Topic E: 'Grand Stirrup Master' is Badly Treated and Gets Revenge
A forum thread of just two posts (13th May 2014) illustrating the frustrations of being an FLO dealing with "C2s and Ds". David Williams gives a link to one of my posts (here it is 'The Sorry Tale of the Surrey Searchers and the FLO', Monday, 12 May 2014). In my experience, about the only time metal detectorists write to me about standards and ethics is when they want to create problems for another metal detectorist. Here is another example and Dr Williams' text here sheds more light on the background. He refers to my "veiled criticism to [sic] PAS" in my comments of the event discussed by Williams. I invite readers to look at what I said and whether there is anything there which an archaeologist would disagree with. Thin skins these PAS folk have, this is all a bit pathetic. But it gets even sillier. Richard, the 'most travelled FLO' (at your expense) notes that I had complimented Williams (hooray, eh?) but then added "it is best to remove that hyperlink though, as if anyone clicks on it Paul Barford can see we are looking at him from the staff forum". Dr Williams did delete the hyperlink. And why should it be any concern of Britain's professional archaeologists that a blog author can see what they are reading?There is the stub of a further post of Williams relying to 'Richard", but this is carelessly cut off in the BM's pdf. It is not known whether there were any beyond that.
Note the way Dr Williams refers to the metal detecting whistleblower: "Pity the informant has 6 finds on the database - he needs to be a very c[l]ean pot if he's going to call the kettle black as I have told him". The informant wrote to me posing as a woman. Male metal detectorists seem to have a tendency to pose as women (the ageing fat guy who posed as 'Candice Jarman' being a particularly unsavoury example)
There is a floating 'discourse' logo near this thread.