|
 Log in |
Register
|
|
 Head To Head The Modern Antiquarian General Discussion Forum | Start a topic | Search |
 Re: Ancient sites: Protect or Use? 225 messages | Select a forum: |
slumpystones wrote: Mustard wrote: Have we reached the part that Paulus was talking about where you accuse me of being a troll? I had to laugh when I read that because at that moment you were behaving in a very troll-like way. You keep making it seem like it's "My way or the highway" all the time when it really isn't. How odd. I've stated no such thing. I'm arguing in favour of an open mind and a consideration of all points of view, whereas you seem to the be one arguing in favour of an entrenched position. Sorry if that sounds a tad critical, but I can't think of another way to put it. slumpystones wrote: It's about being realistic, it's about discouraging piles of crap everywhere, be it at SAMs or in roadside lay-byes [lay-bys? lay byes?...], and realising that people follow happily what is already common practice. A Big Mac wrapper becomes an ashtrayfull of butts, becomes a KFC bargain bucket and wine bottle, becomes a fridge, becomes garden waste, becomes whole piles of shit strewn along the road. Now we could establish that small items are okay, but would that stop them dumping fridges? No. Making it illegal 100% will discourage certain, but not all, people from dumping their household crap on the side of the road. I'm really not sure how we got from a couple of flowers to household crap, fag butts and Mc Donald's wrappers! slumpystones wrote: Human nature being what it is, the only way to discourage the big is to ban the small, however unpalatable that might be. But banning it will have no effect, so dialogue is really your only option. Reply | with quote | Posted by Mustard 27th June 2007ce 15:53 In reply to: Re: Ancient sites: Protect or Use? (slumpystones) |
Messages in this topic: |
|