Sunday, 7 November 2010


PhDiva shows her class when, despite having several times been herself the butt of some of my criticism here over a couple of things, she comments on the 'ad hominem' attempts of UK "metal detectorists" to dismiss the issues raised in this blog. Thank you.


Anonymous said...

I hope you track whoever it is down and expose them Paul

Dorothy King said...

There's a huge difference between a few attack posts and a whole blog devoted to hatred (because that's what 'her' blog is), so I hope they give up soon. You really do have my sympathies, because we can all be made to look bad if people want to, and it could happen to any of us. Chin up - you're probably doing something right if you upset them that badly.

Paul Barford said...

Thanks Corinne. I won't, the people working with my wife will.

I think the Candices and Buffys are already "exposing" quite enough about the ability - or rather total inability - of metal detectorists in the UK to actually address face-on the issues surrounding treating the archaeological record as a source of collectables.

The more this empty sniping goes on with no proper debate emerging, the more it discredits the tekkie position I feel.

The more people that can be alienated from artefact hunters, the better as far as I am concerned. Dorothy King expressed what I am sure is the reaction of a lot of decent educated people to that sort of stuff.

There is nothing really for me to "expose", he is (I am sure its a man) merely making a ham-fisted attempt to collate snippets from the Internet. What he cannot deduce he speculates, gets some right, much wrong. As far as I can see there's nothing there that was hidden or should be hidden, no big sex scandals, no criminal record, just an ordinary bloke doing ordinary things, some with success others less so.

But I am not writing because I have a degree or two and a shovel and trowel or two, I am writing because I have some thoughts, and yes some knowledge, on artefact hunting and collecting. I would have thought the degrees and shovels were less important than the ideas. Obviously not for those who have a fixation on archaeologists having degrees and trowels when they don't.

Paul Barford said...

Thanks Dorothy.

"Candice" is a man.

Actually I do not think I have anything in particular to "hide" (certainly nothing this bloke is likely to come up with). I think most people realise that "you can make anyone look bad if you want to", and the opinion of those who don't really does not interest me.

As far as I am concerned "Candice" is just making himself look inadequate. But I am more interested in the damage he's doing to his own cause.

[I did not see your comment until after I'd replied to Corinne, thanks again].

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