31st October 2005, 11:58 AM
I agree this is rather depressing :face-confused:. It probably is a rather sad yet predictable abuse of an IFA rule which says that everybody involved in an archaeological project should get credit (ie a mention in the list of site workers, post ex staff, report writing), which is a good principle. Why somebody who is already an MIFA should want to artificially bump up their publication list in this way is beyond me - what use is an 'assisted by' credit at that stage. As an aside, insufficient financial resources (ie late payment) provided to an archaeological contractor can be used to delay the lifting of an archaeological condition in some circumstances. Doesn't sound like much of a threat, but a delayed report which leads to a few 20t machines and a workforce stood around doing nothing will cost money.
(I really have worked in the field)
(I really have worked in the field)