Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Sep 2004
7th August 2008, 01:04 PM
Quote:quote:Originally posted by drpeterwardle
Britarch is about British archaeology and is an academic discussion list aimed at academics.
Peter Wardle
Might be aimed at academics but misses the target I think. Not many academic names that I recognise. Been reading the archives for years and have an impression of lots of archaeologists of many flavours including a sizeable armchair group. Often seems like a CBA regional meeting but online...
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2004
7th August 2008, 01:27 PM
for fun I looked at the occupations of many of the posters... and its an intresting read...
There are lots of archaeologist there, but they just keep quiet I fear!
Adn Steven... are you Dolly?
"I don't have an archaeological imagination.."
Borekickers
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2005
7th August 2008, 03:11 PM
Quote:quote:Originally posted by BAJR Host
Adn Steven... are you Dolly?
"I don't have an archaeological imagination.."
Borekickers
Pah! We shall not speak of that poor imitation! I should sue, but my gout is playing up something awful.
Steven
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2007
7th August 2008, 08:33 PM
Quote:quote:Originally posted by BAJR Host
where people could not speak their mind without fear
I love the fact that I can speak my mind on BAJR. Here goes:
[tumbleweed rolls past]
I feel better now[xx(]
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2004
7th August 2008, 10:11 PM
I would have edited it anyway... thanks goodness...
I did have a brief glimpse though - you dirty dirty dolly [:p]
"I don't have an archaeological imagination.."
Borekickers
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2008
8th August 2008, 12:24 PM
Both are useful - but I admit that after having been sucked into both the mad fish-face-slapping ravings of the anti/pro collecting & Metal detecting groups and the head in the sand lunacy of the "global warming isn't real" fanatics I may have to resort to lurking instead.
I tried reasoned comments but have given up - informed sensible debate isn't possible if every comment and example is then pedantically verbally fire bombed until the actual issue being "discussed" is so buried in side arguments and obfiscation that no-one actually knows what the premise of the debate is any more!
Having said that Britarch does provide useful info outside these two issues (those and the insessant posts about bonekickers not being factually accurate) - you do get genuinely helpful answers to questions and requests for help on there (and on here I might add).
Not sure it's for academics though - I guess there are a few of us but I suspect they have already taken to lurking in the background and ignoring the ranting fanatics. E.g. Certain friends and colleagues say they just delete anything with Mr Barford as the author on the basis that nothing they've seen him write was worth reading.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2004
8th August 2008, 12:31 PM
Quote:quote: mad fish-face-slapping ravings
I like that quote... can I use that elsewhere
That said... BAJR can be quite good for that too. [:p]
The thing I liek about BAJR is the range... and the tolerance.. (albeit in the odd occasion, because of the potential to moderate)
Its sad that Paul Barford has go him self in taht position, because there are many things that make sense, and also he does have a good mind. I just think debate involves people discussing, and being able to come to a compromise, rather than lobbing intellectual handgrenades from entrenched positions.
There is a place for both... I just know where I belong and feel comfortable. I note real questions or notices, get lost in pedantic posturing.
Britarch Forum anyone?
"I don't have an archaeological imagination.."
Borekickers
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2008
8th August 2008, 12:37 PM
BAJR Host wrote:
"I was told that Britarch notes BAJR just moans about how the IFA are not enforcing standards ... I refer the honourable gentleman to previous discussions .. about what they can and can't do... and shall we say that for ever grumbling moan.....there is also a real issue. "
Err.. that may have been me! - I wasn't saying that was all that happened here, far from it. BAJR also has lots of moans on other subjects too! ;o)
But seriously, the comment was in relation to malicious misuse of the peer review system and discussing how this might be grounds for a complaint of professional misconduct.
I was commenting that standards enforcement needs an initial complaint in order to be acted on rather than a roving policing brief of a professional body - which would be unworkable. BAJR wasn't really the issue - just an example where such comments could be demonstrated as having had been made before (which given the number of pedants around on Britarch at the time would allow me to at least point them at threads to prove I wasn't making it up!)
For the sake of clarity though my exact comments were:
"I['ve] read a lot of moans on BAJR about the IFA not enforcing their standards & code of conduct, but usually where the IFA have not had a complaint - without a complaint they can't do anything."
I don't think the comment was unreasonable.
Andy
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2008
8th August 2008, 12:39 PM
BAJR Host wrote:
"I just think debate involves people discussing, and being able to come to a compromise, rather than lobbing intellectual handgrenades from entrenched positions."
Here here! Couldn't agree more.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Sep 2005
8th August 2008, 12:45 PM
Actually I think part of the reason why debates on Britarch tend to develop in the way that they do is to do with the email-based format. Incoming email tends to provoke an instant response and it is quite easy to get worked up.
On this forum it is possible to see the whole debate at a glance. Therefore the various positions are easier to interpret, and usually someone has posted something with which I broadly agree before I feel the need to chip in. Also the format tends to encourage shorter posts (with the exception of one or two people).
