Over on a tekkie blog near you, the dullards are out in force, discussing John Howland's recent selective exegesis of a private letter from Mike Heyworth. One "Phil" ["I'm a researcher myself"] (March 21, 2013 at 10:09 pm) urges: "We [ie I assume he means metal detectorists] are willing to have intelligent dialogue with you, but not when you offer such bullshit as fact (or almost fact)". He, however, falsely reckons we have "the same end goal…the discovery and preservation of artifacts" - missing the whole point of the HA Artefact Erosion Counter is making of course. So I am not sure that this metal detectorist is ready for any kind of discussion.
As for the capability of intelligent discussion of other tekkies, it would take a lot of explaining to the mathematically challenged "Big Tony from Bayonne" [I would guess the one in New Jersey] ( March 21, 2013 at 7:01 pm) who seems to think archaeobloggers are paid some "salary" for what they do "from the tax payers":
It is a shame that a knowledgeable accredited archaeologist ( in his own words) as the gentleman from Wales professes to be, uses a factless imagionary item as the Artifact Erosion Counter…. to provide “facts” about metal detectorists and their alleged “illegal” activities - perhaps all the baseless unfounded attacks on metal detectorists required him to resort to using other tactics to try and discredit detecting…Warsaw is not in Wales, "imaginary" is spelt "imaginary". The HA Counter is clearly labelled a model, what is at issue is not "illegal" activities (but the erosive effects of what is taking place under the umbrella of a law which does not protect the archaeolological resource). Quite apart from the fact that "baseless unfounded" is tautology, most of what is written here or on the HA blog is founded in what tekkies themselves are saying on blogs and forums about their hobby (the reader can check for themselves whether we are making this stuff up or not). I think people like "Robbie" are doing a pretty good job themselves in texts like this of bringing discredit to "detecting". Time and time again it is demonstrated that the assumptions on which the PAS " partnership" model is based are without foundation.
TAKE A GOOD LOOK at this, for these are precisely the sort of people the PAS wants to grab more and more millions of public quid to make into the "partners" of the British Museum, archaeological heritage professionals and to whom they want us all to entrust the exploitation of the archaeological record. Take a good look and decide what you think about that as a "policy".
It beats me where he gets that idea from, "Big Tony" seems to be Treasure fixated ("old gold coins and the like but truth be told most people do not know how to find gold rings let alone gold artifacts"). Tony, you miss the point, utterly. Put your reading glasses on and put your thinking cap on before attacking what you clearly do not understand. Not an iota.
One "Robbie" (March 21, 2013 at 7:03 pm) on the other hand really goes to town: