Wait, Wait!  Tribune Aquila has spoken Maior!  We need to discuss this someplace else.

Modianus

On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 8:42 AM, Maior <rory12001@...> wrote:

M. Hortensia Maior A. Tulliae Scholasticae spd;
You should apologize to M. Lucretius Agricola, for trying to
impugn his fine reputation. 

---Gnaeus Caelius Ahenobarbus salve:

This post is very similar to a recent email I received from my sister-
in-law. She's doing a little globe trotting and made her way to
Arizona. She loves the sunsets and unique lay of the land.
She's wondering why it took her so long to check it out.

Vale


In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Gnaeus Caelius Ahenobarbus
<cn.caelius@...> wrote:

>
> Cn. Caelius Ahenobarbus omnibus s.p.d.
>
> When I wrote earlier today, I was at a coffee house doing my

homework. I left there to come home a few minutes ago. What I saw
made our elections seem insignificant: the colors of the setting sun
reflecting off the Santa Catalina mountains on the northeast side of
Tucson. Arizona is known for its beautiful sunsets, and tonight is no
exception. The sky is completely clear of clouds. A few minutes ago,
the mountains were ablaze in shades of red and pink, light and
shadow. Now, they are just mountains again, and the sky is shaded
from pink near the horizon through a light lavender purple to a sky
blue overhead. In a few minutes, it will be dark and I will enjoy one
of the darker urban skies in the nation thanks to the fact that there
are astronomical observatories nearby. The moon will rise in a few
hours, waning. It is truly beautiful and breathtaking here.

>
> The gods, the universe, beauty--they are all still here. Step

outside and watch the next sunset. You'll see. Videbis.

>
> Di deaeque custodiant!
>
> --
> Gnaeus Caelius Ahenobarbus
> Aedilis Oppidi, Oppidum Fluminis Gilae, America Austroccidentalis
> Accensus, cos. M. Moravius Piscinus Horatianus et T. Iulius Sabinus
> http://becomingnewthroughtheold.blogspot.com
>

Salve,

What exactly prevents them from recasting their vote so it's counted?


Vale,

Annia Minucia Marcella



--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "pompeia_minucia_tiberia"
<pompeia_minucia_tiberia@...> wrote:

>
> --- Minucia Minuciae sal.
>
>
> Unfortunately Minucia, given that a voter has initially sent in the
> vote, their vote is void already....it cannot legally be recast. It's
> not a matter of 'cast away' and eventually you'll enter a valid vote.
>
> That is why we are getting rid of the sequential system, but we are
> not rid of it yet, so we should abide by the laws which support it in
> the meantime.
>
> I somehow don't imagine 'we' will, but 'we' should.
>
> Vale
>
>
> In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Annia Minucia Marcella" <annia@>
> wrote:
> >
> > Salve,
> >
> > I'm going to have to disagree with you there. If someone mistakenly
> > voted at the wrong time, their vote is null. This is the
> instructions
> > I read and understood before the vote even started. Perhaps if
> people
> > took the time to read the instructions and schedule they could've
> made
> > sure they voted during their appropriate time.
> >
> >
> > If they want their vote to count they must resend it during their
> > scheduled time.
> >
> >
> > Vale,
> >
> > Annia Minucia Marcella
> >
> > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "pompeia_minucia_tiberia"
> > <pompeia_minucia_tiberia@> wrote:
> > >
> > > ---Pompeia Minucia Strabo Senatrix Consularis Diribitoribus
> > > Quiritibus Novae Romae S.P.D.
> > >
> > > I am not sure where you, the diribitores, feel you have the power
> to
> > > arrogate yourself above the laws of comitia.
> > >
> > > Here is what the Lex Fabia de ratione comitium centuriatorum says:
> > >
> > >
> > > **Once cast, no vote may be altered, even with the correct voter
> > > identification code. Should multiple votes be registered with the
> > > same voter identification code, only the first one recorded shall
> be
> > > used when tallying the vote**
> > >
> > > You may issue an edict, but it has to be lawful. And, with it you
> > > have no imperium to compel the actions of others.
> > >
> > > The most you can do is issue an edict stating that you will not
> tally
> > > votes which are invalid (and recast votes are invalid by law) or
> you
> > > won't tally votes if the election procedure has proven to be
> legally
> > > faulty, until procedural matters are resolved.
> > >
> > > If the imperium-bearing presiding magistrate of this affair wants
> > > to 'alter the law' before it is changed by due process, then he
> > > should be doing it himself, after discussion with the Tribunes to
> > > insure that such a move won't be vetoed.
> > >
> > > With the contradictory directions on the ballots, an absence of
> the
> > > spot for a 'no' vote (cited in the instructions at the top of the
> > > ballot) no formal announcement regarding how abstentions will be
> > > treated, to remove citizen doubts that visits to the cista would
> in
> > > fact be counted, the voter confidence in the elections
> transpiring in
> > > the Comitia Centuriata and Comitia Populi Tributa are is rapidly
> > > waning.
> > >
> > > Myself and others have asked for them to be restarted, but I know
> > > this isn't likely going to happen, but I will nonetheless voice
> my
> > > formal concerns.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, M Martiánius Lupus <mmlupus@>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Salvete omnes,
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Due to the very high number of invalid votes in the Comitia
> > > Centuriata the
> > > > Diribitores announce:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > "We, the Diribitores Novae Romae, would like to remind the
> citizens
> > > of the
> > > > sequential voting procedure of the Comitia Centuriata.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > This means that from 7am Nov 15 to 7am Nov 17 only citizens
> from
> > > Centuria VI
> > > > can vote.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > From 7am Nov 17 to 7am Nov 20 only citizens from Centuriae I to
> XIV
> > > can
> > > > vote.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > From 7am Nov 20 to 17pm Nov 24 all citizens can vote.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > All times listed are Rome time (CET).
> > > >
> > > > [Note: times listed for the cista are based on the time in Rome
> > > (GMT +1),
> > > > not your local time.]
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Any votes cast at the wrong time will not be counted!
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > If you may have already mistakenly voted at the wrong time,
> please
> > > cast a
> > > > new vote during the proper time for it to be counted.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > To see more instructions please see:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > http://www.novaroma.org/nr/Election_MMDCCLXI_%28Nova_Roma%
> > > 29#Comitia_Centuri
> > > > ata
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > and
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > http://www.novaroma.org/nr/Election_MMDCCLXI_%28Nova_Roma%
> > > 29#Comitia_Centuri
> > > > ata_2
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Di vos incolumes custodiant"
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

P. Memmius Albucius omnibus s.d.

Maybe that Scholastica has many defaults that others than me will
have faced. I know that some of us have tense relations with her, as
we may have, each of us, with other cives.

For the ones of us who involve a lot in NR daily working and do
believe in our republic, the probabilities of such tensions are
higher, because the more we talk and work each other, the more we may
face such tensions, and specially when we have strong convictions in
what should be our republic. :-)

As far as I am concerned, Hon. A. Tullia Scholastica has always
behave like the utmost reasonable civis, along as a person of a real
good will and a true culture.

Before that more regretable words be told, I would just like to
confirm that I have lived this episode evoked by Praetoriana Tullia,
being at this time, with current Consul T. Iulius Sabinus and others,
scribe in the Praetorian team.

The blockage has touched the wiki edition of a few Tabularium pages,
then in construction under the authority of Tullia, from August 26 to
31, 2760/2007.

It has consisted in withdrawing the possibility, except for cives
authorized by the Magister aranearius, to modify the concerned pages.

This withdrawal have hit all the members of Pr. Tullia cohors,
including the Praetor herself, except the then 'wikimagister' Iulius.

Every one can read the messages sent then, here in this Forum,
specially my letters nb 51387 and 51412, and wise Iulius Sabinus nb
51434 message, trying to draw positive consequences of the odd
situation we had lived.

In parallel, Praetor Tullia happened to loose during these weeks,
according what she informed us herself at this time, her wiki code,
but on another fully different matter, which has no relation with the
blockage above mentioned.


Valete sincerely omnes,


P. Memmius Albucius
cand. praetor



--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Titus Flavius Aquila
<titus.aquila@...> wrote:

>
> Salvete,
>
> don't we have any other problems than to address and elaborate this

issue here on the ML ? Please if you wish to carry on with this
discussion

> do it somewhere else.
>
> Personally I do not like these recriminations at all. Please find

another place to discuss it.

>
> Optime valete
> Titus Flavius Aquila
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> Von: David Kling (Modianus) <tau.athanasios@...>
> An: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> Gesendet: Dienstag, den 18. November 2008, 11:56:38 Uhr
> Betreff: Re: [Nova-Roma] Scholastica should apologize
>
>
> Caeso Fabius Buteo Modianus A. Tulliae Scholasticae salutem dicit
>
> It is a lie and you continue to spread lies when you claim you and

your cohors were blocked.  Your teacher/student rant also has
nothing to do with the topic at hand, trying to divert attention from
your lie may be quaint but irrelevant.

>
> Modianus 
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 3:28 AM, A. Tullia Scholastica

<fororom@localnet. com> wrote:

>
>
>
>     ATS:  It is no lie that my cohors was blocked.  Yes, I

lost my password, which I rarely use as I needed it only to read
certain pages; I avoid doing anything more than reading parts of the
wiki.  I leave anything more advanced to others.  Your view that my
comments are lies is a matter of perception, and an incorrect one at
that.  

>
>     There are many citizens here who give a lot of time to one

or another aspect of NR or its affiliated educational arm, the
Academia Thules.  I'm sure Agricola has contributed a lot of time,
and that we are grateful.  Some are grateful to their teachers, too,
while others cheat in class, or insult those who have spent thousands
of hours creating and teaching courses.  Fortunately the latter are
few and far between; the overwhelming majority of our students is
well behaved, and several have expressed their gratitude to me
personally.  

>
>     Someone must really be terrified that I might be re-elected

to this lowly post; the hate-Scholastica team has been mobilized in
force.  Even a diribitor guilty of cheating in my class has not been
removed or even restricted from dealing with the rogatorial election
results.  Sounds fishy to me.

>

---That's a very good question.

When you get the initial vote as Diribitor/ Custos, you record the
voter code, then the Tribe or Century, as is the case, and tally what
the voter has voted for, or not voted for.

The next vote,you record the voter code, repeating as above. As
you receive votes, the first thing you check is whether or not that
voter code has been used...if it has, the second vote doesn't count
as a valid vote.

Vale
Po


In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Annia Minucia Marcella" <annia@...>
wrote:

>
> Salve,
>
> What exactly prevents them from recasting their vote so it's

counted?

>
>
> Vale,
>
> Annia Minucia Marcella
>
>
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "pompeia_minucia_tiberia"
> <pompeia_minucia_tiberia@> wrote:
> >
> > --- Minucia Minuciae sal.
> >
> >
> > Unfortunately Minucia, given that a voter has initially sent in

the

> > vote, their vote is void already....it cannot legally be recast.

It's

> > not a matter of 'cast away' and eventually you'll enter a valid

vote.

> >
> > That is why we are getting rid of the sequential system, but we

are

> > not rid of it yet, so we should abide by the laws which support

it in

> > the meantime.
> >
> > I somehow don't imagine 'we' will, but 'we' should.
> >
> > Vale
> >
> >
> > In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Annia Minucia Marcella" <annia@>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Salve,
> > >
> > > I'm going to have to disagree with you there. If someone

mistakenly

> > > voted at the wrong time, their vote is null. This is the
> > instructions
> > > I read and understood before the vote even started. Perhaps if
> > people
> > > took the time to read the instructions and schedule they

could've

> > made
> > > sure they voted during their appropriate time.
> > >
> > >
> > > If they want their vote to count they must resend it during

their

> > > scheduled time.
> > >
> > >
> > > Vale,
> > >
> > > Annia Minucia Marcella
> > >
> > > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "pompeia_minucia_tiberia"
> > > <pompeia_minucia_tiberia@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > ---Pompeia Minucia Strabo Senatrix Consularis Diribitoribus
> > > > Quiritibus Novae Romae S.P.D.
> > > >
> > > > I am not sure where you, the diribitores, feel you have the

power

> > to
> > > > arrogate yourself above the laws of comitia.
> > > >
> > > > Here is what the Lex Fabia de ratione comitium centuriatorum

says:

> > > >
> > > >
> > > > **Once cast, no vote may be altered, even with the correct

voter

> > > > identification code. Should multiple votes be registered with

the

> > > > same voter identification code, only the first one recorded

shall

> > be
> > > > used when tallying the vote**
> > > >
> > > > You may issue an edict, but it has to be lawful. And, with it

you

> > > > have no imperium to compel the actions of others.
> > > >
> > > > The most you can do is issue an edict stating that you will

not

> > tally
> > > > votes which are invalid (and recast votes are invalid by law)

or

> > you
> > > > won't tally votes if the election procedure has proven to be
> > legally
> > > > faulty, until procedural matters are resolved.
> > > >
> > > > If the imperium-bearing presiding magistrate of this affair

wants

> > > > to 'alter the law' before it is changed by due process, then

he

> > > > should be doing it himself, after discussion with the

Tribunes to

> > > > insure that such a move won't be vetoed.
> > > >
> > > > With the contradictory directions on the ballots, an absence

of

> > the
> > > > spot for a 'no' vote (cited in the instructions at the top of

the

> > > > ballot) no formal announcement regarding how abstentions will

be

> > > > treated, to remove citizen doubts that visits to the cista

would

> > in
> > > > fact be counted, the voter confidence in the elections
> > transpiring in
> > > > the Comitia Centuriata and Comitia Populi Tributa are is

rapidly

> > > > waning.
> > > >
> > > > Myself and others have asked for them to be restarted, but I

know

> > > > this isn't likely going to happen, but I will nonetheless

voice

> > my
> > > > formal concerns.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, M Martiánius Lupus <mmlupus@>
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Salvete omnes,
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Due to the very high number of invalid votes in the Comitia
> > > > Centuriata the
> > > > > Diribitores announce:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > "We, the Diribitores Novae Romae, would like to remind the
> > citizens
> > > > of the
> > > > > sequential voting procedure of the Comitia Centuriata.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > This means that from 7am Nov 15 to 7am Nov 17 only citizens
> > from
> > > > Centuria VI
> > > > > can vote.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > From 7am Nov 17 to 7am Nov 20 only citizens from Centuriae

I to

> > XIV
> > > > can
> > > > > vote.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > From 7am Nov 20 to 17pm Nov 24 all citizens can vote.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > All times listed are Rome time (CET).
> > > > >
> > > > > [Note: times listed for the cista are based on the time in

Rome

> > > > (GMT +1),
> > > > > not your local time.]
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Any votes cast at the wrong time will not be counted!
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > If you may have already mistakenly voted at the wrong time,
> > please
> > > > cast a
> > > > > new vote during the proper time for it to be counted.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > To see more instructions please see:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > http://www.novaroma.org/nr/Election_MMDCCLXI_%28Nova_Roma%
> > > > 29#Comitia_Centuri
> > > > > ata
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > and
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > http://www.novaroma.org/nr/Election_MMDCCLXI_%28Nova_Roma%
> > > > 29#Comitia_Centuri
> > > > > ata_2
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Di vos incolumes custodiant"
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Salve.

The law: Lex Fabia de ratione comitiorum centuriatorum Section 4.C.

"Should multiple votes be registered with the same voter identification
code, only the first one recorded shall be used when tallying the vote."

Vale bene
Caesar


From: Annia Minucia Marcella
Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 7:30 AM
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: A Message from the Diribitores Novae Romae


Salve,

What exactly prevents them from recasting their vote so it's counted?

Vale,

Annia Minucia Marcella

It doesn't prevent them recasting it to be accurate, just that if the
law is followed, the subsequent casting(s) won't be counted.

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Gnaeus Iulius Caesar"
<gn_iulius_caesar@...> wrote:

>
> Salve.
>
> The law: Lex Fabia de ratione comitiorum centuriatorum Section 4.C.
>
> "Should multiple votes be registered with the same voter

identification

> code, only the first one recorded shall be used when tallying the

vote."

>
> Vale bene
> Caesar
>
>
> From: Annia Minucia Marcella
> Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 7:30 AM
> To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: A Message from the Diribitores Novae Romae
>
>
> Salve,
>
> What exactly prevents them from recasting their vote so it's

counted?

>
> Vale,
>
> Annia Minucia Marcella
>

Salve,

But since the first vote doesn't count, why would they record the
voter vode and prevent it from being used again? Especially after they
just said that you'll have to recast your vote.


Vale,

Annia Minucia Marcella


--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "pompeia_minucia_tiberia"
<pompeia_minucia_tiberia@...> wrote:

>
> ---That's a very good question.
>
> When you get the initial vote as Diribitor/ Custos, you record the
> voter code, then the Tribe or Century, as is the case, and tally what
> the voter has voted for, or not voted for.
>
> The next vote,you record the voter code, repeating as above. As
> you receive votes, the first thing you check is whether or not that
> voter code has been used...if it has, the second vote doesn't count
> as a valid vote.
>
> Vale
> Po
>
>
> In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Annia Minucia Marcella" <annia@>
> wrote:
> >
> > Salve,
> >
> > What exactly prevents them from recasting their vote so it's
> counted?
> >
> >
> > Vale,
> >
> > Annia Minucia Marcella
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "pompeia_minucia_tiberia"
> > <pompeia_minucia_tiberia@> wrote:
> > >
> > > --- Minucia Minuciae sal.
> > >
> > >
> > > Unfortunately Minucia, given that a voter has initially sent in
> the
> > > vote, their vote is void already....it cannot legally be recast.
> It's
> > > not a matter of 'cast away' and eventually you'll enter a valid
> vote.
> > >
> > > That is why we are getting rid of the sequential system, but we
> are
> > > not rid of it yet, so we should abide by the laws which support
> it in
> > > the meantime.
> > >
> > > I somehow don't imagine 'we' will, but 'we' should.
> > >
> > > Vale
> > >
> > >
> > > In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Annia Minucia Marcella" <annia@>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Salve,
> > > >
> > > > I'm going to have to disagree with you there. If someone
> mistakenly
> > > > voted at the wrong time, their vote is null. This is the
> > > instructions
> > > > I read and understood before the vote even started. Perhaps if
> > > people
> > > > took the time to read the instructions and schedule they
> could've
> > > made
> > > > sure they voted during their appropriate time.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > If they want their vote to count they must resend it during
> their
> > > > scheduled time.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Vale,
> > > >
> > > > Annia Minucia Marcella
> > > >
> > > > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "pompeia_minucia_tiberia"
> > > > <pompeia_minucia_tiberia@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > ---Pompeia Minucia Strabo Senatrix Consularis Diribitoribus
> > > > > Quiritibus Novae Romae S.P.D.
> > > > >
> > > > > I am not sure where you, the diribitores, feel you have the
> power
> > > to
> > > > > arrogate yourself above the laws of comitia.
> > > > >
> > > > > Here is what the Lex Fabia de ratione comitium centuriatorum
> says:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > **Once cast, no vote may be altered, even with the correct
> voter
> > > > > identification code. Should multiple votes be registered with
> the
> > > > > same voter identification code, only the first one recorded
> shall
> > > be
> > > > > used when tallying the vote**
> > > > >
> > > > > You may issue an edict, but it has to be lawful. And, with it
> you
> > > > > have no imperium to compel the actions of others.
> > > > >
> > > > > The most you can do is issue an edict stating that you will
> not
> > > tally
> > > > > votes which are invalid (and recast votes are invalid by law)
> or
> > > you
> > > > > won't tally votes if the election procedure has proven to be
> > > legally
> > > > > faulty, until procedural matters are resolved.
> > > > >
> > > > > If the imperium-bearing presiding magistrate of this affair
> wants
> > > > > to 'alter the law' before it is changed by due process, then
> he
> > > > > should be doing it himself, after discussion with the
> Tribunes to
> > > > > insure that such a move won't be vetoed.
> > > > >
> > > > > With the contradictory directions on the ballots, an absence
> of
> > > the
> > > > > spot for a 'no' vote (cited in the instructions at the top of
> the
> > > > > ballot) no formal announcement regarding how abstentions will
> be
> > > > > treated, to remove citizen doubts that visits to the cista
> would
> > > in
> > > > > fact be counted, the voter confidence in the elections
> > > transpiring in
> > > > > the Comitia Centuriata and Comitia Populi Tributa are is
> rapidly
> > > > > waning.
> > > > >
> > > > > Myself and others have asked for them to be restarted, but I
> know
> > > > > this isn't likely going to happen, but I will nonetheless
> voice
> > > my
> > > > > formal concerns.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, M Martiánius Lupus <mmlupus@>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Salvete omnes,
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Due to the very high number of invalid votes in the Comitia
> > > > > Centuriata the
> > > > > > Diribitores announce:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "We, the Diribitores Novae Romae, would like to remind the
> > > citizens
> > > > > of the
> > > > > > sequential voting procedure of the Comitia Centuriata.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This means that from 7am Nov 15 to 7am Nov 17 only citizens
> > > from
> > > > > Centuria VI
> > > > > > can vote.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > From 7am Nov 17 to 7am Nov 20 only citizens from Centuriae
> I to
> > > XIV
> > > > > can
> > > > > > vote.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > From 7am Nov 20 to 17pm Nov 24 all citizens can vote.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > All times listed are Rome time (CET).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [Note: times listed for the cista are based on the time in
> Rome
> > > > > (GMT +1),
> > > > > > not your local time.]
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Any votes cast at the wrong time will not be counted!
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If you may have already mistakenly voted at the wrong time,
> > > please
> > > > > cast a
> > > > > > new vote during the proper time for it to be counted.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > To see more instructions please see:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > http://www.novaroma.org/nr/Election_MMDCCLXI_%28Nova_Roma%
> > > > > 29#Comitia_Centuri
> > > > > > ata
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > and
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > http://www.novaroma.org/nr/Election_MMDCCLXI_%28Nova_Roma%
> > > > > 29#Comitia_Centuri
> > > > > > ata_2
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Di vos incolumes custodiant"
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Salve,

so the first one recorded wouldn't be the invalid one would it?

Vale,

Annia Minuca Marcella


--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Gnaeus Iulius Caesar"
<gn_iulius_caesar@...> wrote:

>
> Salve.
>
> The law: Lex Fabia de ratione comitiorum centuriatorum Section 4.C.
>
> "Should multiple votes be registered with the same voter identification
> code, only the first one recorded shall be used when tallying the vote."
>
> Vale bene
> Caesar
>
>
> From: Annia Minucia Marcella
> Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 7:30 AM
> To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: A Message from the Diribitores Novae Romae
>
>
> Salve,
>
> What exactly prevents them from recasting their vote so it's counted?
>
> Vale,
>
> Annia Minucia Marcella
>

---Salve: But who said the first vote doesn't count? By the Lex
Fabia that is the *only* vote that counts...subsequent attempts to
use the same voter code are to be discarded.

Short and sweet, the Diribitores are not following the law and have
arrogated themselves to accepting a recast of votes.

Vale
Po




In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Annia Minucia Marcella" <annia@...>
wrote:

>
> Salve,
>
> But since the first vote doesn't count, why would they record the
> voter vode and prevent it from being used again? Especially after

they

> just said that you'll have to recast your vote.
>
>
> Vale,
>
> Annia Minucia Marcella
>
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "pompeia_minucia_tiberia"
> <pompeia_minucia_tiberia@> wrote:
> >
> > ---That's a very good question.
> >
> > When you get the initial vote as Diribitor/ Custos, you record

the

> > voter code, then the Tribe or Century, as is the case, and tally

what

> > the voter has voted for, or not voted for.
> >
> > The next vote,you record the voter code, repeating as above.

As

> > you receive votes, the first thing you check is whether or not

that

> > voter code has been used...if it has, the second vote doesn't

count

> > as a valid vote.
> >
> > Vale
> > Po
> >
> >
> > In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Annia Minucia Marcella" <annia@>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Salve,
> > >
> > > What exactly prevents them from recasting their vote so it's
> > counted?
> > >
> > >
> > > Vale,
> > >
> > > Annia Minucia Marcella
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "pompeia_minucia_tiberia"
> > > <pompeia_minucia_tiberia@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- Minucia Minuciae sal.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Unfortunately Minucia, given that a voter has initially sent

in

> > the
> > > > vote, their vote is void already....it cannot legally be

recast.

> > It's
> > > > not a matter of 'cast away' and eventually you'll enter a

valid

> > vote.
> > > >
> > > > That is why we are getting rid of the sequential system, but

we

> > are
> > > > not rid of it yet, so we should abide by the laws which

support

> > it in
> > > > the meantime.
> > > >
> > > > I somehow don't imagine 'we' will, but 'we' should.
> > > >
> > > > Vale
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Annia Minucia Marcella"

<annia@>

> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Salve,
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm going to have to disagree with you there. If someone
> > mistakenly
> > > > > voted at the wrong time, their vote is null. This is the
> > > > instructions
> > > > > I read and understood before the vote even started. Perhaps

if

> > > > people
> > > > > took the time to read the instructions and schedule they
> > could've
> > > > made
> > > > > sure they voted during their appropriate time.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > If they want their vote to count they must resend it during
> > their
> > > > > scheduled time.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Vale,
> > > > >
> > > > > Annia Minucia Marcella
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "pompeia_minucia_tiberia"
> > > > > <pompeia_minucia_tiberia@> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ---Pompeia Minucia Strabo Senatrix Consularis

Diribitoribus

> > > > > > Quiritibus Novae Romae S.P.D.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I am not sure where you, the diribitores, feel you have

the

> > power
> > > > to
> > > > > > arrogate yourself above the laws of comitia.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Here is what the Lex Fabia de ratione comitium

centuriatorum

> > says:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > **Once cast, no vote may be altered, even with the

correct

> > voter
> > > > > > identification code. Should multiple votes be registered

with

> > the
> > > > > > same voter identification code, only the first one

recorded

> > shall
> > > > be
> > > > > > used when tallying the vote**
> > > > > >
> > > > > > You may issue an edict, but it has to be lawful. And,

with it

> > you
> > > > > > have no imperium to compel the actions of others.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The most you can do is issue an edict stating that you

will

> > not
> > > > tally
> > > > > > votes which are invalid (and recast votes are invalid by

law)

> > or
> > > > you
> > > > > > won't tally votes if the election procedure has proven to

be

> > > > legally
> > > > > > faulty, until procedural matters are resolved.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If the imperium-bearing presiding magistrate of this

affair

> > wants
> > > > > > to 'alter the law' before it is changed by due process,

then

> > he
> > > > > > should be doing it himself, after discussion with the
> > Tribunes to
> > > > > > insure that such a move won't be vetoed.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > With the contradictory directions on the ballots, an

absence

> > of
> > > > the
> > > > > > spot for a 'no' vote (cited in the instructions at the

top of

> > the
> > > > > > ballot) no formal announcement regarding how abstentions

will

> > be
> > > > > > treated, to remove citizen doubts that visits to the

cista

> > would
> > > > in
> > > > > > fact be counted, the voter confidence in the elections
> > > > transpiring in
> > > > > > the Comitia Centuriata and Comitia Populi Tributa are is
> > rapidly
> > > > > > waning.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Myself and others have asked for them to be restarted,

but I

> > know
> > > > > > this isn't likely going to happen, but I will nonetheless
> > voice
> > > > my
> > > > > > formal concerns.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, M Martiánius Lupus

<mmlupus@>

> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Salvete omnes,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Due to the very high number of invalid votes in the

Comitia

> > > > > > Centuriata the
> > > > > > > Diribitores announce:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > "We, the Diribitores Novae Romae, would like to remind

the

> > > > citizens
> > > > > > of the
> > > > > > > sequential voting procedure of the Comitia Centuriata.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > This means that from 7am Nov 15 to 7am Nov 17 only

citizens

> > > > from
> > > > > > Centuria VI
> > > > > > > can vote.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > From 7am Nov 17 to 7am Nov 20 only citizens from

Centuriae

> > I to
> > > > XIV
> > > > > > can
> > > > > > > vote.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > From 7am Nov 20 to 17pm Nov 24 all citizens can vote.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > All times listed are Rome time (CET).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > [Note: times listed for the cista are based on the time

in

> > Rome
> > > > > > (GMT +1),
> > > > > > > not your local time.]
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Any votes cast at the wrong time will not be counted!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > If you may have already mistakenly voted at the wrong

time,

> > > > please
> > > > > > cast a
> > > > > > > new vote during the proper time for it to be counted.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > To see more instructions please see:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > http://www.novaroma.org/nr/Election_MMDCCLXI_%

28Nova_Roma%

> > > > > > 29#Comitia_Centuri
> > > > > > > ata
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > and
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > http://www.novaroma.org/nr/Election_MMDCCLXI_%

28Nova_Roma%

> > > > > > 29#Comitia_Centuri
> > > > > > > ata_2
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Di vos incolumes custodiant"
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

---Salve Minucia:

I'm sorry...I believe I misunderstood you in the last post.

You are correct...the first vote cast is not invalid.

Vale (cleaning glasses)

Pompeia




In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Annia Minucia Marcella" <annia@...>
wrote:

>
> Salve,
>
> so the first one recorded wouldn't be the invalid one would it?
>
> Vale,
>
> Annia Minuca Marcella
>
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Gnaeus Iulius Caesar"
> <gn_iulius_caesar@> wrote:
> >
> > Salve.
> >
> > The law: Lex Fabia de ratione comitiorum centuriatorum Section

4.C.

> >
> > "Should multiple votes be registered with the same voter

identification

> > code, only the first one recorded shall be used when tallying the

vote."

> >
> > Vale bene
> > Caesar
> >
> >
> > From: Annia Minucia Marcella
> > Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 7:30 AM
> > To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: A Message from the Diribitores Novae

Romae

> >
> >
> > Salve,
> >
> > What exactly prevents them from recasting their vote so it's

counted?

> >
> > Vale,
> >
> > Annia Minucia Marcella
> >
>

Salve,

Then why are there scheduled voting times if the votes can be made and
counted at any time?


Vale,

Annia Minucia Marcella


--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "pompeia_minucia_tiberia"
<pompeia_minucia_tiberia@...> wrote:

>
> ---Salve: But who said the first vote doesn't count? By the Lex
> Fabia that is the *only* vote that counts...subsequent attempts to
> use the same voter code are to be discarded.
>
> Short and sweet, the Diribitores are not following the law and have
> arrogated themselves to accepting a recast of votes.
>
> Vale
> Po
>
>
>
>
> In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Annia Minucia Marcella" <annia@>
> wrote:
> >
> > Salve,
> >
> > But since the first vote doesn't count, why would they record the
> > voter vode and prevent it from being used again? Especially after
> they
> > just said that you'll have to recast your vote.
> >
> >
> > Vale,
> >
> > Annia Minucia Marcella
> >
> >
> > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "pompeia_minucia_tiberia"
> > <pompeia_minucia_tiberia@> wrote:
> > >
> > > ---That's a very good question.
> > >
> > > When you get the initial vote as Diribitor/ Custos, you record
> the
> > > voter code, then the Tribe or Century, as is the case, and tally
> what
> > > the voter has voted for, or not voted for.
> > >
> > > The next vote,you record the voter code, repeating as above.
> As
> > > you receive votes, the first thing you check is whether or not
> that
> > > voter code has been used...if it has, the second vote doesn't
> count
> > > as a valid vote.
> > >
> > > Vale
> > > Po
> > >
> > >
> > > In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Annia Minucia Marcella" <annia@>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Salve,
> > > >
> > > > What exactly prevents them from recasting their vote so it's
> > > counted?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Vale,
> > > >
> > > > Annia Minucia Marcella
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "pompeia_minucia_tiberia"
> > > > <pompeia_minucia_tiberia@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > --- Minucia Minuciae sal.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Unfortunately Minucia, given that a voter has initially sent
> in
> > > the
> > > > > vote, their vote is void already....it cannot legally be
> recast.
> > > It's
> > > > > not a matter of 'cast away' and eventually you'll enter a
> valid
> > > vote.
> > > > >
> > > > > That is why we are getting rid of the sequential system, but
> we
> > > are
> > > > > not rid of it yet, so we should abide by the laws which
> support
> > > it in
> > > > > the meantime.
> > > > >
> > > > > I somehow don't imagine 'we' will, but 'we' should.
> > > > >
> > > > > Vale
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Annia Minucia Marcella"
> <annia@>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Salve,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'm going to have to disagree with you there. If someone
> > > mistakenly
> > > > > > voted at the wrong time, their vote is null. This is the
> > > > > instructions
> > > > > > I read and understood before the vote even started. Perhaps
> if
> > > > > people
> > > > > > took the time to read the instructions and schedule they
> > > could've
> > > > > made
> > > > > > sure they voted during their appropriate time.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If they want their vote to count they must resend it during
> > > their
> > > > > > scheduled time.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Vale,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Annia Minucia Marcella
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "pompeia_minucia_tiberia"
> > > > > > <pompeia_minucia_tiberia@> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ---Pompeia Minucia Strabo Senatrix Consularis
> Diribitoribus
> > > > > > > Quiritibus Novae Romae S.P.D.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I am not sure where you, the diribitores, feel you have
> the
> > > power
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > arrogate yourself above the laws of comitia.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Here is what the Lex Fabia de ratione comitium
> centuriatorum
> > > says:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > **Once cast, no vote may be altered, even with the
> correct
> > > voter
> > > > > > > identification code. Should multiple votes be registered
> with
> > > the
> > > > > > > same voter identification code, only the first one
> recorded
> > > shall
> > > > > be
> > > > > > > used when tallying the vote**
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > You may issue an edict, but it has to be lawful. And,
> with it
> > > you
> > > > > > > have no imperium to compel the actions of others.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The most you can do is issue an edict stating that you
> will
> > > not
> > > > > tally
> > > > > > > votes which are invalid (and recast votes are invalid by
> law)
> > > or
> > > > > you
> > > > > > > won't tally votes if the election procedure has proven to
> be
> > > > > legally
> > > > > > > faulty, until procedural matters are resolved.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > If the imperium-bearing presiding magistrate of this
> affair
> > > wants
> > > > > > > to 'alter the law' before it is changed by due process,
> then
> > > he
> > > > > > > should be doing it himself, after discussion with the
> > > Tribunes to
> > > > > > > insure that such a move won't be vetoed.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > With the contradictory directions on the ballots, an
> absence
> > > of
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > spot for a 'no' vote (cited in the instructions at the
> top of
> > > the
> > > > > > > ballot) no formal announcement regarding how abstentions
> will
> > > be
> > > > > > > treated, to remove citizen doubts that visits to the
> cista
> > > would
> > > > > in
> > > > > > > fact be counted, the voter confidence in the elections
> > > > > transpiring in
> > > > > > > the Comitia Centuriata and Comitia Populi Tributa are is
> > > rapidly
> > > > > > > waning.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Myself and others have asked for them to be restarted,
> but I
> > > know
> > > > > > > this isn't likely going to happen, but I will nonetheless
> > > voice
> > > > > my
> > > > > > > formal concerns.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, M Martiánius Lupus
> <mmlupus@>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Salvete omnes,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Due to the very high number of invalid votes in the
> Comitia
> > > > > > > Centuriata the
> > > > > > > > Diribitores announce:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > "We, the Diribitores Novae Romae, would like to remind
> the
> > > > > citizens
> > > > > > > of the
> > > > > > > > sequential voting procedure of the Comitia Centuriata.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > This means that from 7am Nov 15 to 7am Nov 17 only
> citizens
> > > > > from
> > > > > > > Centuria VI
> > > > > > > > can vote.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > From 7am Nov 17 to 7am Nov 20 only citizens from
> Centuriae
> > > I to
> > > > > XIV
> > > > > > > can
> > > > > > > > vote.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > From 7am Nov 20 to 17pm Nov 24 all citizens can vote.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > All times listed are Rome time (CET).
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > [Note: times listed for the cista are based on the time
> in
> > > Rome
> > > > > > > (GMT +1),
> > > > > > > > not your local time.]
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Any votes cast at the wrong time will not be counted!
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > If you may have already mistakenly voted at the wrong
> time,
> > > > > please
> > > > > > > cast a
> > > > > > > > new vote during the proper time for it to be counted.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > To see more instructions please see:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > http://www.novaroma.org/nr/Election_MMDCCLXI_%
> 28Nova_Roma%
> > > > > > > 29#Comitia_Centuri
> > > > > > > > ata
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > http://www.novaroma.org/nr/Election_MMDCCLXI_%
> 28Nova_Roma%
> > > > > > > 29#Comitia_Centuri
> > > > > > > > ata_2
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Di vos incolumes custodiant"
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

---Salve:

In an effort to replicate the ancient ways.

They voted sequentially, beginning with the Century Praerogavita,
First Class, Second class, etc.

It guess setting something up where a citizen's vote would be
electronically refused if they voted out of sequence is doable, but
would like entail mucho complicated computer programming.

I'm all for getting rid of it altogether, in favour of just counting
the votes sequentially.

But it's still law until we vote it away.

Vale
Pompeia


In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Annia Minucia Marcella" <annia@...>
wrote:

>
> Salve,
>
> Then why are there scheduled voting times if the votes can be made

and

> counted at any time?
>
>
> Vale,
>
> Annia Minucia Marcella
>
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "pompeia_minucia_tiberia"
> <pompeia_minucia_tiberia@> wrote:
> >
> > ---Salve: But who said the first vote doesn't count? By the Lex
> > Fabia that is the *only* vote that counts...subsequent attempts

to

> > use the same voter code are to be discarded.
> >
> > Short and sweet, the Diribitores are not following the law and

have

> > arrogated themselves to accepting a recast of votes.
> >
> > Vale
> > Po
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Annia Minucia Marcella" <annia@>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Salve,
> > >
> > > But since the first vote doesn't count, why would they record

the

> > > voter vode and prevent it from being used again? Especially

after

> > they
> > > just said that you'll have to recast your vote.
> > >
> > >
> > > Vale,
> > >
> > > Annia Minucia Marcella
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "pompeia_minucia_tiberia"
> > > <pompeia_minucia_tiberia@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > ---That's a very good question.
> > > >
> > > > When you get the initial vote as Diribitor/ Custos, you

record

> > the
> > > > voter code, then the Tribe or Century, as is the case, and

tally

> > what
> > > > the voter has voted for, or not voted for.
> > > >
> > > > The next vote,you record the voter code, repeating as

above.

> > As
> > > > you receive votes, the first thing you check is whether or

not

> > that
> > > > voter code has been used...if it has, the second vote doesn't
> > count
> > > > as a valid vote.
> > > >
> > > > Vale
> > > > Po
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Annia Minucia Marcella"

<annia@>

> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Salve,
> > > > >
> > > > > What exactly prevents them from recasting their vote so

it's

> > > > counted?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Vale,
> > > > >
> > > > > Annia Minucia Marcella
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "pompeia_minucia_tiberia"
> > > > > <pompeia_minucia_tiberia@> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --- Minucia Minuciae sal.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Unfortunately Minucia, given that a voter has initially

sent

> > in
> > > > the
> > > > > > vote, their vote is void already....it cannot legally be
> > recast.
> > > > It's
> > > > > > not a matter of 'cast away' and eventually you'll enter a
> > valid
> > > > vote.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > That is why we are getting rid of the sequential system,

but

> > we
> > > > are
> > > > > > not rid of it yet, so we should abide by the laws which
> > support
> > > > it in
> > > > > > the meantime.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I somehow don't imagine 'we' will, but 'we' should.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Vale
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Annia Minucia Marcella"
> > <annia@>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Salve,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I'm going to have to disagree with you there. If

someone

> > > > mistakenly
> > > > > > > voted at the wrong time, their vote is null. This is

the

> > > > > > instructions
> > > > > > > I read and understood before the vote even started.

Perhaps

> > if
> > > > > > people
> > > > > > > took the time to read the instructions and schedule

they

> > > > could've
> > > > > > made
> > > > > > > sure they voted during their appropriate time.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > If they want their vote to count they must resend it

during

> > > > their
> > > > > > > scheduled time.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Vale,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Annia Minucia Marcella
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --- In Nova-

Roma@yahoogroups.com, "pompeia_minucia_tiberia"

> > > > > > > <pompeia_minucia_tiberia@> wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > ---Pompeia Minucia Strabo Senatrix Consularis
> > Diribitoribus
> > > > > > > > Quiritibus Novae Romae S.P.D.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I am not sure where you, the diribitores, feel you

have

> > the
> > > > power
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > arrogate yourself above the laws of comitia.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Here is what the Lex Fabia de ratione comitium
> > centuriatorum
> > > > says:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > **Once cast, no vote may be altered, even with the
> > correct
> > > > voter
> > > > > > > > identification code. Should multiple votes be

registered

> > with
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > same voter identification code, only the first one
> > recorded
> > > > shall
> > > > > > be
> > > > > > > > used when tallying the vote**
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > You may issue an edict, but it has to be lawful. And,
> > with it
> > > > you
> > > > > > > > have no imperium to compel the actions of others.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The most you can do is issue an edict stating that

you

> > will
> > > > not
> > > > > > tally
> > > > > > > > votes which are invalid (and recast votes are invalid

by

> > law)
> > > > or
> > > > > > you
> > > > > > > > won't tally votes if the election procedure has

proven to

> > be
> > > > > > legally
> > > > > > > > faulty, until procedural matters are resolved.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > If the imperium-bearing presiding magistrate of this
> > affair
> > > > wants
> > > > > > > > to 'alter the law' before it is changed by due

process,

> > then
> > > > he
> > > > > > > > should be doing it himself, after discussion with the
> > > > Tribunes to
> > > > > > > > insure that such a move won't be vetoed.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > With the contradictory directions on the ballots, an
> > absence
> > > > of
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > spot for a 'no' vote (cited in the instructions at

the

> > top of
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > ballot) no formal announcement regarding how

abstentions

> > will
> > > > be
> > > > > > > > treated, to remove citizen doubts that visits to the
> > cista
> > > > would
> > > > > > in
> > > > > > > > fact be counted, the voter confidence in the

elections

> > > > > > transpiring in
> > > > > > > > the Comitia Centuriata and Comitia Populi Tributa are

is

> > > > rapidly
> > > > > > > > waning.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Myself and others have asked for them to be

restarted,

> > but I
> > > > know
> > > > > > > > this isn't likely going to happen, but I will

nonetheless

> > > > voice
> > > > > > my
> > > > > > > > formal concerns.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, M Martiánius Lupus
> > <mmlupus@>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Salvete omnes,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Due to the very high number of invalid votes in the
> > Comitia
> > > > > > > > Centuriata the
> > > > > > > > > Diribitores announce:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > "We, the Diribitores Novae Romae, would like to

remind

> > the
> > > > > > citizens
> > > > > > > > of the
> > > > > > > > > sequential voting procedure of the Comitia

Centuriata.

> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > This means that from 7am Nov 15 to 7am Nov 17 only
> > citizens
> > > > > > from
> > > > > > > > Centuria VI
> > > > > > > > > can vote.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > From 7am Nov 17 to 7am Nov 20 only citizens from
> > Centuriae
> > > > I to
> > > > > > XIV
> > > > > > > > can
> > > > > > > > > vote.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > From 7am Nov 20 to 17pm Nov 24 all citizens can

vote.

> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > All times listed are Rome time (CET).
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > [Note: times listed for the cista are based on the

time

> > in
> > > > Rome
> > > > > > > > (GMT +1),
> > > > > > > > > not your local time.]
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Any votes cast at the wrong time will not be

counted!

> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > If you may have already mistakenly voted at the

wrong

> > time,
> > > > > > please
> > > > > > > > cast a
> > > > > > > > > new vote during the proper time for it to be

counted.

> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > To see more instructions please see:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > http://www.novaroma.org/nr/Election_MMDCCLXI_%
> > 28Nova_Roma%
> > > > > > > > 29#Comitia_Centuri
> > > > > > > > > ata
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > http://www.novaroma.org/nr/Election_MMDCCLXI_%
> > 28Nova_Roma%
> > > > > > > > 29#Comitia_Centuri
> > > > > > > > > ata_2
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Di vos incolumes custodiant"
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Salve

Correct - only the FIRST vote cast counts, according to the law.

Vale bene
Caesar


From: Annia Minucia Marcella
Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 7:47 AM
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: A Message from the Diribitores Novae Romae


Salve,

so the first one recorded wouldn't be the invalid one would it?

Vale,

Annia Minuca Marcella

Salvete omnes diribitores.

What Pompeia Minucia said. I was a rogatrix (diribitor) before the position title was changed, and the lex at that time did state that, in the case of the same voter code being used more than once, only the first vote was to be counted. According to the website, the Lex Fabia de ratione comitiorum centuriatorum is still in force.

While it would be more convenient to simply let folks vote again at their correct time, we can't unless the Lex Fabia is changed or repealed. That particular part of the Lex is in place to reduce potential voter fraud.

Paulla Corva

Cn. Caelius Ahenobarbus civibus Novae Romae s.p.d.

On the subject of sequential voting (centuria praerogativa, then first class, then others), I need to do more research. But, to be honest, it makes perfect sense to me, and it seems to fit with the idea that we are a republic and not a democracy. With modern technology, a new cista could easily be set up to only allow votes from the appropriate voters at the appropriate times. This is not really that complicated.
Because I have an interested in voting systems, procedures, and the like, I may write more about this sometime.

Optime valete!

--
Gnaeus Caelius Ahenobarbus
Aedilis Oppidi, Oppidum Fluminis Gilae, America Austroccidentalis
Accensus, cos. M. Moravius Piscinus Horatianus et T. Iulius Sabinus
http://becomingnewthroughtheold.blogspot.com

Cn. Lentulus Cn. Caelio sal.: Yes, and thank you, Ahenobarbe, for saying this. Sequential voting should be kept but FIRST we have to have a technical background to it! If we will have a website that supports the voting system, sequential voting will be a simple and easy way of voting. But, mehercle, just let's be over this nightmare we experience currently. Vale! --- Mar 18/11/08, Gnaeus Caelius Ahenobarbus <cn.caelius@...> ha scritto: Da: Gnaeus Caelius Ahenobarbus <cn.caelius@...> Oggetto: [Nova-Roma] Sequential Voting Cn. Caelius Ahenobarbus civibus Novae Romae s.p.d. On the subject of sequential voting (centuria praerogativa, then first class, then others), I need to do more research. But, to be honest, it makes perfect sense to me, and it seems to fit with the idea that we are a republic and not a democracy. With modern technology, a new cista could easily be set up to only allow votes from the appropriate voters at the appropriate times. This is not really that complicated. Because I have an interested in voting systems, procedures, and the like, I may write more about this sometime. Optime valete! -- Gnaeus Caelius Ahenobarbus Aedilis Oppidi, Oppidum Fluminis Gilae, America Austroccidentalis Accensus, cos. M. Moravius Piscinus Horatianus et T. Iulius Sabinus http://becomingnewt hroughtheold. blogspot. com

---

Scopri la community di Io fotografo e video
Il nuovo corso di Gazzetta dello sport per diventare veri fotografi!

>
> "Should multiple votes be registered with the same voter identification
> code, only the first one recorded shall be used when tallying the vote."
>

Salvete, omnes.

Yes, the case is clear - once a vote from a particular ID has been
registered, none after that will be used to tally the vote.

So, when is a vote registered? When it enters the system or when
registered as valid by a diribitor?

Valete, Titus Octavius Pius.

Q Caecilius Metellus Quiritibus salutem.

Saluete, Quirites.

It seems to me that there is a lot of explaining that should likely be done with
the whole situation on our current voting. As a member of the first team of
diribitores having to count votes under the sequential method, let me add what I
can from my experiences then.

Regarding the "arrogation" of powers not otherwise expressed. While it may have
been a bit more appropriate to have done so via edict, what M Martianus posted
is, in my personal opinion, adhering to the spirit of the law, despite some lack
of clarity in the letter of it itself. Equally, though the edict itself was
never re-issued or brought wholly into law, having noticed the potential for so
many votes to be left uncounted by error of a citizen voting early then trying
to correct oneself later, when I and my then-colleagues took office, we issued
an edict to cover and clarify the issue, which stood unopposed then, which can
be found here:
http://www.novaroma.org/tabularium/edicts/diribitor-2005-01-27.html With that,
M Martianus may be following a method used over the past few years; I'm not a
diribitor anymore, and haven't been a consultant to them since I left office,
but it wouldn't surprise me if the votes have been counted in such a way all
along. At any rate, there is some legal history with him, even if, I think,
that missive could have been better handled.

We could, though, argue all day about these things; for the moment, it's serving
us no purpose until and unless the vote is scrapped, and, for my own part, I
don't think such should happen. (I've only noted one other person in this
discussion who has had the job of counting votes; I'm sure that person and I
both sympathise with our current staff at the prospect of having to start that
all over again.)

---Salve Octavi Pi:

You raise an interesting point.

My two cents:


This clause from the lex Fabia implies to me that votes assigned to a
particular voter code are recorded at the cista.

**In consultation with the diribitores, the magister aranearius shall
make available a cista, a secure web-based form, to allow citizens to
vote directly through the official Nova Roma web site. This form
shall record the voter identification number and desired vote(s) of
the individual. The information thus collected will either be
forwarded to the diribitores as it is gathered, or at the end of the
process, at their discretion. Alternative methods of voting may be
enacted by other legislation as required. **

As to the question about *when* a vote is actually registered, ie if
the Diribitores were assumed to be doing the registering rather than
the cista, why would they trouble themselves to register multiple
votes under the same voter code, only to have to throw them out, save
the first one?

This lends to my inclination that a citizen's vote is to be
considered as born at the cista.

Vale
Pompeia








In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Kristoffer From <from@...> wrote:

>
> >
> > "Should multiple votes be registered with the same voter

identification

> > code, only the first one recorded shall be used when tallying the

vote."

> >
>
> Salvete, omnes.
>
> Yes, the case is clear - once a vote from a particular ID has been
> registered, none after that will be used to tally the vote.
>
> So, when is a vote registered? When it enters the system or when
> registered as valid by a diribitor?
>
> Valete, Titus Octavius Pius.
>

Q Caecilius Metellus Quiritibus salutem.

> It seems to me that there is a lot of explaining that should likely be done with
> the whole situation on our current voting. As a member of the first team of
> diribitores having to count votes under the sequential method, let me add what I
> can from my experiences then.

Let me correct myself. While a member of the first team of diribitores to count
under that method, that team was the second team of individuals counting under
such, the first consisting of A Apollonius Cordus, C Minucius Hadrianus, Fl
Galerius Aurelianus, and Stephanus Ullerius Venator Piperbarbus.

Pirates of the Mediterranean

M. Hortensius Rufus Ahenobarbo sal.

Thank You. This is a lovely post and was the first one to make me
smile today. It's always important to remember the bigger picture.

Vale

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Gnaeus Caelius Ahenobarbus
<cn.caelius@...> wrote:

>
> Cn. Caelius Ahenobarbus omnibus s.p.d.
>
> When I wrote earlier today, I was at a coffee house doing my

homework. I left there to come home a few minutes ago. What I saw
made our elections seem insignificant: the colors of the setting sun
reflecting off the Santa Catalina mountains on the northeast side of
Tucson. Arizona is known for its beautiful sunsets, and tonight is no
exception. The sky is completely clear of clouds. A few minutes ago,
the mountains were ablaze in shades of red and pink, light and
shadow. Now, they are just mountains again, and the sky is shaded
from pink near the horizon through a light lavender purple to a sky
blue overhead. In a few minutes, it will be dark and I will enjoy one
of the darker urban skies in the nation thanks to the fact that there
are astronomical observatories nearby. The moon will rise in a few
hours, waning. It is truly beautiful and breathtaking here.

>
> The gods, the universe, beauty--they are all still here. Step

outside and watch the next sunset. You'll see. Videbis.

>
> Di deaeque custodiant!
>
> --
> Gnaeus Caelius Ahenobarbus
> Aedilis Oppidi, Oppidum Fluminis Gilae, America Austroccidentalis
> Accensus, cos. M. Moravius Piscinus Horatianus et T. Iulius Sabinus
> http://becomingnewthroughtheold.blogspot.com
>

C. Terentius Varro Omnibus sal.   I was studying a list of Roman public virtues and found this one:   "Concordia -- 'Concord' Harmony among the Roman people, and also between Rome and other nations."  How beneficial it would be for any and all to ponder and meditate upon the depth of meaning here and then be careful to put the concept to practical use.   Oddly, I wasn't able to find the one that promotes discord and strife among Romans.  Perhaps one of the practitioners of this unnamed "virtue" could point it out to me.    Optime valete! --- On Tue, 11/18/08, Maior <rory12001@...> wrote: From: Maior <rory12001@...> Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: Scholastica should apologize: Thank you Webmasters! To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com Date: Tuesday, November 18, 2008, 7:42 AM M. Hortensia Maior A. Tulliae Scholasticae spd; You should apologize to M. Lucretius Agricola, for trying to impugn his fine reputation. As anyone can see here: Q. Valerius Callidus our hardworking webmaster was quite aggravated with Scholastica and her rude behavior. http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/Nova- Roma/message/ 51454 http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/Nova- Roma/message/ 51455 I was part of the NRwiki group in 2007 and the webmasters: Gracchus, Callidus, Agricola, Cordus were fantastic and helpful. Only one person found fault with them. M. Lucretius Agricola has only helped Nova Romans, given us a fantastic resource with the NRwiki, and devoted himself to learning and being our webmaster: night and day. Our webmasters: Agricola , Callidus and Gracchus never really get the thanks and appreciation they deserve as so much of their work is behind the scenes. I want to thank M. Lucretius Agricola, Q. Valerius Callidus, and M. Octavius Gracchus for all their hard work and devotion! Without you Nova Roma could not work. gratias vobis ago M. Hortensia Maior > > Caeso Fabius Buteo Modianus A. Tulliae Scholasticae salutem dicit > > It is a lie and you continue to spread lies when you claim you and your > cohors were blocked. Your teacher/student rant also has nothing to do with > the topic at hand, trying to divert attention from your lie may be quaint > but irrelevant. > > Modianus > > On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 3:28 AM, A. Tullia Scholastica <fororom@... > > wrote: > > > > > > > ATS: It is no lie that my cohors was blocked. Yes, I lost my > > password, which I rarely use as I needed it only to read certain pages; I > > avoid doing anything more than reading parts of the wiki. I leave anything > > more advanced to others. Your view that my comments are lies is a matter of > > perception, and an incorrect one at that. > > > > There are many citizens here who give a lot of time to one or another > > aspect of NR or its affiliated educational arm, the Academia Thules. I'm > > sure Agricola has contributed a lot of time, and that we are grateful. Some > > are grateful to their teachers, too, while others cheat in class, or insult > > those who have spent thousands of hours creating and teaching courses. > > Fortunately the latter are few and far between; the overwhelming majority > > of our students is well behaved, and several have expressed their gratitude > > to me personally. > > > > Someone must really be terrified that I might be re-elected to this > > lowly post; the hate-Scholastica team has been mobilized in force. Even a > > diribitor guilty of cheating in my class has not been removed or even > > restricted from dealing with the rogatorial election results. Sounds fishy > > to me. > > > > > > > > > > >

Q. Valerius Poplicola omnibus sal.

Since they were not allowed to cast their vote by law, the initial
votes not only should not count, but they should not even be counted.
It should be like they never existed. Only when it is their time to
vote should then that vote be counted. I think the law is more
favorable to this argument than you lose your vote over confusion.

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Gnaeus Iulius Caesar"
<gn_iulius_caesar@...> wrote:

>
> It doesn't prevent them recasting it to be accurate, just that if the
> law is followed, the subsequent casting(s) won't be counted.
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Gnaeus Iulius Caesar"
> <gn_iulius_caesar@> wrote:
> >
> > Salve.
> >
> > The law: Lex Fabia de ratione comitiorum centuriatorum Section 4.C.
> >
> > "Should multiple votes be registered with the same voter
> identification
> > code, only the first one recorded shall be used when tallying the
> vote."
> >
> > Vale bene
> > Caesar
> >
> >
> > From: Annia Minucia Marcella
> > Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 7:30 AM
> > To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: A Message from the Diribitores Novae Romae
> >
> >
> > Salve,
> >
> > What exactly prevents them from recasting their vote so it's
> counted?
> >
> > Vale,
> >
> > Annia Minucia Marcella
> >
>

Q. Valerius Poplicola

For the record, I too would like to see the elections redone with far
more clarity.

bene uale.

Salve C. Terentius Varro

Well said!!

Vale

Tiberius Galerius Paulinus

>From: Terry Wilson <twilson6356@...>
>Reply-To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
>To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Scholastica should apologize: Thank you
>Webmasters!
>Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 06:42:01 -0800 (PST)
>
>C. Terentius Varro Omnibus sal.
>�
>I was studying a list of Roman public virtues and found this one:
>�
>"Concordia -- 'Concord' Harmony among the Roman people, and also between
>Rome and other nations."� How�beneficial it would be for any and all to
>ponder and meditate upon the depth of meaning here and then be careful to
>put the concept to practical use.
>�
>Oddly, I wasn't able to�find the one that promotes discord and strife among
>Romans.� Perhaps�one of the practitioners of this unnamed "virtue"�could
>point�it�out to me.�
>�
>Optime valete!
>
>--- On Tue, 11/18/08, Maior <rory12001@...> wrote:
>
>From: Maior <rory12001@...>
>Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: Scholastica should apologize: Thank you
>Webmasters!
>To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
>Date: Tuesday, November 18, 2008, 7:42 AM
>
>
>
>
>
>
>M. Hortensia Maior A. Tulliae Scholasticae spd;
>You should apologize to M. Lucretius Agricola, for trying to
>impugn his fine reputation.
>
>
>As anyone can see here:
>Q. Valerius Callidus our hardworking webmaster was quite aggravated
>with Scholastica and her rude behavior.
>http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/Nova- Roma/message/ 51454
>http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/Nova- Roma/message/ 51455
>
>I was part of the NRwiki group in 2007 and the webmasters:
>Gracchus, Callidus, Agricola, Cordus were fantastic and helpful.
>Only one person found fault with them.
>
>M. Lucretius Agricola has only helped Nova Romans, given us a
>fantastic resource with the NRwiki, and devoted himself to learning
>and being our webmaster: night and day.
>Our webmasters: Agricola , Callidus and Gracchus never really
>get the thanks and appreciation they deserve as so much of their
>work is behind the scenes.
>
>I want to thank M. Lucretius Agricola, Q. Valerius Callidus, and
>M. Octavius Gracchus for all their hard work and devotion!
>Without you Nova Roma could not work.
>gratias vobis ago
>M. Hortensia Maior
>
>
> >
> > Caeso Fabius Buteo Modianus A. Tulliae Scholasticae salutem dicit
> >
> > It is a lie and you continue to spread lies when you claim you and
>your
> > cohors were blocked. Your teacher/student rant also has nothing
>to do with
> > the topic at hand, trying to divert attention from your lie may be
>quaint
> > but irrelevant.
> >
> > Modianus
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 3:28 AM, A. Tullia Scholastica <fororom@...
> > > wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > ATS: It is no lie that my cohors was blocked. Yes, I lost
>my
> > > password, which I rarely use as I needed it only to read certain
>pages; I
> > > avoid doing anything more than reading parts of the wiki. I
>leave anything
> > > more advanced to others. Your view that my comments are lies is
>a matter of
> > > perception, and an incorrect one at that.
> > >
> > > There are many citizens here who give a lot of time to one
>or another
> > > aspect of NR or its affiliated educational arm, the Academia
>Thules. I'm
> > > sure Agricola has contributed a lot of time, and that we are
>grateful. Some
> > > are grateful to their teachers, too, while others cheat in
>class, or insult
> > > those who have spent thousands of hours creating and teaching
>courses.
> > > Fortunately the latter are few and far between; the
>overwhelming majority
> > > of our students is well behaved, and several have expressed
>their gratitude
> > > to me personally.
> > >
> > > Someone must really be terrified that I might be re-elected
>to this
> > > lowly post; the hate-Scholastica team has been mobilized in
>force. Even a
> > > diribitor guilty of cheating in my class has not been removed or
>even
> > > restricted from dealing with the rogatorial election results.
>Sounds fishy
> > > to me.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Slave L. Amelia,

Where I grew up in Halifax Nova Scotia pirates were hung at the
harbour entrance for a few years in a cage like scarecrows. A skull
of one of them along with his biography can be seen in the Citadel
Museum there. Details:


http://thechronicleherald.ca/NovaScotian/1088067.html

These Somali pirates are acting with impunity and I'd agree Roman
methods are in order.

Vale bene,

Quintus Suetonius Paulinus

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Lyn Dowling" <ldowling@...> wrote:
>
> Salvete, omnes,
>
> Is anyone else following the ongoing saga of the Somali pirates and
their
> catch(es)-of-the-week, and are you slightly amused/amazed that
modern states
> do not know what to do about small gangs of organized pirates?
>
> Gnaeus Pompeius Magnus knew what to do about pirates. Gaius Julius
Caesar
> knew what to do about pirates. Modern states don't know what to do
about
> pirates?
>
> O tempora . . .
>
> Valete,
> L.Aemilia
> (temporary resident of Mogadishu, 1993-94)
>

Salve et salvete,

It just makes me wonder, how the original senate would act at times, when debating hot topics we have seen displayed on the ML, as we have lately.I may be wrong,and often times am, but If I remember correctly from some things I have resd, it could get quite tumultuous at times.Yet, things always seemed to work themselves out.I suppose Republicanism without debate can become despotism.

Vale et valete,
For The Gods!
Ap.Galerius Aurelianus

--- On Tue, 11/18/08, Stephen Gallagher <spqr753@...> wrote:

> From: Stephen Gallagher <spqr753@...>
> Subject: [Nova-Roma] "virtue"
> To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Tuesday, November 18, 2008, 1:55 PM
> Salve C. Terentius Varro
>
> Well said!!
>
> Vale
>
> Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
>
>
> >From: Terry Wilson <twilson6356@...>
> >Reply-To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> >To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> >Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Scholastica should
> apologize: Thank you
> >Webmasters!
> >Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 06:42:01 -0800 (PST)
> >
> >C. Terentius Varro Omnibus sal.
> > 
> >I was studying a list of Roman public virtues and found
> this one:
> > 
> >"Concordia -- 'Concord' Harmony among the
> Roman people, and also between
> >Rome and other nations."  How beneficial it
> would be for any and all to
> >ponder and meditate upon the depth of meaning here and
> then be careful to
> >put the concept to practical use.
> > 
> >Oddly, I wasn't able to find the one that promotes
> discord and strife among
> >Romans.  Perhaps one of the practitioners of this
> unnamed "virtue" could
> >point it out to me. 
> > 
> >Optime valete!
> >
> >--- On Tue, 11/18/08, Maior <rory12001@...>
> wrote:
> >
> >From: Maior <rory12001@...>
> >Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: Scholastica should apologize:
> Thank you
> >Webmasters!
> >To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> >Date: Tuesday, November 18, 2008, 7:42 AM
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >M. Hortensia Maior A. Tulliae Scholasticae spd;
> >You should apologize to M. Lucretius Agricola, for
> trying to
> >impugn his fine reputation.
> >
> >
> >As anyone can see here:
> >Q. Valerius Callidus our hardworking webmaster was
> quite aggravated
> >with Scholastica and her rude behavior.
> >http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/Nova- Roma/message/
> 51454
> >http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/Nova- Roma/message/
> 51455
> >
> >I was part of the NRwiki group in 2007 and the
> webmasters:
> >Gracchus, Callidus, Agricola, Cordus were fantastic and
> helpful.
> >Only one person found fault with them.
> >
> >M. Lucretius Agricola has only helped Nova Romans,
> given us a
> >fantastic resource with the NRwiki, and devoted himself
> to learning
> >and being our webmaster: night and day.
> >Our webmasters: Agricola , Callidus and Gracchus never
> really
> >get the thanks and appreciation they deserve as so much
> of their
> >work is behind the scenes.
> >
> >I want to thank M. Lucretius Agricola, Q. Valerius
> Callidus, and
> >M. Octavius Gracchus for all their hard work and
> devotion!
> >Without you Nova Roma could not work.
> >gratias vobis ago
> >M. Hortensia Maior
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Caeso Fabius Buteo Modianus A. Tulliae
> Scholasticae salutem dicit
> > >
> > > It is a lie and you continue to spread lies when
> you claim you and
> >your
> > > cohors were blocked. Your teacher/student rant
> also has nothing
> >to do with
> > > the topic at hand, trying to divert attention
> from your lie may be
> >quaint
> > > but irrelevant.
> > >
> > > Modianus
> > >
> > > On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 3:28 AM, A. Tullia
> Scholastica <fororom@...
> > > > wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ATS: It is no lie that my cohors was
> blocked. Yes, I lost
> >my
> > > > password, which I rarely use as I needed it
> only to read certain
> >pages; I
> > > > avoid doing anything more than reading parts
> of the wiki. I
> >leave anything
> > > > more advanced to others. Your view that my
> comments are lies is
> >a matter of
> > > > perception, and an incorrect one at that.
> > > >
> > > > There are many citizens here who give a lot
> of time to one
> >or another
> > > > aspect of NR or its affiliated educational
> arm, the Academia
> >Thules. I'm
> > > > sure Agricola has contributed a lot of time,
> and that we are
> >grateful. Some
> > > > are grateful to their teachers, too, while
> others cheat in
> >class, or insult
> > > > those who have spent thousands of hours
> creating and teaching
> >courses.
> > > > Fortunately the latter are few and far
> between; the
> >overwhelming majority
> > > > of our students is well behaved, and several
> have expressed
> >their gratitude
> > > > to me personally.
> > > >
> > > > Someone must really be terrified that I
> might be re-elected
> >to this
> > > > lowly post; the hate-Scholastica team has
> been mobilized in
> >force. Even a
> > > > diribitor guilty of cheating in my class has
> not been removed or
> >even
> > > > restricted from dealing with the rogatorial
> election results.
> >Sounds fishy
> > > > to me.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

Salve,

I am new to Rome.I have just started to work toward my citizenship.
I have been delaying this for about three years now and have finally
taken the plunge.It seems I have found myself as an onlooker to some
great debates.All part of the learning process,right?Well I'm glad I
took this step and hope to meet many fine Romans here.

Vale,
Appia Flavia Lupa

Salve,

My first post and I seem to be in trouble already.Sorry

Vale, Lupasangra

--- On Tue, 11/18/08, Complutensis <complutensis@...> wrote:

> From: Complutensis <complutensis@...>
> Subject: [Nova-Roma] Posts in Nova Roma Announce List
> To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Tuesday, November 18, 2008, 3:00 PM
> Ex officio Praetoris
>
> M. Cur. Complutensis omnes civibus SPD
>
> Please remember that personal messages will not be allowed
> in the Nova Roma
> Announce list.
>
> This is a low-volume announcement list for citizens of Nova
> Roma.
>
> "We recommend that edicta, decreta, comitia calls,
> proposed laws, election
> results, and other business matters of importance to those
> who do not subscribe to the Main List be posted here,
> including magisterial
> and sacerdotal appointments and oaths of office. If there
> is any doubt about the suitability of a proposed post, ask
> the praetores of
> Nova Roma."
>
> Questions, answers and other about the announces posted in
> this list must be
> posted in the Main List of Nova Roma.
>
> The messages that do not meet these standards will be
> rejected by the
> moderators.
>
> This edict takes effect immediately.
>
> Given under my hands this 18th day of November 2761 from
> the founding of
> Roma during the Consulship of M.Moravius and T. Iulius
>
> M.CVR.COMPLVTENSIS
> PRAETOR

C.Marius Basilius Appiae Flaviae Lupae S.P.D.

Welcome in Nova Roma!
Fortunately there are in Nova Roma many different interesting mailing
list dedicated to topics like Roman Religion or Latin or Culture, where
the level of the conversation is a little less "chaotic". The problem
is that we are in the electoral campaign and vote, and many Nova Romans
enjoy it with a lot (A LOT!) of passion, sometimes I' say too much ;)
I work in the sodalitas proDIIS, we try to build a temple in Rome....
it will take a loooong time, but we are not in hurry.
I hope to see you here around.

Vale optima!

C.Marius

Salvete omnes

I can't understand all of these histrionics... Yes, there was a problem with the opening of
the cista for the Comita Plebis Tributa, but instead of complaining to the list, I simply
notified the webmaster and in less than 5 minutes, it was corrected. The voting procedure
is intuitive (IMO). I voted and moved on. It was that simple.

The same with the Comitia Plebis Tributa. Yes, the instructions are incorrect, but when
have you ever voted NO for something. You either vote for it, or leave the line/square
blank. I won't comment on abstenio. Again, I voted without muss or fuss.

I am now waiting for my turn at the Comitia Centuriata.

Yes, one vote started late and was corrected. Yes, the instructions are incorrect with the
inclusion of a "NO" vote, when it doesn't exist (and isn't really necessary - except in voice
voting situations). Instead of disrupting a process already in motion, let's work on
catching the kinks for the next one.

This constant bickering is not really useful and demeans the spirit of the process.

Let the flaming begin. :)

Optime valete

Ti. Horatius
Procurator Nova Britannia

Salve,

Awesome post!


Vale,

Annia Minucia Marcella

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Tiberius Horatius Barbatus"
<robbjaxon@...> wrote:

>
> Salvete omnes
>
> I can't understand all of these histrionics... Yes, there was a

problem with the opening of

> the cista for the Comita Plebis Tributa, but instead of complaining

to the list, I simply

> notified the webmaster and in less than 5 minutes, it was corrected.

The voting procedure

> is intuitive (IMO). I voted and moved on. It was that simple.
>
> The same with the Comitia Plebis Tributa. Yes, the instructions are

incorrect, but when

> have you ever voted NO for something. You either vote for it, or

leave the line/square

> blank. I won't comment on abstenio. Again, I voted without muss or fuss.
>
> I am now waiting for my turn at the Comitia Centuriata.
>
> Yes, one vote started late and was corrected. Yes, the instructions

are incorrect with the

> inclusion of a "NO" vote, when it doesn't exist (and isn't really

necessary - except in voice

> voting situations). Instead of disrupting a process already in

motion, let's work on

> catching the kinks for the next one.
>
> This constant bickering is not really useful and demeans the spirit

of the process.

>
> Let the flaming begin. :)
>
> Optime valete
>
> Ti. Horatius
> Procurator Nova Britannia
>

At the time of the alleged incident, I examined the permissions on the
site, at Agricola's request. He is absolutely right - there were NO
accounts blocked, nor were entire categories protected from editing.

Here is the COMPLETE list of every account that has ever been blocked
in the wiki:

mysql> select log_title,log_comment from nrw_logging where
log_action='block';
+---------------------------+------------------------------------+
| log_title | log_comment |
+---------------------------+------------------------------------+
| Memememe | do not recognize user |
| Jarod | Bad user name |
| Lontano | unknown user, not a Roman name |
| Apollo | Not a proper user name |
| Wbrown94704 | Not a proper user name |
| Marsvigilia | Not a proper user name |
| Rolus_Zissous_Cuocus | not listed in Album Civium |
| Aquilinus_Sergia_Octavius | Name not well-formed, not in album |
| Nabia | Unrecognized name |
| Pretty_in_Pink | Not a recognized user name |
| Mmk21mod1 | not a recognized user |
| Cumbag | obvious |
| Bocaj | not a recognized user |
| Willy_on_Wheels | major vandalism |
| CrisOvaller | not a Roman |
+---------------------------+------------------------------------+

See anyone in there who shouldn't be?

Any difficulties suffered by the "cohors" were due to their own
technical ineptitude, and their confrontational attitude when called
on it. Rather than trying to resolve any perceived problems, they
just started flinging "edicts" and accusations about.

And, as a result, you've likely lost yet *another* webmaster.

- Octavius.

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "M. Lucretius Agricola"
<marcus.lucretius@...> wrote:

>
>
> > > ATS: It is no lie that my cohors was blocked.
>
> Yes, it is.
>
> It is an utter, complete, absolute lie. No person on your cohort or
> any other cohort has ever been blocked from editing.
>
> You are, quite simply, a liar.
>
> MLA
>

Salve Tiberius Horatius Barbatus

Amice

I must respectfully disagree (like that�s news). I have been a voter since I
was 17 and any ballot
question I have ever voted on was always a choice between voting in favor
of it or voting against it.

Voting yes or voting no.

I have been a voter in Nova Roma for almost seven years and this is the
first time I have ever
heard that one would vote Yes to mean YES but one would leave it blank to
vote NO. The instructions to clarify this were give after the fact.

The instructions that were on the ballots this year are the same
instructions that have always been on the ballots:

"Vote "YES" or "NO" for each law presented. If you do not wish to vote at
all, you can select "ABSTINEO", meaning "I Abstain". "ABSTINEO" is a neutral
choice and will not be
counted as a vote for that issue. "

Vale

Tiberius Galerius Paulinus

We Fear Change.


-Annia Minucia Marcella

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Stephen Gallagher" <spqr753@...> wrote:
>
> Salve Tiberius Horatius Barbatus
>
> Amice
>
> I must respectfully disagree (like that's news). I have been a voter
since I
> was 17 and any ballot
> question I have ever voted on was always a choice between voting in
favor
> of it or voting against it.
>
> Voting yes or voting no.
>
> I have been a voter in Nova Roma for almost seven years and this is the
> first time I have ever
> heard that one would vote Yes to mean YES but one would leave it
blank to
> vote NO. The instructions to clarify this were give after the fact.
>
> The instructions that were on the ballots this year are the same
> instructions that have always been on the ballots:
>
> "Vote "YES" or "NO" for each law presented. If you do not wish to
vote at
> all, you can select "ABSTINEO", meaning "I Abstain". "ABSTINEO" is a
neutral
> choice and will not be
> counted as a vote for that issue. "
>
> Vale
>
> Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
>

Salve Annia Minucia Marcella

"We Fear Change"

No we fear a rigged election

Vale

Tiberius Galerius Paulinus

>From: "Annia Minucia Marcella" <annia@...>
>Reply-To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
>To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: Voting procedure
>Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 21:15:21 -0000
>
>We Fear Change.
>
>
>-Annia Minucia Marcella
>
>
>--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Stephen Gallagher" <spqr753@...> wrote:
> >
> > Salve Tiberius Horatius Barbatus
> >
> > Amice
> >
> > I must respectfully disagree (like that's news). I have been a voter
>since I
> > was 17 and any ballot
> > question I have ever voted on was always a choice between voting in
>favor
> > of it or voting against it.
> >
> > Voting yes or voting no.
> >
> > I have been a voter in Nova Roma for almost seven years and this is the
> > first time I have ever
> > heard that one would vote Yes to mean YES but one would leave it
>blank to
> > vote NO. The instructions to clarify this were give after the fact.
> >
> > The instructions that were on the ballots this year are the same
> > instructions that have always been on the ballots:
> >
> > "Vote "YES" or "NO" for each law presented. If you do not wish to
>vote at
> > all, you can select "ABSTINEO", meaning "I Abstain". "ABSTINEO" is a
>neutral
> > choice and will not be
> > counted as a vote for that issue. "
> >
> > Vale
> >
> > Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
> >
>
>

LOL, it's totally not rigged. But whatever floats your boat I guess.

-Annia Minucia Marcella

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Stephen Gallagher" <spqr753@...> wrote:
>
> Salve Annia Minucia Marcella
>
> "We Fear Change"
>
> No we fear a rigged election
>
> Vale
>
> Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
>
>
>
> >From: "Annia Minucia Marcella" <annia@...>
> >Reply-To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> >To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> >Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: Voting procedure
> >Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 21:15:21 -0000
> >
> >We Fear Change.
> >
> >
> >-Annia Minucia Marcella
> >
> >
> >--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Stephen Gallagher" <spqr753@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Salve Tiberius Horatius Barbatus
> > >
> > > Amice
> > >
> > > I must respectfully disagree (like that's news). I have been a voter
> >since I
> > > was 17 and any ballot
> > > question I have ever voted on was always a choice between voting in
> >favor
> > > of it or voting against it.
> > >
> > > Voting yes or voting no.
> > >
> > > I have been a voter in Nova Roma for almost seven years and this
is the
> > > first time I have ever
> > > heard that one would vote Yes to mean YES but one would leave it
> >blank to
> > > vote NO. The instructions to clarify this were give after the fact.
> > >
> > > The instructions that were on the ballots this year are the same
> > > instructions that have always been on the ballots:
> > >
> > > "Vote "YES" or "NO" for each law presented. If you do not wish to
> >vote at
> > > all, you can select "ABSTINEO", meaning "I Abstain". "ABSTINEO" is a
> >neutral
> > > choice and will not be
> > > counted as a vote for that issue. "
> > >
> > > Vale
> > >
> > > Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
> > >
> >
> >
>

Salve Annia Minucia Marcella

I said we fear one not that we have one.

Any ballot question in any democratic nation in the world that gave a choice
of voting yes or
abstaining as the options would be views as flawed at best and an attempt
to cheat at worst.

Vale

Tiberius Galerius Paulinus

>From: "Annia Minucia Marcella" <annia@...>
>Reply-To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
>To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: Voting procedure
>Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 21:24:11 -0000
>
>LOL, it's totally not rigged. But whatever floats your boat I guess.
>
>-Annia Minucia Marcella
>
>
>--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Stephen Gallagher" <spqr753@...> wrote:
> >
> > Salve Annia Minucia Marcella
> >
> > "We Fear Change"
> >
> > No we fear a rigged election
> >
> > Vale
> >
> > Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
> >
> >
> >
> > >From: "Annia Minucia Marcella" <annia@...>
> > >Reply-To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> > >To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> > >Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: Voting procedure
> > >Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 21:15:21 -0000
> > >
> > >We Fear Change.
> > >
> > >
> > >-Annia Minucia Marcella
> > >
> > >
> > >--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Stephen Gallagher" <spqr753@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Salve Tiberius Horatius Barbatus
> > > >
> > > > Amice
> > > >
> > > > I must respectfully disagree (like that's news). I have been a voter
> > >since I
> > > > was 17 and any ballot
> > > > question I have ever voted on was always a choice between voting in
> > >favor
> > > > of it or voting against it.
> > > >
> > > > Voting yes or voting no.
> > > >
> > > > I have been a voter in Nova Roma for almost seven years and this
>is the
> > > > first time I have ever
> > > > heard that one would vote Yes to mean YES but one would leave it
> > >blank to
> > > > vote NO. The instructions to clarify this were give after the fact.
> > > >
> > > > The instructions that were on the ballots this year are the same
> > > > instructions that have always been on the ballots:
> > > >
> > > > "Vote "YES" or "NO" for each law presented. If you do not wish to
> > >vote at
> > > > all, you can select "ABSTINEO", meaning "I Abstain". "ABSTINEO" is a
> > >neutral
> > > > choice and will not be
> > > > counted as a vote for that issue. "
> > > >
> > > > Vale
> > > >
> > > > Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>

Graccho s.d.

Just a last word on the subject, amice: the question had not been
about blocked "accounts" but about blocked pages, whose free access
has been closed to non-wiki technicians.

Vale Censori,


P. Memmius Albucius

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Matt" <hucke@...> wrote:
>
>
> At the time of the alleged incident, I examined the permissions on
the
> site, at Agricola's request. He is absolutely right - there were NO
> accounts blocked, nor were entire categories protected from editing.
>
> Here is the COMPLETE list of every account that has ever been
blocked
> in the wiki:
>
> mysql> select log_title,log_comment from nrw_logging where
> log_action='block';
> +---------------------------+------------------------------------+
> | log_title | log_comment |
> +---------------------------+------------------------------------+
> | Memememe | do not recognize user |
> | Jarod | Bad user name |
> | Lontano | unknown user, not a Roman name |
> | Apollo | Not a proper user name |
> | Wbrown94704 | Not a proper user name |
> | Marsvigilia | Not a proper user name |
> | Rolus_Zissous_Cuocus | not listed in Album Civium |
> | Aquilinus_Sergia_Octavius | Name not well-formed, not in album |
> | Nabia | Unrecognized name |
> | Pretty_in_Pink | Not a recognized user name |
> | Mmk21mod1 | not a recognized user |
> | Cumbag | obvious |
> | Bocaj | not a recognized user |
> | Willy_on_Wheels | major vandalism |
> | CrisOvaller | not a Roman |
> +---------------------------+------------------------------------+
>
> See anyone in there who shouldn't be?
>
> Any difficulties suffered by the "cohors" were due to their own
> technical ineptitude, and their confrontational attitude when called
> on it. Rather than trying to resolve any perceived problems, they
> just started flinging "edicts" and accusations about.
>
> And, as a result, you've likely lost yet *another* webmaster.
>
> - Octavius.
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "M. Lucretius Agricola"
> <marcus.lucretius@> wrote:
> >
> >
> > > > ATS: It is no lie that my cohors was blocked.
> >
> > Yes, it is.
> >
> > It is an utter, complete, absolute lie. No person on your cohort
or
> > any other cohort has ever been blocked from editing.
> >
> > You are, quite simply, a liar.
> >
> > MLA
> >
>

Salve,

So why would they record an invalid vote?


Vale,

Annia Minucia Marcella


--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Gnaeus Iulius Caesar"
<gn_iulius_caesar@...> wrote:

>
> Salve
>
> Correct - only the FIRST vote cast counts, according to the law.
>
> Vale bene
> Caesar
>
>
> From: Annia Minucia Marcella
> Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 7:47 AM
> To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: A Message from the Diribitores Novae Romae
>
>
> Salve,
>
> so the first one recorded wouldn't be the invalid one would it?
>
> Vale,
>
> Annia Minuca Marcella
>

Aulus Liburnius Quiritibus SPD

Since I opened this issue with my post number 59253, I would like to
explain that I personally found the instructions contained in the
ballot itself confusing as they were at odds with the ballot format.

No alternate explanation as to how to vote "Antiquo" was included.
I actually had not yet even decided how to vote but I found myself
forced to ask for instructions.

Yes, images of hanging chads passed through my mind...

Valete,
Aulus Liburnius Hadrianus

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Stephen Gallagher" <spqr753@...>
wrote:

>
> Salve Annia Minucia Marcella
>
> I said we fear one not that we have one.
>
> Any ballot question in any democratic nation in the world that

gave a choice

> of voting yes or
> abstaining as the options would be views as flawed at best and an

attempt

> to cheat at worst.
>
> Vale
>
> Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
>
>
>
>
>
> >From: "Annia Minucia Marcella" <annia@...>
> >Reply-To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> >To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> >Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: Voting procedure
> >Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 21:24:11 -0000
> >
> >LOL, it's totally not rigged. But whatever floats your boat I

guess.

> >
> >-Annia Minucia Marcella
> >
> >
> >--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Stephen Gallagher" <spqr753@>

wrote:

> > >
> > > Salve Annia Minucia Marcella
> > >
> > > "We Fear Change"
> > >
> > > No we fear a rigged election
> > >
> > > Vale
> > >
> > > Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > >From: "Annia Minucia Marcella" <annia@>
> > > >Reply-To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> > > >To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> > > >Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: Voting procedure
> > > >Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 21:15:21 -0000
> > > >
> > > >We Fear Change.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >-Annia Minucia Marcella
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Stephen Gallagher"

<spqr753@> wrote:

> > > > >
> > > > > Salve Tiberius Horatius Barbatus
> > > > >
> > > > > Amice
> > > > >
> > > > > I must respectfully disagree (like that's news). I have

been a voter

> > > >since I
> > > > > was 17 and any ballot
> > > > > question I have ever voted on was always a choice between

voting in

> > > >favor
> > > > > of it or voting against it.
> > > > >
> > > > > Voting yes or voting no.
> > > > >
> > > > > I have been a voter in Nova Roma for almost seven years

and this

> >is the
> > > > > first time I have ever
> > > > > heard that one would vote Yes to mean YES but one would

leave it

> > > >blank to
> > > > > vote NO. The instructions to clarify this were give after

the fact.

> > > > >
> > > > > The instructions that were on the ballots this year are

the same

> > > > > instructions that have always been on the ballots:
> > > > >
> > > > > "Vote "YES" or "NO" for each law presented. If you do not

wish to

> > > >vote at
> > > > > all, you can select "ABSTINEO", meaning "I

Abstain". "ABSTINEO" is a

> > > >neutral
> > > > > choice and will not be
> > > > > counted as a vote for that issue. "
> > > > >
> > > > > Vale
> > > > >
> > > > > Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
>

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Robert Levee <galerius_of_rome@...>
wrote:

>
> Salve Titus,
> I also believe the fair and juct action you propose is the correct

line to follow.We should stop the voting until the proper and just
form for casting our votes is instituted, and the time for that is NOW.

>
>
> Vale,
> Appius Galerious Aurelianus
>
>

Salvete

I just voted and I did not see a no vote for the Laws just  YES,
and ABSTAIN ! so I did not vote on the Laws at all as even the ones i
would have voted yes on I will not as there was no plance to vote no.
and on the ones i wished to vote NO on there was no plance to do so

that needs to be fixed asap

Valete


Marcus Cornelius Felix
Sacerdos Templi Mercurius
Primus Sacerdotus Provincia America Boreoccidentalis

House Priest Patrician Gens Cornelia

Not only am I in trouble for posting my hello on the wrong list,I just
was informed by my husband that I posted under his name.Please forgive
me I am new and very prone to make mistakes.

Vale,
Apia Flavia Lupa

C. Terentius Varro Appiae Flaviae Lupae s. p. d.   Welcome to Nova Roma!  I think you'll find that it's a great adventure, that it's intellectually stimulating, and that it provides lots of opportunities for personal growth.  I'm also glad you took the plunge, and I promise you will meet many fine Romans here who are willing to help you with any questions you have.  Good luck and have fun. --- On Tue, 11/18/08, lupasangra <lupasangra@...> wrote: From: lupasangra <lupasangra@...> Subject: [Nova-Roma] Hello To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com Date: Tuesday, November 18, 2008, 1:31 PM Salve, I am new to Rome.I have just started to work toward my citizenship. I have been delaying this for about three years now and have finally taken the plunge.It seems I have found myself as an onlooker to some great debates.All part of the learning process,right? Well I'm glad I took this step and hope to meet many fine Romans here. Vale, Appia Flavia Lupa

Salve,

I do not see how the current choices are cheating or flawed. I think
everyone is being a bit crazy on this whole thing.

Just vote during your time and wait for the results. Should it really
matter that instead of clicking "no" you just leave it blank to vote
"no"? It counts as "no" either way.

For example, to vote "no" for Scholastica, don't click on the box next
to her name. Too easy.

Vale,

Annia Minucia Marcella

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Stephen Gallagher" <spqr753@...> wrote:
>
> Salve Annia Minucia Marcella
>
> I said we fear one not that we have one.
>
> Any ballot question in any democratic nation in the world that gave
a choice
> of voting yes or
> abstaining as the options would be views as flawed at best and an
attempt
> to cheat at worst.
>
> Vale
>
> Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
>
>
>
>
>
> >From: "Annia Minucia Marcella" <annia@...>
> >Reply-To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> >To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> >Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: Voting procedure
> >Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 21:24:11 -0000
> >
> >LOL, it's totally not rigged. But whatever floats your boat I guess.
> >
> >-Annia Minucia Marcella
> >
> >
> >--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Stephen Gallagher" <spqr753@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Salve Annia Minucia Marcella
> > >
> > > "We Fear Change"
> > >
> > > No we fear a rigged election
> > >
> > > Vale
> > >
> > > Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > >From: "Annia Minucia Marcella" <annia@>
> > > >Reply-To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> > > >To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> > > >Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: Voting procedure
> > > >Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 21:15:21 -0000
> > > >
> > > >We Fear Change.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >-Annia Minucia Marcella
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Stephen Gallagher"
<spqr753@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Salve Tiberius Horatius Barbatus
> > > > >
> > > > > Amice
> > > > >
> > > > > I must respectfully disagree (like that's news). I have been
a voter
> > > >since I
> > > > > was 17 and any ballot
> > > > > question I have ever voted on was always a choice between
voting in
> > > >favor
> > > > > of it or voting against it.
> > > > >
> > > > > Voting yes or voting no.
> > > > >
> > > > > I have been a voter in Nova Roma for almost seven years and this
> >is the
> > > > > first time I have ever
> > > > > heard that one would vote Yes to mean YES but one would leave it
> > > >blank to
> > > > > vote NO. The instructions to clarify this were give after
the fact.
> > > > >
> > > > > The instructions that were on the ballots this year are the same
> > > > > instructions that have always been on the ballots:
> > > > >
> > > > > "Vote "YES" or "NO" for each law presented. If you do not
wish to
> > > >vote at
> > > > > all, you can select "ABSTINEO", meaning "I Abstain".
"ABSTINEO" is a
> > > >neutral
> > > > > choice and will not be
> > > > > counted as a vote for that issue. "
> > > > >
> > > > > Vale
> > > > >
> > > > > Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
>