Doing it Right, "the Killjoy Way"?

What joy is there in brainlessly trashing the archaeological record in the selfish pursuit of personal gain and ignoring (dismissing) legitimate concerns? Heritage Action draw attention to a discussion in the metal detecting blogosphere and point out its significance:

It seems to me it is detectorists themselves who are often the most eloquent advocates for legal regulation of their activities. Yesterday one of them wrote: “I do the best I can do, maybe I don’t abide by the rules that Nigel Swift thinks should be made but who in their right mind would? The man is relentless in being a killjoy.” So it seems beyond dispute that doing things in a way that maximises public benefit not their own is simply not an option for him and most of his colleagues – even though tens of thousands of amateur archaeologists constantly do exactly that without complaint, reward or expensive outreach. What clearer case for legal regulation of artefact hunting could there be?

Indeed.Who in their right mind would consider otherwise? It is the refusal of people like that to even consider paying attention to legitimate concerns about the effects of current 'management' policies that is damaging the hobby as much as it is damaging England's beleagured archaeological record.

Note the way that the metal detectorists always personalise the concerns, these are not issues that people have with the way artefact hunting is done, but individuals, Nigel Swift, Paul Barford, the professionals attacked on the TonyRobinsonsPants blog.  I guess attempting to see those who question your actions as the preserve of just a very small number of people (the ones that speak out) is a way of trying to pretend you are not an exploitive minority selfishly taking from the entire public the decontextualised geegaws that are collected.

Vignette: Birdbrain anticonservationists protest loudest.