Ancient sites: Protect or Use?

close
more_vert
nigelswift N
nigelswift Jun 28, 2007 11:52:56
Replying to Mirla

Since the only bit of agreement in this highly peculiar thread seems to be that everyone thinks non biological offerings are a Bad Thing, perhaps I could offer this, not as a full solution but at least one that everyone would think would do a bit of good:

_________________________

Code for Responsible Subsequent Visitors to Megalithic Sites

CLAUSE 1: Remove all non biological offerings from the site.
CLAUSE 2: Thank you.
_________________________

M Mustard
Mustard Jun 29, 2007 18:05:39
Replying to nigelswift

nigelswift wrote:
Since the only bit of agreement in this highly peculiar thread seems to be that everyone thinks non biological offerings are a Bad Thing, perhaps I could offer this, not as a full solution but at least one that everyone would think would do a bit of good:

_________________________

Code for Responsible Subsequent Visitors to Megalithic Sites

CLAUSE 1: Remove all non biological offerings from the site.
CLAUSE 2: Thank you.
_________________________

No argument from me. Seems perfectly reasonable.

B BuckyE
BuckyE Jun 29, 2007 23:05:55
Replying to nigelswift

Oh brother! You guys. It's the old toilet seat argument again: does it get left up or down? (Meaning, of course, the girls want the seat left down, the boys want the seat left up, right?) Well, the OBVIOUS solution to that is to leave it the way the NEXT PERSON wants it. The girls leave the seat up for the boys, and vice versa.

Applying the same logic, the TMAers are hereby required to leave some piece of plastic tat every time they visit, for the worshippers and tourists to admire, and the pagans and tourists to clean it up, leaving the site clean for the old curmudgeons. Jeeze, wasn't that easy?

And a big hello to Mustard and Mirla! Fun place, huh?