Diggers Forum. Anonymous Complaints. - kettlaness - 2nd June 2015
Sith Wrote:Was a statement of an incorrect level of accreditation the only thing wrong with the report ?
'Only' ?
Isn't that enough ?
Where someone cites false accreditation, can the assumption be made that their documentation presents a fair reflection of the facts ? - especially since the levels of accreditation are based on competence ? Doesn't this 'devalue' the worth of the accreditation for those members who are at that level ?
And what about the client ?; if I were to employ someone to carry out a particular task (whether archaeological or not) I might well decide to take them on, based on their accreditation to the governing body - that's what I'd be paying them for.
Diggers Forum. Anonymous Complaints. - Dinosaur - 3rd June 2015
This is all just convincing me further (if that's possible) that any potential cIFA membership subs are being much better invested in my Premium Bond account (other you-might-win-a-million savings schemes are probably available) towards a much younger car as a far-more-useful career-development tool, and cIFA can go hang....
Diggers Forum. Anonymous Complaints. - Marc Berger - 4th June 2015
ketlanness, why haven't you mentioned copyright as yet? is it cause you isn't self employed?
Diggers Forum. Anonymous Complaints. - Dinosaur - 4th June 2015
Marc Berger Wrote:ketlanness, why haven't you mentioned copyright as yet? is it cause you isn't self employed?
We're supposed to be producing information for public consumption, so copyright should only really be coming into play as a defence against academic plagiarism? :face-stir:
Diggers Forum. Anonymous Complaints. - kettlaness - 4th June 2015
Marc Berger Wrote:ketlanness, why haven't you mentioned copyright as yet? is it cause you isn't self employed?
You've totally lost me now - I realise I'm probably being a bit dim, but what do you mean by 'copyright' and how does that tie in with my employment ?
Diggers Forum. Anonymous Complaints. - kettlaness - 4th June 2015
Dinosaur Wrote:We're supposed to be producing information for public consumption, so copyright should only really be coming into play as a defence against academic plagiarism? :face-stir:
Again, I'm a little 'lost' with this comment . . .
Diggers Forum. Anonymous Complaints. - Dinosaur - 4th June 2015
When I dig stuff up and publish it, its in the public domain, couldn't give a s**t if people want to copy it, I've moved on to the next project. I do however object to any of my ideas being nicked and recycled without due credit. Factual archaeology books do not, on the whole, make anyone rich (not in this country anyway).
Marc seems to work on the different principle that any findings from any work he does should be his, and his alone, unless someone pays for the info, over and above the fact that he's already been paid for it as part of his original contract to produce it in the first place - 'having cake' and 'eating it' can probably be combined in some way here?
Diggers Forum. Anonymous Complaints. - kettlaness - 4th June 2015
Dinosaur Wrote:Thus is all just convincing me further (if that's possible) that any potential cIFA membership subs are being much better invested in my Premium Bond account (other you-might-win-a-million savings schemes are probably available)
Please send all your surplus money to me - I have a high-interest account in Nigeria, that can look after it for you
Diggers Forum. Anonymous Complaints. - Sikelgaita - 4th June 2015
kettlaness Wrote:Please send all your surplus money to me - I have a high-interest account in Nigeria, that can look after it for you
Oh no! Is everyone posting here actually a clone of Unitof1!
(Apologies Kettlaness if you don't understand that reference either)
Diggers Forum. Anonymous Complaints. - kettlaness - 4th June 2015
Sikelgaita Wrote:Oh no! Is everyone posting here actually a clone of Unitof1!
(Apologies Kettlaness if you don't understand that reference either)
Woosh !
Yes, that's another reference I've missed; I'll learn . . . . . . . . . eventually.
|