[Edited] Dave Sadler has produced a useful online video interview with former pest-control officer Jason Massey giving the background to his metal detecting company "Detecting for Veterans" setting out some of the background.... The core of the video starts here:
Posted on You Tube by Peaky Finders Metal Detecting Shop and Rallies on Nov 26, 2020
UPDATE 17th September 2021
Within a few hours of this post, that video was deleted. [in the original post I unnecessarily wrote rather uncharitably about the video in which the interview was found, for which I apologise to the author]
.jpg)
7 comments:
Thanks Paul. Any publicity is good publicity. I'm the afore mentioned bobble hatted, waffle laden host. And also, previously written about editor of the Archaeology and Metal Detecting Magazine. Sadly, many have been taken in by Mr Massey, we host anybody who wishes to join us on the show, and this episode will be removed as soon as possible, for no other reason than promoting this man. Maybe you would like to join us one week, we would love to talk to you. I'll even attempt to keep my waffle short.
Thanks as ever.
Dave Sadler
Host of incredibly bad Metal Detecting show.
Hi Dave, thanks for getting back to me (and for writing under your own name - most metal detectorists can't do us that courtesy).
I was brought up never to wear a hat indoors, I find it an irritating affection.
I am sorry for my comments on the show, to my mind it was overladen with extraneous material.
It is a shame that you have deleted the video. Like most of the other material on D4V that has been disappearing from the Internet these past few hours.
You know, people like me are going to say what we see wrong with artefact hunting, commercial rallies in particular (as a phenomenon) with or without Mr Massey, and that interview is information about the history of the hobby - which will one day have to be written.
I do not understand the detectorists' inability to stand by their hobby and fellow hobbyists. When I make a link here to any (ANY) online resource to make a point, instead of addressing that point, detectorists invariably simply quietly delete the material I refer to. As if by hiding it, the problem has gone away. No, it has not gone away, it just shows that you are all in denial. That is just dishonest, and that is the SAME dishonesty that we are talking about here, isn't it? (and if you say no, I'll just say that's a dishonest answer too).
Metal detectorists are showing time after time that if points are made, issues highlighted, they'll do bugger all to address them, confront the issues, work out how to change things. Nothing. Just ignore the problem for as long as possible. And because British archaeologists are largely such negligent wimps and policy-makers can't see why they should bother with changing anything, you've learnt that you'll be able to get away with it a while longer just by doing nothing.
I am constantly told that there are "some bad eggs" in your hobby, which I'll accept.
But why actually, can we and the rest of the public (WHOSE HERITAGE IT IS) not see these bad eggs too? If nothing else to judge for ourselves whether what Paul Barford says about them is true or not. They can't do that if the evidence has been removed. And you know what? The whole UK metal detecting community (and some archaeologists) says people like me are exaggerating, that it's not how we say, or as bad as we say... but at the same time removing as far as is possible the evidence by which both my and your claims can be assessed. Who will the readers of this blog believe? Those who think wearing beanies indoors is perfectly acceptable will go for your version, those who were brought up differently, I'll bet will interpret your deletions in a different manner.
Why actually can detectorists not have the guts (guts Dave) to stand behind a true, unvarnished and holistic picture of the hobby? Have all the forums open to be read by everybody who wants to see what you are up to? What (actually) is SO BAD in it and SO DIVERGENT from the picture you'd want to paint for the public that you are all of you AFRAID to show it as it is?
Tekkies claim that what "Barfy" says is all "lies", but you are not able to stand behind a real full, honest picture of the hobby, warts and all. You want the public only to have access to a whitewashed, and therefore dishonest, picture. The unicorns.
Mr Massey was just part of that wider phenomenon, newspapers and magazines wrote glowingly about D4V, you tried repeatedly to get him on your show. Andres Dobat et al. wrote a paper on him. It all looked squeaky-clean and public spirited. Like detecting itself is made to look. And the moment the facade starts to crack, ah well, "we hide those bits".
Thanks for the invitation. You do not say what you want to talk about. But I think really I'd put a lot of time and effort into it, and then - like this last one - you could just as easily delete it on a whim, leaving no trace of that effort. I have my blog, I say what I want to say here. Thanks.
Little bit wrong about the episode removal. We just decided, before I read your blog, to remove it as not to promote his activities in the future. There's also a paper written about his previous work which has been added, with permission of the author, to the Archaeology and Metal Detecting Magazine. Although a well researched paper, I will also be removing this, again, not to promote him.
I appreciate your thoughts, and they are your own, I and others may not agree with them, but many are thought provoking and, in some cases, close to the bone, to the point that some may not like to admit they agree with you.
In regards to the show, I can not comment from my perspective, but I have met a number of viewers and listeners over the past few weeks, I was shocked at the affect the show had on some of them. From learning simple little historical facts, to information from archaeologists and even the inane waffling banter we sometimes have, which has cheered some of them up, especially confined to barracks during the lockdown periods.
Personally, I like lying on the sofa in my sweat pants and watching crap TV, but I don't like to let folk down who do enjoy watching.
My terrible haircut and visible greying also add to my hat wearing. Loathe am I of my vanity.
The offer of joining us is open, a neutral platform is available to discuss anything you wish, of course we can not control the comments made bu others, but I'm sure your skin is well leathered.
Regards.
The host of the now renamed - Incredibly bad metal detecting show.
Well, leaving aside the issue of hats and hairdos... I perhaps should explain that I was looking for info on D4V, and when I found a video with a title that suggested it was that, I then found myself having to wait a long time before the bit that I was interested in started.
And by the way, I am not in general a fan of any British channels or videos about "metal detecting", there was one exception that seemed had a fresh approach I liked - wrote about it. Also the longer-running ones get a bit stale. But the Polish ones, for all the snazzy visuals they attempt... worse by a factor of ten than any of them.
I think if I'd been sat there with a beer just watching idly to see "what's Dave S. talking about today?" I might have had a different attitude. Sorry.
My skin is leathery (hair well-grey too) we'll see about the invitation.
Not just me Paul. A fine co host and multiple guests. Things have evolved since the episode you viewed. Over 2 years now in podcast and visual form.
And via advertising we also produce free printed copies of the Archaeology and Metal Detecting Magazine. I'd like to say this profits, but in the 5 and a half years I've been producing all of the above, with a lot of help from my co editor and lots of other nice folk. Mrs Sadler would probably thwack me for spending the money.
The show isn't about me, it's about the guest and the viewers. Sadly, I'm only the driver.
Email me at any time to arrange an appearance, at Editor@archmdmag.com
Dave.
Host - the IBMDs
The "Unknown" who (for some reason) wants to add here critical comments about "Detectival" is first of all going to have to learn how to put their name either in the comment heading, or if that is too difficult for him/her/them, sign the post with their real name at the bottom. In the notes for commenters I quite clearly say I do not accept anonymous posts, and certainly I am not going to publish accusations like that where there is no name. OK, clear? You feel you have something worth saying here, take responsibility for your words and put them under your own name. Stand by what you say.
Post a Comment