next
> > to the founder of this micronation it is time to
> speak out and take
> > sides.
> >
> > Censor Octavius, I believe your honour and
> dignitas stand intact. I
> > could not say the same thing about your opponent.
> Please accept my
> > deep appreciation for not backing down but rather
> fighting back in a
> > gentlemanlike way when attacked with such rabid
> madness as I have
> > witnessed over the last few days. Your clarity and
> reasonable style
> > are an example to follow for all of us.
>
> Very well said, sir. I do not know Marcus Octavius
> Germanicus
> personally, but the opinion that I have formed of
> him during my time on
> this list has been a strongly positive one. Despite
> the vicious tone set
> by his opponent, his mode of conduct in this
> discussion has done nothing
> except raise that opinion yet another notch - and I
> do not grant my
> respect lightly.
>
> For those who want their "historical accuracy" at
> all costs, I have a
> hint. In general, emulating the conduct of Gaius
> Julius Caesar is
> praiseworthy; attempting to model Cato the Younger
> minus any semblance
> of his probity produces a raving hydrophobic maniac.

> P. Cornelia S.P.D.
> This is
> bordering on the neurotic and obcessive if I might be so bold as to
> suggest this, and you would need to see a Doctor....
>

> A political appointment? Ahh, the Ordo Equestor......the SENATE?
> Am I getting warm?
>

> In a message dated 7/1/03 12:16:40 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
> scriba_forum@h... writes:
>
>
> > A political appointment? Ahh, the Ordo Equestor......the SENATE?
> > Am I getting warm?
> >
>
> Q. Fabius Maximus SPD
> Salvete.
>
> The problem with this scenario is that M. Marcius Rex had a Senate

> recommended it to the Censors personally, after Marcius put

> administered Germania, and was an excellent Propraetor. But he

> as the Praetorship, because he felt one of gensmates had been

> process by the Senate and Consules of Nova Roma, and he couldn't

> such an oppressive government.

> Plan fact is he and several of his "like
> thinking" group missed the vote that would have allowed the

> Propraetor.

> Had they voted likely the crisis would have been avoided.

> But I also seem to detect the resumption of old vendettas, some

> thought were put to rest years ago. Apparently they are still

> Roman of us. We forget kindness, but we never forget slights.
>

> This is correct except for the fact that I had resigned from my
> propraetorship earlier and with proper previous notice to the Senate
> as I was about to leave the province for Asia maior and could not
> well remain governor of a province literally thousand of miles away.
>

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, qfabiusmaxmi@a... wrote:

By the way the Senate
> never claimed
> conspiracy, it was your fac..like thinking colleagues that
complained.
> Especially Moravius Vado, whom I believe you were referring to.

Oh I was referring to a post of our pater patriae and Pontifex
Maximus Cassius Julianus commenting on the events much later and who
termed it IIRC as something akin to a conspiracy.


Very well Tribune,
> we will let that sleeping
> dog lie.

Yes Cave Canem!

Marcus Marcius Rex

> --- Salvete Omnes:
>
> I've had a wrist injury as of late and don't post
> often. But I can't
> let this slide, even if I hurt all day from
> typing....
>
> That L. Sicinius draft proposal for Gens Reform was
> NOT written just
> to rain on your parade, Marcus Octavius.....that is
> a MISTRUTH
>
> "Random fool, highjacking a truth to take credit for
> it?" You owe
> Senator Sicinius an apology...that is an open attack
> based on your
> subjective interpretation...and that's a polite way
> of putting it.
>
> The man did not become a citizen yesterday.He has
> been here for I
> believe 2 1/2 years. So I don't think this can be,
> at this state,
> remotely resembling truth.
>
> Senator Sicinius drafted his proposal in
> 2001....check the NovaRoma
> Laws list archives...There was alot of discussion
> between Sicinius
> himself, Salix Astur and T. Labienius...with
> comments from myself and
> others. Your interest, or atleast 'input' into this
> entire issue did
> not materialize until your consulship last year.
>
> How would you like it if I suggested publically that
> perhaps you
> rekindled this whole issue last year as a tool to
> vindicate your own
> aspirations, spiting, say, your consular colleague,
> Lucius Cornelius,
> who happens to have a rather large gens? Now that
> wouldn't be nice,
> would it?
>
> ***Po hands Octavius a level.....here, get your
> facts straight***
>
> Do not accuse Sicinius of petty spite. His concern
> was that our
> current system is not historically accurate, which
> it is not. At the
> time I didn't think it was needed, but neither was
> the can of worms
> you later opened, so suddenly, Sicinius proposal
> looked like parts of
> it were written by the Gods. Your proposed law to
> allow people
> to 'gens hop' like they were squaredancing was full
> of holes and more
> dangerous than any proposal could ever be...And
> those who objected
> to it or expressed concern were responded to by you
> and others as
> though their brains were on vacation.
>
>
>
> With respect to the Pontifex Maximus, (which I
> believe Marcus
> Octavius you are advocating also) I felt that his
> proposal of
> everyone being their own familia would dilute us to
> the extent where
> our ties with oneanother would be weak and we, as a
> still-small group
> would have difficulty 'knitting' together. This
> potentially amounts
> to us having a roster of inactive citizens (which we
> already have)
>
>
>
> L. Sicinius proposal was reviewed for those
> components which would be
> potentially desirable to the populace. Another
> proposal, drafted by
> myself, Q. Fabius and T. Labienus was presented to
> the Senate, giving
> people choices within a specific timeframe, fostered
> ties between
> familiae/gens,facilitated respect for the religio,
> involved the
> collegium, et al. It allowed choices in terms of
> modern exingencies,
> special circumstances (there are reasons why you
> should be allowed to
> leave or can be booted:) but protected the sanctity
> of the Ancient
> via Romana with regard to family structure.
>
> It is ahistorical not to have familia, as the
> pater/mater is the
> priest (ess) of his/her household. Further, it
> seems a lonely temple
> with only one person (one person family) making
> offering. Translated
> into Christian terms...like having several
> cathedrals each with only
> one-person congregations, which is the priest or
> minister....why
> bother?
>
> You can almost set your watch by these gens reform
> discussions...check the archives for July of 2002 :)
>
> Valete
> Pompeia Cornelia
> former Praetor
> former Senator
> Tribune et Benefacarius Praefectum
> Sodalitas Militarium NOVA ROMA
>
>
>
>
> In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Marcus Octavius
> Germanicus <hucke@c...>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Recently some people sought to attack my
> credibility
> > > with a false assertation that I had opposed Gens
> > > reform. They were attempting to decive you to
> futher
> > > thier own agenda.
> >
> > The truth of the matter is that Lucius Sicinius
> and his allies tried
> > to derail my gens reform proposal by substituting
> one of their own.
> > Sicinius' proposal was considered by the Senate
> and found, by those
> > of us who had initiated the idea for reform, to be
> a move in the
> > wrong direction.
> >
> > That's what this is really about. Lucius
> Sicinius, who was not even
> > a Senator at the time, is consumed with bitterness
> that the Senate
> was
> > not at his beck and call and that we gave our own
> proposals more
> > consideration than his.
> >
> > His proposal was never anything more than an
> attempt to neutralize
> > mine. After his was read and found wanting,
> Senator Cassius drafted
> > another, which many of us did support, and it is
> that which will
> > likely be the foundation for future reforms.
> Sicinius may burn
> > with jealously all he likes, but he is not a king,
> and the Senate
> > and People are free to reject his dictates.
> >
> > When the Senate or the People do consider a gens
> reform proposal, it
> > will be one that is supported and authored by
> those who the People
> > elected to higher office - it will not be the
> proposal of some
> > random fool who attempts to hijack a cause so that
> he can take
> credit
> > for reform himself.
> >
> > Vale, Octavius.
> >
> > --
> > Marcus Octavius Germanicus,
> > Censor, Consular, Citizen.
> > http://cynico.net/~hucke/
>
>

> Soon after I started urging caution about passing a
> proposal, caution, not urging it's defeat, a well
> cordinated misinformation campaign kicked in that
> saught to discredit me for daring to raise my voice
> against the Modernist faction.

> > It would seem to me a shame, if the goal is
> greater
> > historical accuracy, not to specify that the
> > materfamilias or paterfamilias should be the
> actual or
> > adoptive parent, grandparent, great-grandparent or
> > other living ancestor of the other members of the
> > family. This would not, I think, infringe anyone's
> > rights...

> The main problem with our present Constution is that
> it mandates ahistoric Gens....

> My postion was and remains ALLOW Gens reform, but
> don't FORCE it.

> I am slightly nervous about the power of a
> paterfamilias to expel a member of his family: is
> there any historical basis for this? Surely however
> much one may dislike one's children one cannot stop
> them being one's children?

> In the Republican period a paterfamilias could...
> expel from the familia.

> In a message dated 6/30/03 11:20:10 AM Pacific
> Daylight Time,
> cordus@... writes:
>
> Salvete.
> > I am slightly nervous about the power of a
> > paterfamilias to expel a member of his family: is
> > there any historical basis for this? Surely
> however
> > much one may dislike one's children one cannot
> stop
> > them being one's children?
>
> Yet this was very Roman. And while in reality, the
> head of the family had
> life and
> death authority over all of his family, this is not
> going to play well in
> Nova Roma.
> So since in Nova Roma the equivalent of death is
> banishment for life, and
> since all citizens' rights are protected under the
> constitution this is something
> the family head cannot do. So this is a compromise.
> It acknowledges the
> Roman rights to the head of the family and yet
> allows the filius protection under
> the constitution. Expelled but not banished.
> >
> > Also, I wonder whether it would be useful to make
> > clear whether a person being adopted requires only
> the
> > permission of his or her would-be adoptive parent,
> or
> > whether he or she also needs the permission of his
> or
> > her current parent.
> >
>
> We had discussed that, Apollonius, but so with many
> heads of Gens are missing
> in action
> that becomes problematic. Perhaps the clause should
> read "...if they can be
> found."
>
> Valete
> Q. Fabius Maximus
>

> You have spent the past few days on a non stop
> campaign of slander and lies directed at me.

> First you and Senator Salix Raise the issuse of Gens
> reform lying through your teeth about my postion in a
> transparent attempt to discredit me, then when that
> fails you lie again accusing me of raising it.

> At first I politly pointed out the errors, but the two

> I Shouldn't have been surprised. It was the same
> McCarthyite tatics that you employed against your
> fellow Consul last year when you turned your toga and
> went over to the faction that you had opposed prior to
> then

> A Clever plot on your part. Pretend to be in one camp
> to draw support for an election, only to switch to the
> other after achieving power.

> So if your latest plot to destroy the Traditionalists
> works, how long will it be before you turn your toga
> again and stab your new allies in the back?

> Is the "modern" style of government you have been
> advocating of late? One where unprincipaled and
> unprovoked attacks

> You have claimed to want only "the best of Roma" while
> your actions have clearly shown that your intent is
> inflict the worst aspects of Modern governments on
> Nova Roma in your self serving bid for personal power.

> Over the past 18 months you have repeatadly proven
> your self to be a Liar, A Slanderer of reputations, A
> Backstabber, and in general the least trustworthy
> person in Nova Roma.

> Salvete,
>
> Coming back of a long trip, I was wondering - Did the romans know

>
> Or the Parrots were discovered just on America?
>

> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Lucius Arminius Faustus
> wrote:
> > Salvete,
> >
> > Coming back of a long trip, I was wondering - Did the romans know
> parrots? Alas, how they called a parrot on latin? If the Romans

> people on the Middle Ages knew also.
> >
> > Or the Parrots were discovered just on America?
> >
>

>
> You have yet to successfully point out where we have
> been lying. Your
> story changes every hour, every time you are caught
> in a contradiction,
> you either weasel out of it or ignore it.

> In a message dated 7/1/03 12:16:40 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
> scriba_forum@h... writes:
>
>
> > A political appointment? Ahh, the Ordo Equestor......the SENATE?
> > Am I getting warm?
> >
>
> Q. Fabius Maximus SPD
> Salvete.
>
> has been rife with controversy since day one. However, is that not

> expected? I'm sure when Romulus or whatever name he was called,

> gens and plowed the pomerium, he expected there would be problems

> would have to solve.

> Salvete omnes!
>
> I'm Octavia Fabia Musica, a new citizen of Nova Roma.
>
> I'm very happy (and also very excited!) to be in this community and

>
> Regards,
>
> Octavia Fabia Musica
>
>

> Salvete,
>
> Well, it is official! I'm no longer Christy Nemo
> but rather Annia
> Octavia Indagatrix. Thanks to all who assisted me in
> my very long
> search for the right gens.
>
> Valete,
>
> Annia Octavia Indagatrix
> Citizen
>
>

> > Salvete omnes!
> >
> > I'm Octavia Fabia Musica, a new citizen of Nova Roma.
> >

> Welcome to Nova Roma. I hope you have a great time here and enjoy

> the great things Nova Roma has to offer. Please feel free to ask

> questions about anything you wish to know. There is a great wealth

> knowledge here covering everything from a Roman steam engine to
> advanced Latin grammar. You may wish to go to our main page and

> at the different sodalistas or special interest groups that
> concentrate on everything from Latin grammar to ancient Roman

>
> Your entry into Nova Roma seems to be just like mine. You are
> entering this list in the middle of a heated debate concerning the
> structure of the Roman family, operating segments of NR in more
> traditional or more modern ways. These heavy political discussions
> which are difficult for newbies to follow are not the norm; they

> a few times a year, last a week or two and then vanish. Don't let

> dominant current discussion deter you from posting questions or
> ideas. Many of us will certainly welcome a change in topic by now!
> Have fun, don't be shy and have a great time!
>
> Quintus Lanius Paulinus

> Salvete,
>
> Well, it is official! I'm no longer Christy Nemo but rather Annia
> Octavia Indagatrix.

>
> --- christyacb <bryanta003@h...> wrote:
> > Salvete,
> >
> > Well, it is official! I'm no longer Christy Nemo
> > but rather Annia
> > Octavia Indagatrix. Thanks to all who assisted me in
> > my very long
> > search for the right gens.
> >
> > Valete,
> >
> > Annia Octavia Indagatrix
> > Citizen
> >
> >
>
> Congrats citizen Annia Octavia Indagatrix and
> welcome to the citizenry of Nova Roma.
>
> Lucius Quintius Constantius (Lacus Magni)
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
> http://sbc.yahoo.com

> The main problem with our present Constution is that
> it mandates ahistoric Gens. If a Gens wished to set
> itself up on strictly historic grounds, that
> organization would have no legal sanction under Nova
> Roma's constitution.

> This is clearly wrong. Those who wish to strive for a
> historic Gens structure should be allowed to do so.

> However not all of our citizens are ready to make that
> leap at this time. In Consider it to be unfair, to
> borrow a favorite term from the modernists ;), to let
> people enter an organization under one set of rules,
> and then to suddenly change them.

> My view is that we should limit ourselves to
> empowering the citizens who wish to achive a historic
> structure in thier Gens without forcing any change on
> those who aren't ready yet.
>
> That is what my proposal does. Any Gens that wants a
> historic structure could reorganize itself as soon as
> this law was passed. Those who weren't ready wouldn't
> have to make any changes, wouldn't have to jump
> through any hoops to retain thier structure. They
> would barely notice a change in the law.

> Annia Octavia Indagatrix writes:
>
> > Salvete,
> >
> > Well, it is official! I'm no longer Christy Nemo but rather

> > Octavia Indagatrix.
>
> Congratulations Annia Octavia! Welcome to the ranks of citizenship.
>
> -- Marinus

> Senator Drusus;
>
> I object to your comment which labels Consular Sulla
> a "hated"
> individual. I know for a fact that many of the NR
> Citizens who do not
> think of the Consular as a "hated" individual, but
> rather as a Citizen
> who has been involved in Nova Roma since almost the
> beginning.
> Certainly he s unquestionably supprted by the Gens
> Cornelai, which is
> the largest Ges in Nova Roma. It is also certainly
> true that he has
> been involved in some questionable actions in the
> past and has made some
> surprising statements, but I do not think that those
> past situations
> deserve the title of "hated."
>
> I certainly do not "hate" Consular Sulla, even
> though for the most part
> I do not agree with his social and political views.
> Because of his past
> actions, I do have a tendency to review proposals
> which are obviously
> supported by the trio which you have indicated with
> a littl more care,
> and caution, but that does not sum up anywhere near
> to the term "hated."
>
> In regard to Consular Maximus, we have served
> together as colleagues,
> and while we do not always agree on every aspect of
> political endeavor,
> and I believe in certain cases Consular Maximus is
> both impatient and
> harshly opinionated for given situations, I believe
> that in his own
> right he has the best interests of Nova Roma, as he
> sees them, at heart.
>
> In regard to yourself, I see you as not only a
> Senatorial Colleage, but
> as an indvidual who has any of the same attributes
> that I earlier
> ascribed to one of my Gens of whom I am proud
> indeed. Your friendship
> and support for and with Consular Sulla is admirable
> in view of his past
> foibles, and your efforts to act as his mouthpiece
> during his
> unfortunate, but necessary absence from this list is
> certainly
> recognized.
>
> However, I must object to your terminology regarding
> Consular Sulla both
> in naming (labeling) him as "Hated" and suggesting
> however delicately
> that the Honored Consular Maximus is by association
> also to be "tarred
> with the same brush." I thnk that such labeling is
> really beneath you
> Senator, and I would very respectfully ask that you
> withdraw this
> unfortuanate, unnecessary ad frankly disturbing view
> publicly and offer
> an apology to those of us who hold the two Conslars
> above mentoned in
> much highrer esteem than your labeling might
> suggest.
>
> Respectfully;
>
> Marcus Minucius Audens
> Consular, Nova Roma Citizen
>
>
> A wet sheet and a flowing sea, and a wind follows
> fast, and fills the
> white and rustling sail, and bends the gallant mast;
> and bends the
> gallant mast my boys while like the eagle free, our
> good ship starts and
> flies and leaves old England on our lee------Fair
> Winds and following
> Seas!!!
>
>

> Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
>
> (I am back!)

> At least someone took the time out to read my *silly* email :-)

>
> Now about that TNT miniseries: the actor they got to play

> about a thousand times cooler than Christopher Lambert in "The

> (a.k.a. "Vercingetorix" everywhere outside the US)

> "L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@e...> writes:
>
> [snippage]
>
> > Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
> >
> > (I am back!)
>
> Welcome back Lucius Cornelius. It hasn't been the same without you.
>
> -- Marinus

> Salve Scaevola,
>
> <Well! They do say that politics makes for some odd bedfellows... :)
>
> At least someone took the time out to read my *silly* email :-)
> Vale,
> Diana

> Senator Drusus;
>
> I object to your comment which labels Consular Sulla a "hated"
> individual. I know for a fact that many of the NR Citizens who do

> think of the Consular as a "hated" individual, but rather as a

> who has been involved in Nova Roma since almost the beginning.
> Certainly he s unquestionably supprted by the Gens Cornelai, which

> the largest Ges in Nova Roma.

----- Original Message -----
From: Diana Moravia Aventina
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2003 1:11 PM
Subject: RE: [Nova-Roma] Advertising in the Eagle


Salve Scaevola,

<Well! They do say that politics makes for some odd bedfellows... :)

At least someone took the time out to read my *silly* email :-)
Vale,
Diana



To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



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





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

>>...filthy language and insults of the "Back Alley" which resulted

> Senator Drusus;
>
>
>
> Ave Senator Audens,
>
>SNIP
>
> Respectfully,
>
>
>
> Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
>
> (I am back!)
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> Senator Audens writes:
>
> >>...filthy language and insults of the "Back Alley" which resulted
> in the resignation of a very good friend and valuable NR Citizen<<
>
>
> Salve Senator Audens,
>
> Actually the individual in question left the Back Alley because of
> language he found offensive; as he should have if it was not to his
> liking.
>
> He resigned his NR citizenship over some comments by one of our
> pagan cives discussing door to door Christian evangelism; made here
> on the Main List. The comments were intended to be humorous, but
> the individual in question is deeply Christain, and he was offended
> sufficiently to resign.
>
> The Back Alley is not so bad, mi amicus.
>
> With respect.
>
> Vale,
> Gaius Popillius Laenas

> Welcome back from wherever you were.

> I have seen many references to the Gens Cornelia though to be

> I don't understand any of them other than that it is a large

> Salve
>
> Wait a minute you mean that ALL the e-mails for the past two weeks

>
>
> Vale
>
> Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Diana Moravia Aventina
> To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2003 1:11 PM
> Subject: RE: [Nova-Roma] Advertising in the Eagle
>
>
> Salve Scaevola,
>
> <Well! They do say that politics makes for some odd

>
> At least someone took the time out to read my *silly* email :-)
> Vale,
> Diana
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to

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

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, MarcusAudens@w... wrote:
> Master G.P. Laenius;
> Thank you for your comments. I appreciate your concern.
>
> I am well aware of what caused the resignation of my friend. Both
> actions had thier basis in "Back Alley." It may well be better now,
> however, it was definaely not to my taste then, and that is why I
left.
> "Not so bad," is really not what I am looking for at this point
either.
> Considering the content of my spam mail each day, "not really bad"
may
> mean something different to you, than it does to me.

Actually, Senator, that is not correct. Lucius Cornelius Dalmaticus
resigned over what he preceived as anti-Christian comments coming
from our Junior Consul Titus Labienus Fortuantus. Labienus made
comments about Jehovah Witness people trying to convert him or his
wife. Those comments were the cause of Dalmaticus's resignation and
not only his resignation but the resignation of Iulia Cassia.

If you would like I can research the offending message from Consul
Labienus, the resignation statement of Lucius Cornelius Dalmaticus
and Iulia Cassia.

Respectfully,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix

>>I am well aware of what caused the resignation of my friend. Both

>>"Not so bad," is really not what I am looking for at this point

>>I have my opinion as you have yours, and each of the new

----- Original Message -----
From: M. Octavius Solaris
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2003 12:49 PM
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Tha Back Alley


Salve Sulla,

<<... If you would like I can research the offending message from Consul
Labienus ... >>

Er. And have you stopped beating your wife? IIRC the majority of listmembers did not perceive Labienus' message as offensive and neither did he intend it to come across as such. Just "getting the facts straight here", mi Sulla ;).

Sulla: Beating my wife? I am not married. :) My post was correcting Senator Audens as to the facts of the situation that two individuals did preceive Labienus's post about Jehovahs Witness as offensive and proceeded to leave Nova Roma. That is the fact of the situation, Solaris....Just "getting the facts straight here", mi Solaris.

Vale,

Sulla

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

> Salve Scaevola,
>
> <Well! They do say that politics makes for some odd bedfellows... :)
>
> At least someone took the time out to read my *silly* email :-)
> Vale,
> Diana

> Actually, Senator, that is not correct. Lucius Cornelius Dalmaticus
> resigned over what he preceived as anti-Christian comments coming
> from our Junior Consul Titus Labienus Fortuantus. Labienus made
> comments about Jehovah Witness people trying to convert him or his
> wife. Those comments were the cause of Dalmaticus's resignation

> not only his resignation but the resignation of Iulia Cassia.
>
> If you would like I can research the offending message from Consul
> Labienus, the resignation statement of Lucius Cornelius Dalmaticus
> and Iulia Cassia.
>
> Respectfully,
>
> Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix

----- Original Message -----
From: Quintus Lanius Paulinus (Michael Kelly)
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2003 1:08 PM
Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: Tha Back Alley


> Actually, Senator, that is not correct. Lucius Cornelius Dalmaticus
> resigned over what he preceived as anti-Christian comments coming
> from our Junior Consul Titus Labienus Fortuantus. Labienus made
> comments about Jehovah Witness people trying to convert him or his
> wife. Those comments were the cause of Dalmaticus's resignation
and
> not only his resignation but the resignation of Iulia Cassia.
>
> If you would like I can research the offending message from Consul
> Labienus, the resignation statement of Lucius Cornelius Dalmaticus
> and Iulia Cassia.
>
> Respectfully,
>
> Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix

Salve Sulla,

Ave Quintus Lanius!

That's indeed sad because I'm a practicing Christian and I don't care
for some of the particular Christian sects trying to convert me and
tell me that earth is only 6000 years old.

Sulla: I agree with you completely.

I just looked over a few
crinoid (coral reef) stems today from 9000 ft down in our Canadian
sub artic so I need better explainations than theirs. Similarily
those who tell me moderate consumption of wine or beer are sinful get
no ear from me.

Sulla: Same with me as well.

By the way, I don't want to start a religious debate here. I'm merely
pointing out that many Christians disagree with the approaches of
other Christians; not just our pagan friends.

Sulla: I understand completely. I only pointed out the correction to keep the facts straight. There is no reason to blame a mailing list for the action of an individual, regardless if the majority did not find the post inquestion as offensive or not. Everyone has different thresholds of tolerance, especially when Religious issues are involved.

Respectfully,
Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix


Regards,

Quintus Lanius Paulinus



Yahoo! Groups Sponsor



To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



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


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

> Fourth, there is no shame in sharing political sympathies, and like

----- Original Message -----
From: jmath669642reng@...
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2003 2:17 PM
Subject: [Nova-Roma] Debates


Senator Sulla;

Senator Audens;
I will NOT debate the issue with you, as I know from long experience
that you will say anything that comes to your mind accurate or not, to
seemigly win your point. Suffce it to say that you do not have in your
extensive archives of who said what to whom, the notes from many former
members of Nova Roma that I have contacted in the wake of thier
resignations, as to the reason they resigned.

Sulla: Thats perfectly fine, in my mind I do not have to debate you or research anything in the archieves since the message(s) in question were located by Propraetor Gaius Popilius.

With that in mind, this discussion is at an end for my part.

Sulla: Excellent!

<SNIP>

Vale,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix

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

> Salve Drusus Maxentus Silvanus and welcome to Nova Roma.
>
> Where in the Republic do you reside. I live in Maryland a part of

>
> Again welcome and please enjoy your next 30-40 years in Nova

>
>
> Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
> Citizen
> Fortuna Favet Fortibus
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: David John White
> To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2003 6:34 PM
> Subject: [Nova-Roma] Salve from a new citizen
>
>
> Salve
> I admire the dedication and enthusiasm of Nova Roma's
> citizens in recreating not only the technical structure, ideas

> philosophy of Rome but allowing everybody to see and feel Roman

> Even smell and taste it if they eat the food.
> Roman laws, virtues, natural religion and its family values are

> good basis for any community in the modern world.
> Perhaps we can guide more of the lost souls of today's greedy
> barbaric society to live well, respect each other, work hard and

> in harmony with nature.
> The Nova Roma site is extensive and well structured with much of
> interest both to Citizens and enthusiasts from outside.
> It would be nice to do more extensive recreations of Roman life.
> Maybe a farm producing food the Roman way or small ecologically

> communities.
> I look forward to Citizenship in a strong and growing Republic.
> Vale,
>
> Drusus Maxentus Silvanus
>
> P.S
> Do we have Environmental policies or guidelines for life or

> businesses?
>
>
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to

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

> Salve Druse,
>
> Please allow me to be one of the first to welcome you to NR. You
> scarecly scratched our message board and I see a few excellent

> already. You know, I bet if we ran some sort of farm it would be a
> good "dry run" for more larger dreams and projects down the road.
> There has been a series on tv in North America and English about
> reenacting and recreating an iron age village; maybe we could
> recreate a Roman out post and take turns living on that for a year

> so, growing our foods, raising animals and above all - wine making.
> Please visit sodalistas coq et coq where there are interesting
> discussions on food and drink. Our moderator Pipar just posted a
> great mead recepie which I shall try when I return from the

> wilderness.
>
> I know others on the list will wish to speak with you but I'll

> many sesteri that they're off watching the Julius Caesar Miniseries
> tonight. I don't get that particular station on satellite here but
> I'll settle again for "Druids".
>
> When you have a moment, would you please tell us how you found Nova
> Roma and what recommendations you would suggest for attracting new
> citizens like yourself. Enjoy and we look forward to seeing your
> postings!
>
>
> Vale bene,
>
> Quintus Lanius Paulinus
>
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "David John White"
> <davidwhite432003@y...> wrote:
> > Salve
> > I admire the dedication and enthusiasm of Nova Roma's
> > citizens in recreating not only the technical structure, ideas