Silbury Hill forum 180 room
Image by Moth
Silbury Hill

Grrr​…

close
more_vert

Littlestone wrote:
... give 'em a bit of a chance to correct their mistake in good faith before getting all evangelical on their collective asses. :)
If by evangelical you mean zealous - no, not me gov'. If supporting a particular cause (in this case the protection and conservation of our prehistoric heritage) then most certainly (why would anyone contributing to this board be anything but that?).
I mean OVER zealous. Nothing wrong with wanting them to take the comments down - just don't expect it done the same afternoon! From a purely practical point of view, they're more likely to react favourable if approached calmly. No point getting their backs up by harassing them. People start to get unreasonable under such circumstances, making it less likely that you'll get the result you want.

We all want the same thing - it's just a case of how you go about getting it.

Which is it - zealous or over zealous? I don't like either.

No point getting their backs up by harassing them.
Two comments (so far) to their website pointing out that they are in error hardly constitutes 'harassment'. Assuming you'd seen their website and its seeming 'OK' to climb Silbury, "...for a view around the country side" how would you have responded? (assuming that you don't think it's alright to climb protected monuments).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxA4r_sdnaA

There ya go.
Now there's no need for anyone to climb it ever again. ; )