nigelswift wrote: No, you misread my reasons for saying what I do. Its not because I know best but because I recognise there are two conflicting views and one of them may transgress the other, ergo the only rational answer is "if in doubt do nowt"
If that was the solution, the world would be caught in a constant state of inaction! ;)
nigelswift wrote: i.e leave the site in the default position which, self evidently, is the one supported by most people. (If this was not the majority view MOST people would leave offerings, and clearly they don't. Offerings-leavers are simply outvoted on this matter aren't they? Doesn't that count for anything? Or must a minority claim a right to defy the majority, like detectorists?
Sorry, but that's a ridiculous assertion. That's like saying that most people don't go to church, ergo most people don't support the rights of others to attend church. Most people don't conduct archaeology at ancient sites - that must mean that they object to it!
nigelswift wrote: Yep, then I go home and leave the place as I found it Bit late if the other people have already left. ;)
nigelswift wrote: (I must keep stressing, I don't mind the odd bunch of flowers, I just don't think there's a right to leave them any more than to leave litter in the park Its a public open space and sacrosanct..)
I don't think they have the right to leave them any more than you have the right to prevent them.
nigelswift wrote: True, but I'm hamstrung by not being able to see a defect in the above logic!
That's because there isn't one. Nor is there a defect in the alternate logic of the offering-leaver - they simply represent two different value sets. They both have their own logical consistency, which is why you'll never make any progress by arguing about it. The only progress that can be made is if both "sides" attempt to show some respect and understanding of each other's positions.
Reply | with quote | Posted by Mustard 27th June 2007ce 10:45 |
Ancient sites: Protect or Use? (Mirla, Jun 25, 2007, 15:18)- Re: Ancient sites: Protect or Use? (tiompan, Jun 25, 2007, 16:30)
- Re: Ancient sites: Protect or Use? (Hob, Jun 25, 2007, 17:18)
- Re: Ancient sites: Protect or Use? (Mirla, Jun 26, 2007, 11:26)
- Re: Ancient sites: Protect or Use? (goffik, Jun 26, 2007, 14:45)
- Re: Ancient sites: Protect or Use? (Paulus, Jun 26, 2007, 23:14)
- Re: Ancient sites: Protect or Use? (tomwatts, Jun 27, 2007, 14:57)
- Re: Ancient sites: Protect or Use? (Paulus, Jun 27, 2007, 21:24)
- Re: Ancient sites: Protect or Use? (FourWinds, Jun 28, 2007, 05:51)
- Re: Ancient sites: Protect or Use? (goffik, Jun 28, 2007, 06:07)
- Re: Ancient sites: Protect or Use? (ocifant, Jun 28, 2007, 06:30)
- Re: Ancient sites: Protect or Use? (tuesday, Jun 28, 2007, 08:41)
- Re: Ancient sites: Protect or Use? (Mustard, Jun 29, 2007, 18:04)
- New Code (nigelswift, Jun 28, 2007, 11:52)
- Re: Ancient sites: Protect or Use? (Mirla, Jun 29, 2007, 15:27)
- Re: Ancient sites: Protect or Use? (Vybik Jon, Sep 17, 2012, 14:26)
|
|