Ave,
I to am a new member. I joined just six months ago and felt the same lack of welcome. When this discussion thread started some weeks ago, I decided to give it another shot.
The majority of the discussion regarding this issue has been why it will not work and very little on how to make it better or opposing plans. With that in mind I was asking Musca if he had a thought out plan or if he was just giving his own two sesterces as to why it would not work. Aggression was not what was meant, but clarifying of ideas. If the tone was wrong then I apologize to Musca and to anyone else who may feel that the environment is to aggressive. My intent was, and remains, to increase the discussion.
Celer
________________________________________
From:
Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com <
Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2015 2:55 PM
To:
Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Nova Roma Reborn - Part III - An Economy of Activity Page 22-36
Ave,
I want to add my comments to some aspects of this discussion.
Preface: I kindly ask to receive my comments not as a personal criticism
of any person involved in the debate, but as my constructive and neutral
attempt of contributing my thoughts to the debate. So name-calling, as
it happened in the "We are dying" thread, is absolutely uncalled for. I
don't intend to offend or attack anyone on a personal level.
First, before the question arises: yes, I have thoroughly read the
entire document, and I did it with great interest.
I totally understand the need for separating the two Inc. entities
(financially and juristically) and I realize the struggles the authors
of the paper went through in order to maintain a non-profit status and
to keep things clean in the eyes of the IRS. Discussing a virtual
currency as one means to avoid any problems with this legal status is a
totally legitimate scenario, which should be examined and discussed.
Therefore I think it's a very good idea that Sulla broke the discussion
about the paper into discussing the chapters separately. This allows for
a more thorough and detailed debate about single aspects of the paper -
it is simply to large to be discussed as a whole, and too many important
points would be overlooked or missing.
Regarding CP and the market place as an incentive:
During the discussion so far, some people stated that a virtual currency
doesn't offer an incentive of participating in the active life of NR.
Unfortunately, I have to agree with this opinion. First, I also see the
problem that CP are not very useful for members who are not interested
in spending them to gain a political office. Since most members who are
able to offer something of actual value (be it merchandise, handicraft,
or practical service) would prefer actual money, I'm sceptical about how
a lively market place could be established with a virtual currency. I
would even be sceptical about a web shop or market place with hard
currency, because there is the danger that this would convey the
(mis-)impression of NR as a "Roman merchandise vendor" or a Roman web
shop instead of an active community interested in Roman culture,
politics, or religion. Sure, buying and selling Roman goods can be
considered as some form of "activity" - certainly more active than the
passive silent majority today -, but it's only a nice side-effect or
bonus to the community to be able to barter, to sell and buy their
products, to be creative (who doesn't want a cool NR pendant ;)? ), but
I wouldn't define this as a thriving, active community life.
In addition, the entire plan is currently mostly aimed at an US
audience, so I wonder what the incentives for members in Europe or other
countries overseas could be. Questions of membership fees being
tax-deductable are of no use for members overseas, since NR isn't
aknowledged as a non-profit organization over here.
I totally understand the need of building Roman temples in the US - for
known reasons, you don't have any ancient sites at your doorstep, which
could be used for religious or educative purposes, like we have in
Europe. So establishing a Roman temple is something I would support,
even as a European and even considering the fact that many of us won't
never have a chance in their life time to travel to the US and to meet
and celebrate with other Nova Romans there.
The idea that the CP could be also spent for the Cultus Deorum, as an
offering, or for other services strongly interconnected with religious
activities, brings an interesting and good new angle to the question.
This is, in my opinion, also worth a second thought and more discussions.
I also see the need for an organized and well-thought-out structure and
constitution for NR, which stands on a firm juristical foundation, so
the entire debate about the paper is certainly important and should be
continued chapter by chapter, as Sulla suggested.
What I fail to see is the interconnection of the initial question: "how
can we draw fresh blood and give the members an incentive to actively
participate in the community" with the discussion about a new
constitution and about securing a solid institutional foundation. Both
questions are important, but the latter doesn't answer the former.
As I stated in the former "We are dying" thread, I'm a supporter of the
idea of a modern forum or discussion board Musca just re-introduced to
the discussion. I strongly support his opinion that - in order to revive
NR and to draw fresh (and, most of all, _active_ blood) - we need to
convey a feeling of "community" to the members.
Whether NR consists of one or two Inc. and whether it has a status of a
non-profit organization in Maine isn't relevant to most members or
potential members out there. They discover the website and wonder what
wonders may wait behind these doors. They fill out the registration,
think of a Roman name, and delve into the world of NR - certainly
expecting a tight and active community of people who are in love with
Rome, Roman culture, religion, history, or even politics. They then
discover, as Musca just did, that there is not much more than a static
wiki and some mailing lists. It's difficult to see and understand what
to do next, how to participate and what the advantages of membership in
NR are. So the majority disappears after a short while and searches for
other means of exchange with likeminded people.
I second Musca here: exchange with other members about Roman topics of
all kinds, in a clear, fast, immediate and well structured way, like in
a forum, would certainly motivate much more members (and prospects) in
actively participating, discussing and even coordinating RL events than
any discussion in a Mailing list.
Celer, As I stated before, both questions (active, loyal and motivated
members who identify with NR) are as important as a solid constitution,
but both touch different angles of a vital question: how can NR survive,
get more active members, prosper and flourish. They are not directly
interconnected, but they are both parts of the puzzle.
To answer your question of how a forum is any different than what NR is
today:
Personally, I think Mailing lists were state-of-the-art in the 90s, but
today, they are a clunky medium for debates, exchange or coordination. A
forum has many advantages: it is sorted by topics and can easily be
browsed by members (even old threads are not lost in the abyssos of a
convoluted Mailing List, discussions are more focussed and
well-structured, and a forum also allows for sub-forums (internal as
well as public ones), where various aspects can be discussed: Roman life
and culture, internal NR politics or issues, religion, life Events, it
could even include a market place section where members could advertise
and offer their work. The threshold of registering, writing and engaging
in a forum is much lower than registering in a mailing list, especially
in the current mailing lists of NR:
As Musca observed after only participating a short time, the
conversational tone on the NR MLs is often quite aggressive towards
newcomers or even "silent" lurking long-time members who suddenly dare
to participate in "internal" discussions like this. They are quickly
muzzled and discouraged to elaborate their thoughts further. I just
remember the current "We are dying" debate where a member (of the silent
majority, but who was a passive member for several years), who dared to
offer his opinion, was called a "pissant nobody", just because he
doesn't belong to the inner circle which obviously is the only one
allowed to offer their opinion, and who quickly feels personally
attacked by any (real or imaginary) criticism. In my opinion, such words
are generally totally uncalled for in _any_ debate and don't shed a very
positive light on the debate culture in NR. They certainly deter and
discourage new members from a more active participation.
Celer, I don't see any need for such an aggressive answer to a
legitimate suggestion by an interested and motivated new member.
During this discussion, someone mentioned that a web shop should be
installed in order to build the proposed market place with its virtual
(or real) currency. We all agree that the NR wiki certainly is the wrong
place for such an endeavor. So - if you believe that someone will
volunteer for building and maintaining this market place, a web shop, or
other selling-buying-platform, why shouldn't there be a member willing
to install a forum if the need arises?
You never asked, and noone demanded an immediate answer or a
well-thought-out and elaborate concept for the forum right NOW. It was
just a (legitimate) suggestion by Musca, and details can be discussed in
a different thread, even in the far future when the market place is
online and the new constitution is signed. There is no need to hurry, no
need to ask for volunteers right now, or even force Musca to name
somebody who would do the job if he wants his suggestion to be taken
seriously. This is entirely missing the point.
By the way, there are several members in NR who are well experienced in
moderating forums (even large, lively forums), and others who are quite
experienced with creating BBBoards, phpBoards or other forums. I don't
see this as a show-breaker or a reason why the forum idea should be
dismissed without even being discussed. Nobody suggested that it should
be pressed on your, or Sulla's, or Caesar's shoulders to create the
forum, maintain, administer and moderate it.
Regarding incentives for new members:
When I joined NR some years ago, I made the same experience as Musca
just described. I joined NR because of my love for Rome, Roman ideas,
Roman music, and - most of all - Roman religion. I then discovered that
the main activities took place in several Mailing lists. I'm not much
interested in politics or in leading the organization, but, for example,
I - since I'm playing the tibia - am interested in Roman music, so I
joined the Sodalitas Musarum, hoping for an interesting exchange among
likeminded people about Roman music and about playing authentically
replicated instruments. I had to discover that the Sodalitas was dead.
So, in my opinion, a civilized debate about incentives and of how to
revive an active, friendly, cooperative community life is absolutely
necessary - besides (!) the current debate, which is also important. We
should also allow members who are usually only silent readers of this ML
to add their input to the discussion freely and without fear of
repression or of not being taken seriously.
When thinking about practical means of forging a loyal, active community
who identifies with NR, its ideals, and its ideas, it's vital that we
don't dismiss anything beforehand, but to discuss even the weirdest ideas.
And don't forget that we are scattered all over the world - local
re-enactment events are great, as are meetings, but we need to establish
an online community first and for all, which is easily accessible from
all over the world and which allows for the participation, cooperation
and interaction of all members alike. Most of us simply want to be part
of an international community of people who love Rome, Roman ideals,
Romanitas, and who are often also practicioners of the Religio Romana,
and we definitely need more than a static wiki and some obscure mailing
lists to achieve this.
My 2 sesterces to the discussion.
Respectfully,
Corvina
------------------------------------
------------------------------------
------------------------------------
Yahoo Groups Links
