The "Detractors" are 100% Right

I wonder if I can press you further

From the FLO of West Slytherin:

I’m glad to hear that Rescue continue to support the PAS and it’s (sic!) aims. I have to say that after reading the 'Policy for the Future’ document (and perhaps paying too much attention to detractors) I did fear that support had slipped away. It would be nice to strengthen the links between Rescue and PAS, as we are all working toward the same ends.

A debatable point, I would suggest. They continue:

In terms of constructive criticism (and speaking personally here), it’s of course always welcome and always useful. I wonder if I can press you a little further, and ask if you might expand on how (either in your opinion or that of Rescue) you feel that “the PAS has been unable to sufficiently advocate for archaeological methodologies and rigorous survey practices…” etc. and even perhaps how Rescue feel this might be corrected.

I would suggest it is up to the PAS to show that RESCUE are wrong. Quite clearly if one looks at any metal detecting forum tale of "wot I found yesterdiy" it becomes all to clear that even 'responsible metal detecting' is done in a manner that shows nobody has been advocating in that for archaeological methodologies and rigorous survey practices. It's on a detecting forum near you, just a mouse click away.

Surely if random acquisitive collectable artefact hoiking is destroying, unrecorded, archaeological information which now even this FLO now admits consists of more than 'X-marks the spot' but 'positional/spatial/typological (sic) etc. info is the context', then surely best practice (responsible detecting) is that which allows that information content to be retrieved and recorded. No? So where is PAS putting that message across? 

The FLO might like to explain the use of the term "detractors" here. Also "recontextualisation"...
Bonkers.