Lorna Richardson on "Archaeological Trolling"

Lorna Richardson: "the fact there is a growing and thickly-referenced discussion of 'trolling' in archaeology online in my thesis is heartbreaking"

Must be. The thesis apparently is about "the interface of Public Archaeology and the use of Internet technologies in archaeological communities involved in public engagement and outreach work"...  whatever that is supposed to mean.

Yeah, right. But do not let us all believe what the PAS and British Museum tell us about where "archaeology online" begins and ends, shall we?  For them, a "troll" is someone who says "can we have our marbles/bronzes/ivories back please?" Or who says, "can we discuss why you think these policies are good and sustainable when other evidence suggests the story is not so simple?". Their answer to both is a dismissive "no, go away". I wonder whether Ms Richardson is disagreeing with her supervisors over what "trolling" is in debate on the heritage?

After all she would not want to write something she might later feel would be better edited out in a fit of archaeological bowldlerism...

Sisyphus and the Trolls on the Gate of the Digital Divide. (= Public-funded archaeological outreach scheme defending artefact hunting and collecting from their questioners and critics)

UPDATE 5th August 2013:
Ms Richardson explains (pers. comm.):

I was talking about the dreadful treatment of Mary Beard, who as you know has now received bomb threats and rape threats. Totally nauseating behaviour on the behalf of idiots with nothing better to do with their time.  

She should try looking at what happens to groups like Heritage Action when they start debating metal detecting issues in the UK if she thinks that is bad. I'm not really I admit I am not really clear how classicist Mary Beard constitutes either 'Public Archaeology' or an 'archaeological community involved in public engagement and outreach work'. I would have thought there were better examples to discuss in the context of her work. Ms Richardson goes on to say that she considers this to be a "gender issue" and that "the internet can be a dangerous place to be as a female academic". Personally I would say that it's rather naive to think that the internet was a safe place for anyone.

I really do not think this is such a "gender" thing. The kind of behaviour she is talking about is surely more to do with incurable idiocy, bad manners and social inadequacy than sexism. But I understand that its less p.c. to talk about low IQs than sexism these days in the dumbed-down UK.