Hi Goff -
goffik wrote: Hi Paulus!
I'm not so sure that's the way it is... Y'see, the way I see it is that we get quite a few antagonists appearing on this site (quite a few who have been previously banned and return under rather flimsy pseudonyms!) - their sole intention seems to be to create bad feeling among other contributors...
Hmmm...perhaps it's a northern thing then...? (or izzit just me?) I s'ppose I've gotta ask: what's the real problem with antagonists? Some of them can actually make you think, differently. And that's gotta be good. Some evoke the old emotional 'AAARRRGGHHHH!!! - F**k off" exclamation, obviously - but that's summat I think, if we're emotionally and psychologically strong - or rather, 'adult' - we can deal with. Otherwise there's the potential for something to become little other than a clique, where alternate views or disagreements are fled from, instead of musing over. And I know that there are different educational and evolutional levels to each and everything we explore, but in occluding some we reinforce the clique mentality - and that's gotta be wrong, surely?
goffik wrote: I don't think LS is out of order at all. In fact he probably speaks for quite a few of us (who, rather sensibly, just avoid eye-contact with aforementioned idiots! ;o) )!
Echoing what I've just said: there are also quite a few TMA people I've spoke to (via emails and first-person) who think the contrary. Occasionally they emerge and make the passing remark that they can't be arsed anymore, but they're simply not into having to make any effort into trying to widen or challenge the parameters. They can't be bothered arguing (though I think the word used by the forum folk would be 'discussiuon' - though it turns out to be something very different many times). Surely that's bad innit? Cliquey? I spent 6 months thinking "Fuck TMA" for such reasons (but my arrogance brought me back!) - and there are notably others who have stopped adding sites similarly. Not good. I think we need to widen a bit more tolerance in disagreement - wot d' y' think?
Howzabout - those who don't like people disagreeing with them should piss off; and those who enjoy a good argument encouraged!? Or, perhaps, widen the forum into differing subject matters, as elsewhere? We could have HA section, where the politics of megaliths and those really into that can waffle and argue to their heart's content. A NewAge section where ley-hunters and energy-liners can dowse their little ways? Pure archaeomancers, where the nitty-gritty of archaeology is reeled over? A Myth & Folklore section, for the mythographers and fairy-hunters among us? We've just entered Europe after all - howzabout widening the forums aswell...?
goffik wrote: Hope all is good at your end!
G x
Cheers for asking! VERY good at this end for various reasons. How's your Well's wbsite coming alongby the way? Any further development?
Cheers - Paul
This topic is locked | Posted by Paulus 31st July 2007ce 14:40 |
Silbury updates (Littlestone, May 20, 2007, 16:20)- Re: Silbury updates (Pete G, May 20, 2007, 23:50)
- Re: Silbury updates (moss, May 21, 2007, 07:52)
- Re: Silbury updates (Pilgrim, May 21, 2007, 08:04)
- Re: Silbury updates (Littlestone, May 21, 2007, 21:11)
- Sentient Silbury: A lithic laxative? (Pilgrim, May 22, 2007, 01:28)
- Re: Silbury updates (tiompan, May 22, 2007, 07:43)
- Re: Silbury updates (Littlestone, May 22, 2007, 19:31)
- Re: Silbury updates (Pete G, May 23, 2007, 15:46)
- Re: Silbury updates (Littlestone, May 23, 2007, 22:26)
- Re: Silbury updates: 'Atkinson/BBC Entrance' (Littlestone, May 24, 2007, 17:34)
- Re: Silbury updates (Littlestone, May 31, 2007, 20:23)
- Re: Silbury updates (RSleepy, May 28, 2007, 12:54)
- Re: Silbury updates (Littlestone, May 22, 2007, 10:28)
- Re: Silbury updates (tomwatts, May 22, 2007, 11:35)
- Re: Silbury updates (Littlestone, Jun 01, 2007, 18:01)
- Oh come off it! (nigelswift, Jun 07, 2007, 08:23)
- Update No. 4 (nigelswift, Jun 11, 2007, 13:06)
- Diminishing returns (Littlestone, Jun 13, 2007, 22:52)
- Re: Silbury updates (Littlestone, Jun 15, 2007, 07:51)
- I'd take the Fifth.... (Pilgrim, Jun 18, 2007, 07:35)
- Week 5 update (Littlestone, Jun 18, 2007, 15:58)
- Re: Silbury updates (tomwatts, Jun 20, 2007, 17:14)
- Re: Silbury updates (Littlestone, Jun 25, 2007, 18:21)
- Re: slumpy's EH comment - England's Heritage (slumpystones, Jun 28, 2007, 17:21)
- English Heritage - Another side (Robert Carr, Jun 29, 2007, 07:15)
- Re: Silbury updates (goffik, Jun 29, 2007, 13:07)
- Re: Silbury updates (Littlestone, Jun 29, 2007, 13:16)
- Re: Silbury updates (scousemaiden, Jun 30, 2007, 14:42)
- Re: Silbury updates (moss, Jun 30, 2007, 16:48)
- Re: Silbury updates (slumpystones, Jun 30, 2007, 17:59)
- Re: Silbury updates (scousemaiden, Jun 30, 2007, 20:11)
- Re: Time Capsules? (Pilgrim, Jun 30, 2007, 23:44)
- Re: Silbury updates (nigelswift, Jul 01, 2007, 05:39)
- Re: Silbury updates (Littlestone, Jul 01, 2007, 06:39)
- Re: Silbury updates (scousemaiden, Jul 01, 2007, 08:16)
- Re: Silbury updates (slumpystones, Jul 01, 2007, 08:44)
- Hate? (Pilgrim, Jul 01, 2007, 09:01)
- Re: Silbury updates (nigelswift, Jul 01, 2007, 09:19)
- Re: Silbury updates (Mustard, Jul 01, 2007, 13:29)
- Re: Silbury updates (Toxic Delerium, Jul 01, 2007, 15:12)
- Re: Silbury updates (nigelswift, Jul 01, 2007, 15:23)
- Re: Silbury updates (Toxic Delerium, Jul 01, 2007, 15:25)
- Re: Silbury updates (nigelswift, Jul 01, 2007, 15:28)
- Re: Silbury updates (Toxic Delerium, Jul 01, 2007, 15:33)
- Re: Silbury updates (rammie, Jul 01, 2007, 15:36)
- Re: Silbury updates (Pete G, Jul 01, 2007, 15:38)
- Re: Silbury updates (slumpystones, Jul 01, 2007, 15:40)
- Re: Silbury updates (nigelswift, Jul 01, 2007, 15:44)
- Re: Silbury updates (Toxic Delerium, Jul 01, 2007, 15:47)
- Re: Silbury updates (Mustard, Jul 01, 2007, 15:51)
- Re: Silbury updates (slumpystones, Jul 01, 2007, 15:55)
- Re: Silbury updates (Toxic Delerium, Jul 01, 2007, 15:59)
- Re: Silbury updates (Mustard, Jul 01, 2007, 16:00)
- Re: Silbury updates (Toxic Delerium, Jul 01, 2007, 16:08)
- Re: Silbury updates (slumpystones, Jul 01, 2007, 16:24)
- Re: Silbury updates (Toxic Delerium, Jul 02, 2007, 08:36)
- Re: Silbury updates (fitzcoraldo, Jul 02, 2007, 08:38)
- Re: Silbury updates (moss, Jul 02, 2007, 09:24)
- Re: Silbury updates (nigelswift, Jul 02, 2007, 09:50)
- Re: Silbury updates (Rockrich, Jul 02, 2007, 10:49)
- Re: Silbury updates (slumpystones, Jul 02, 2007, 11:35)
- Re: Silbury updates (nigelswift, Jul 01, 2007, 16:03)
- Re: Silbury updates (Mustard, Jul 01, 2007, 15:28)
- Re: Silbury updates (Pete G, Jul 01, 2007, 12:49)
- Re: Silbury updates (Robert Carr, Jul 01, 2007, 08:32)
- Re: Silbury updates (VenerableBottyBurp, Jul 01, 2007, 08:33)
- Re: Silbury updates (slumpystones, Jul 01, 2007, 08:15)
- Re: Silbury updates (Lubin, Jul 01, 2007, 14:52)
- Ask the Experts (Littlestone, Jul 01, 2007, 10:50)
- Re: Silbury updates (Mustard, Jul 01, 2007, 15:08)
- Re: Silbury updates (Littlestone, Jul 01, 2007, 16:18)
- Re: time capsule - would this solve the problems? (VenerableBottyBurp, Jul 02, 2007, 15:39)
- Re: time capsule - would this solve the problems? (goffik, Jul 02, 2007, 15:55)
- Re: time capsule - would this solve the problems? (Pete G, Jul 02, 2007, 16:07)
- Re: time capsule - would this solve the problems? (Littlestone, Jul 02, 2007, 16:20)
- Re: time capsule - would this solve the problems? (slumpystones, Jul 02, 2007, 16:28)
- Re: time capsule - would this solve the problems? (CianMcLiam, Jul 02, 2007, 16:36)
- Re: time capsule - would this solve the problems? (nigelswift, Jul 02, 2007, 17:02)
- Re: time capsule - would this solve the problems? (tiompan, Jul 03, 2007, 08:33)
- Re: Silbury updates (Pilgrim, Jul 03, 2007, 06:07)
- Re: Silbury updates (goffik, Jul 03, 2007, 14:48)
- Re: Silbury updates (moss, Jul 09, 2007, 15:15)
- Re: Silbury updates (Littlestone, Jul 16, 2007, 16:38)
- Time capsule - Lord Avebury's opinion (Littlestone, Jul 19, 2007, 06:51)
- Re: Time capsule - Lord Avebury's opinion (slumpystones, Jul 19, 2007, 09:52)
- Re: Time capsule - Lord Avebury's opinion (nigelswift, Jul 19, 2007, 15:59)
- Re: Time capsule - Lord Avebury's opinion (Littlestone, Jul 19, 2007, 17:26)
- Re: Time capsule - Lord Avebury's opinion (Robert Carr, Jul 19, 2007, 17:51)
- Re: Time capsule - Lord Avebury's opinion (slumpystones, Jul 19, 2007, 19:13)
- Re: Time capsule - Lord Avebury's opinion (Littlestone, Jul 19, 2007, 22:01)
- Re: Time capsule - Lord Avebury's opinion (Robert Carr, Jul 20, 2007, 09:54)
- Re: Time capsule - Lord Avebury's opinion (nigelswift, Jul 20, 2007, 10:06)
- Re: Time capsule - Lord Avebury's opinion (Robert Carr, Jul 20, 2007, 10:12)
- Re: Time capsule - Lord Avebury's opinion (Robert Carr, Jul 20, 2007, 11:02)
- Re: Time capsule - Lord Avebury's opinion (nigelswift, Jul 20, 2007, 11:08)
- Re: Time capsule - Lord Avebury's opinion (goffik, Jul 20, 2007, 11:12)
- Re: Time capsule - Lord Avebury's opinion (Robert Carr, Jul 20, 2007, 11:15)
- Re: Time capsule - Lord Avebury's opinion (nigelswift, Jul 20, 2007, 11:32)
- Re: Time capsule - Lord Avebury's opinion (Robert Carr, Jul 20, 2007, 11:57)
- Re: Time capsule - Lord Avebury's opinion (nigelswift, Jul 20, 2007, 12:02)
- Re: Time capsule - Lord Avebury's opinion (Moth, Jul 20, 2007, 12:14)
- Re: Time capsule - Lord Avebury's opinion (moss, Jul 20, 2007, 12:26)
- Re: Time capsule - Lord Avebury's opinion (slumpystones, Jul 21, 2007, 10:08)
- Re: Time capsule - Lord Avebury's opinion (VenerableBottyBurp, Jul 20, 2007, 00:10)
- Re: Silbury updates (Mr Hamhead, Jul 20, 2007, 08:00)
- And now for the door... (Littlestone, Jul 20, 2007, 18:54)
- English Heritage and Heritage Action meeting? (Robert Carr, Jul 21, 2007, 12:46)
- Re: Silbury updates (Littlestone, Jul 23, 2007, 15:38)
- Silbury about to implode? (Littlestone, Jul 26, 2007, 12:51)
- Re: Silbury about to implode? (nigelswift, Jul 26, 2007, 13:05)
- Re: Silbury about to implode? (Rhiannon, Jul 26, 2007, 14:15)
- Re: Silbury about to implode? (VenerableBottyBurp, Jul 26, 2007, 21:48)
- More details re temporary halt (whipangel, Jul 27, 2007, 11:15)
- Re: Silbury about to implode? (Littlestone, Jul 27, 2007, 17:36)
- the view from inside (fool on the hill, Jul 27, 2007, 20:49)
- Re: the view from inside (fitzcoraldo, Jul 28, 2007, 08:26)
- Re: the view from inside (Littlestone, Jul 28, 2007, 11:14)
- Re: the view from inside (moss, Jul 28, 2007, 11:23)
- Re: the view from inside (Robert Carr, Jul 28, 2007, 13:55)
- Re: the view from inside (goffik, Jul 28, 2007, 19:47)
- Re: the view from inside (nigelswift, Jul 28, 2007, 22:09)
- Re: the view from inside (Pilgrim, Jul 28, 2007, 23:53)
- Re: Silbury about to implode? (slumpystones, Jul 27, 2007, 20:27)
- Mr Carr (Littlestone, Jul 29, 2007, 07:34)
- Re: Mr Carr (slumpystones, Jul 29, 2007, 14:51)
- Re: Mr Carr (Paulus, Jul 31, 2007, 11:46)
- Re: Mr Carr (Littlestone, Jul 31, 2007, 13:04)
- Re: Mr Carr (Paulus, Jul 31, 2007, 13:26)
- Re: Mr Carr (Paulus, Jul 31, 2007, 13:42)
- Re: Mr Carr (goffik, Jul 31, 2007, 13:47)
- Re: Mr Carr (Paulus, Jul 31, 2007, 14:11)
- Re: Mr Carr (goffik, Jul 31, 2007, 14:20)
- Re: Mr Carr (Paulus, Jul 31, 2007, 14:40)
- Re: Mr Carr (Robert Carr, Jul 31, 2007, 18:35)
- Calling "Fool on the Hill" (nigelswift, Jul 30, 2007, 11:42)
- Re: Silbury updates (goffik, Jul 31, 2007, 17:11)
|
|