Saturday, 28 September 2013

"Daj mi adres pana HGW, wytłumaczę mu bardzo szybko że się myli i bardzo szybko przeprosi za zaistniałe chamstwo z jego strony ... "

Over on a metal detecting forum near you, discussion is continuing about the Fifth Offley commercial artefact hunting rally. But the people concerned would prefer to be the only people doing it:
"Może warto Drogi Panie P.B. pogadać z nami na naszym forum a nie obrażać?"
Insulting? Where, maybe they'd like to show us where they have been insulted in my post largely about Julian Watters and the PAS? These Poles seem quick to take offence at an imagined slight. If England is a country with "normal laws" and these folk are doing nothing wrong, then what is the problem with bringing out into the open what they are doing and discussing it openly? They want to participate in the joint archaeological heritage of the British Isles, then let them also participate in discussions about it. As for the guy ("Marand9", 29thSept 10:07) wanting my "address", the link to the blog leads also to its comments section. Let the rally participants feel free to use it to tell me where I am mistaken about what I, and everybody else, saw on that film.

As for my joining their online discussions, as I explained earlier, I tried to register to learn more about the group but was rejected ("Cultural Property Immigration: the UK's Polish "Historical Explorers"..." Thursday, 13 September 2012). I also invited these people to comment on my blog posts last year, but the group's members adopted a "don't speak to him" policy (not the first group of artefact hunters to do that).
Podaję adres blogu Paula Barforda, jednak proponuję by powstrzymać się od komentowania tam jego wpisów [...] zapewne blog pana PB działa jak kilka polskich for poszukiwawczych, gdzie "nieopoprawne" wpisy są momentalnie usuwane a jakakolwiek polemika niedopuszczalna.
Nothing could be further from the truth. Obviously if artefact hunters disagree with what I am saying or wish to address my concerns, this is the place to do it. I suggest if they are afraid that I will delete anything that does not suit me (the usual telkkie excuse for not engaging in proper discussion), then they can post the comment in duplicate, once here, with a copy on their own forum for all to see. 

UPDATE 2nd October 2013:
Needless to say, the vulgar comment has not been removed from the Thesaurus forum.


Dorothy King said...

At least "Panie P.B." is in the polite form ... ditto pana.

Paul Barford said...

well, I'm not too much up on gutter Polish (it does not come up much in the sort of circles I move in), but am reliably informed by a young person that "HGW..." is not an abbreviation for the name of the current President of Warsaw, but probably something more scatological.

(Except if that is so, it should be "ch" and not "h")

but he spelt "chamstwo" right.

Dorothy King said...

Can't help you with that as I'm told my Polish is ridiculously old-fashioned so the 'average' Pole doesn't understand me ...LOL

Pisz Aniu, pisz... said...

Well, it's always difficult to judge whether one should try and post any kind of comment on your blog.. We did try to comment on your posts last year but the comments were instantly removed from this page, even though we only addressed the facts, ignoring your usual mix of half truths and pure nonsense. Replying to bloggers such as yourself is an activity known in cyberspace as "feeding the troll" and generally is not to be encouraged but since in the above post you write pure untruth, I will brake the rule just once and TRY to explain few things in the hope (vain of course)that you will finally get the message.
You really DO insult us for example by implying that there is any kind of censorship at work. Your quotes are taken out of context from an open internet forum and since you are such a close follower of posts on it you know perfectly well that we clear important topics from unnecessary chat and banter. This is called "moderating" an internet forum and is done by any responsible forum administrators/moderators. In this particular case we cleared the topic which was a photographic summary of our Detecting Without Borders rally by removing questions of one forum member to another of a kind "what do you think is the best type of detector" and "what is the best sleeping bag to take to the rally next time". The message of forum administrator was clear: "I have cleared this topic a little bit. Please remember that this topic is seen by guests from outside the forum so let's stick with the topic of the rally and confine chat and banter to shoutbox area of the forum and private messages." Of course you know perfectly well that this was done in order to make the topic interesting to our guests and in no way any form of censorship. The proof is that as usual you take words out of their context (in your blog post from yesterday) and quoting only part of that message, thereby suggesting to readers of your blog that we tried to hide something from "outsiders". This kind of manipulation is your unfortunate trademark so small wonder that you are looked upon as a typical internet troll, craving attention. Another lie is of course about you trying to join the forum and participate in discussions but being stopped by someone who "looked at my blog and saw I write about preservation". Utter nonsense as exchange of emails from last year can clearly demonstrate. We do not generally publish private correspondence but in this case may make an exception so that readers of your blog can make their own mind up, without your censorship and twisting of words and facts. I will not even try to write about your other comments and suggestions with a cleverly hidden racist remarks, which presumably try to paint Polish detectorists as a kind of boil in a British world of detecting, which British detectorists could do well without. Surely not because we are the first club in the UK in which members have obligation to report 100% of their historical finds to PAS, another target of your hate-posts? Such comments should simply be ignored or should be consulted with ones lawyer. But then we would really be feeding the troll..

Paul Barford said...

Mr Murawski, it is good to hear from you. Thank you for your comment.

Last year no comment reached this blog, so cannot have been "removed" by me. If there is something which you wanted to comment on and experienced technical problems, please send it again.

It's not really necessary to explain to me patronisingly what "feeding the trolls" means, as this blog gets more than enough of them. I really do not understand your aversion to discussing what it is you are doing in a reasonable manner, why is raising questions "trolling"? (Tell me, when would it not be?)

Thank you also for the explanation of what it was your mods removed from the rally thread. I am not sure though that there is anything "untrue" or "out of context" in what I said. I asked what it was you did not want these guests seeing on that thread and now we have the answer. I am sure moderating such a forum could be quite frustrating.

You know I really would like you to point out where in the post which we are discussing you see any "cleverly hidden racist remarks" !!! (Besides which Polish is a nationality, not a "race"). That seems to me to be nonsense.

I think the more general issue is not so much that Polish detectorists are the problem here, but (if you'd read my blog) rallies. I think they are a serious problem that need discussing. I think also they are a huge weak link in the chain of arguments used to justify artefact hunting in the UK. You will see on the pages of my blog very many posts raising these issues.

I also think so-called "metal detecting holidays" are a huge problem as well. If you look in my blog there is a fair amount of discussion of them, mainly involving US artefact-hunting-tourists (Chicago Ron, the Colchester setup in particular). Your rally develops into one of them the moment you start inviting detectorists from other countries to the UK to take advantage of the lax UK laws. That is the main reason I discussed "Detecting without frontiers", not because of the nationality of the people you invited.

My additional interest in it however is more personal, in that it was your declared ambition to use it as an example of "good laws" for your fellows back in Poland to use in their battles with Polish preservation laws. I think in Poland we have enough problems with those seeing PAS as something which it is not without adding to them. And again, I invite you and your Polish colleagues to have a good look at the reasons why PAS is not in fact the answer to the problem. You may, as is the fashion in UKtekkiedom, try to dismiss it as "hate posts" to save addressing the issues. That however does not mean that the issues do not exist.

Paul Barford said...

Oh, and maybe Mr Murawski, as a translator yourself, you might like to explain to my English-speaking readers what the phrase "HGW" (from your moderated forum that "guests" might see) actually means.

You removed the comment on sleeping bags, but not that one
(it was still up at two this afternoon).

Paul Barford said...

Hmmm. That comment that was allegedly "removed" can now be explained.

Mr Murawski gives a link to it ("in its entirity") here:

The link is ....

which goes to a text which put in a Word file comes to 11831 words.

In the sidebar over on the left of this page (scroll down a bit) is a section "Posting comments
About posting comments to this blog, please see here". It seems Mr Murawski did not.

The fourth paragraph down very clearly warns posters that independently of me there is a word limit to Blogger's comments and what to do to avoid losing posts (save them as a word file and post in shorter chunks).

That would explain why I never received the comment, but I am sure detectorists who before acting cannot be bothered to look at the guidelines provided for their convenience will continue to see it as some kind of slight on my part.

Paul Barford said...

I saw the text "Ratunek Czy Rabunek, Czyli Klub Pod Ostrzałem" on the Forum, I thought it was a general chip-on-the-shoulder moan, there is nothing in the text itself to suggest an attempt had been made to post it as a comment to my blog. It is, after all, written in the third person, which seems to me to be an odd way to address the blog's author.

It would be difficult to answer it in one go, as the commenter has placed remarks on a whole number of different posts together in the one comment. He'd have had more luck getting through the Blogger word limit problem by commenting on each post separately, UNDER that post (as I said in the Guidelines), which would also help keep the discussion on topic (-rather like the issues he himself presents at the top of this comment thread about his own club's forum).

Should Mr Murawski care to do that, I will answer his points, but it really looks like he wants to take up an enormous amount of my time discussing again issues like "he called us artefact hunters" (see a 2008 post all about that) and other such things.

Paul Barford said...

From the moderated forum:
"piszę z małej litery z wiadomych względów "

because it's a proper noun?

Paul Barford said...

Mr Murawski,
since I see that you did not trust me and posted a copy of your comments, preceded by some unjustifiable accusations, to your club's forum, would it not be intellectually honest to now indicate there (which seven hours later you still have not done) that I replied to these comments?

Can you do that please?

Could you and your members also try to keep in mind that I have as much right to express my opinion about artefact hunting in the UK as you have to do it.

Paul Barford said...

On this page:

we can all see the full extent of the "intellectual honesty" of our Polish colleagues.

No such link was published, and the poor lost souls when they come to me blog simply read the first post to which Mr Murawski linked, and do not go any further into the topic by reading the followup posts.

That is how much they care about the British heritage, about as much as they can put in their pocket it would seem from that.

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