Friday 26 March 2010

Responsible Collectors and MILIs


On the Yahoo AncientArtifacts list which promotes responsible collecting, Californian part-time coin dealer Dave Welsh to provoke more conflict on the list by Wayne Sayles' recent blog post“Dealing with the Mentally Fixated Ideologue” to the list. He justifies this and claims it is (somehow) on-topic "because of the significant common sense merits of Mr. Sayles' reaction to some very provocative and (in my opinion) unwarranted remarks in Paul Barford's blog". (Sayles suggested ignoring the points I made). One list member responds "So you posted all that drivel to defend someone who is not a member here regarding something that was not written here? Does that about sum it up?" (yes, just about).

Another collector, Ramon Saenz de Heredia responds by using Sayles' words to define:
the Mentally Inclined to Looting Ideologue (MILI), a sociopath whose main objective is to influence responsible collectors [...] to put aside any ethics when buying ancient artifacts or coins and to disregard or fight any existing national or international laws and/or treaties. This activity can reach orgasmic levels when lobbying against those laws and/or treaties (in or outside this group) and the prohibition of some definite types of artifacts and coins. As painful as it may seem on any given day, in any given instance, the only effective way to deal with MILI(s) is to ignore him/them.
Neat. That just about sums up what Sayles and Welsh are after.

"Provocative" some of the things here may well be, whether or not they are "unwarranted" really depends on where one stands with regard to the indiscriminate digging up and trade in archaeological artefacts. From where I am standing, the position of the no-questions-asked dealing in antiquities certainly seems to warrant very close examination and questioning. Of course both dealers, Mr Sayles and Mr Welsh are quite at liberty to stop "ignoring" the questions, hoping they will go away, and actually engage with them, including here on my blog.


David Gill said...

You need to understand that Sayles' posting does not contain "extended flames, abusive language, rants [or] repetitious postings". The reason I say this is that the List Owner for UNIDRIOT has just posted it there.
Best wishes

Paul Barford said...

I think nobody who has looked at the archives of that list would be under any illusions just what kind of posts and from whom are allowed by the moderator's use of the AUP. Also experience shows what kind are blocked - and it is NOT for being "abusive", on the contrary.

But then nobody really should be under any illusions by now about the level of "debate" represented by the ACCG crowd.

Creative Commons License
Ten utwór jest dostępny na licencji Creative Commons Uznanie autorstwa-Bez utworów zależnych 3.0 Unported.