8th December 2005, 01:46 AM
Hello D. Vader
Thanks for the welcome.... seems strange talking to a movie star
Sorry about the length of the post but I hope I manage to get my point accross. It would be a lot easier if we were face to face talking. The written word is not known to be one of my greatest skills:face-thinks:
UKDFD MISSION STATEMENT
The UK Detector Finds Database (UKDFD) is a hobby-based initiative, which has the following aims:
To promote a recording ethos within the hobby and encourage those detectorists who would not otherwise record their finds to do so by making use of the UKDFD self-recording facility
To bring about an increase in the number of detectorists recording their finds, and the overall number of items that are recorded
To make available a facility and encourage the recording of post c.1650 finds, many of which are not eligible for inclusion on the Portable Antiquities Scheme (PAS) database
To provide an easy-to-use and supportive self-recording environment for detectorists, which employs the latest technology and methods of communication?
To make the UKDFD database accessible as an internet resource for the identification and research of items recorded, and to preserve that information for the benefit of future generations
There is a difference in the two databases
There are significant questions that our critics should be asking themselves too...
1. Are UKDFD (and the PAS) recording exclusively for the benefit of archaeologists and heritage professionals?
2. What proportion of the total number of UKDFD (and PAS) users are likely to be archaeologists and heritage professionals?
3. Should we not cater for the wishes of the majority of our database users?
4. Did PAS consult with pre-established databases like the CCI and the EMC when they constructed their coin templates?
5. How would a PAS-cloned UKDFD encourage detectorists who don't record with the PAS to do so with its clone?
6. Why should we emulate a database that is widely believed to be very flawed (unless you're an archaeologist)?
7. Why should UKDFD emulate data collection methods reliant on costly and outdated methods of communication?
You see that we believe that the information and heritage belongs to everybody not just archaeologists. I am not knocking archaeologist as I have a lot of respect for the profession but some of you do live in a square box and can not step outside that framework. The UKDFD is a fantastic achievement by volunteers (we don?t have ?8million) to collect and record data that would not have been collected for what ever reasons and to pass on that data if the recorder wishes it to be so. Please take a visit over to http://www.ukdfd.co.uk and take a look at some of the excellent ID.s and the way it is structured. Everybody can understand (Joe Public), try the search system and print out a record.
I am sorry but ?credit where credit is due? Many people in your profession ask for responsible metal detecting but only when its maybe meets certain ?biased criteria? is it classed as responsible.
It must also be known that I have great respect for your forum owner and his forward thinking and his ability to ?step outside the box?. Keep up the good work.
This post is not meant to inflame and is written with honesty and goodwill as its only intent.
http://www.ukdfd.co.uk
Recording OUR heritage for future generations.
Thanks for the welcome.... seems strange talking to a movie star
Sorry about the length of the post but I hope I manage to get my point accross. It would be a lot easier if we were face to face talking. The written word is not known to be one of my greatest skills:face-thinks:
UKDFD MISSION STATEMENT
The UK Detector Finds Database (UKDFD) is a hobby-based initiative, which has the following aims:
To promote a recording ethos within the hobby and encourage those detectorists who would not otherwise record their finds to do so by making use of the UKDFD self-recording facility
To bring about an increase in the number of detectorists recording their finds, and the overall number of items that are recorded
To make available a facility and encourage the recording of post c.1650 finds, many of which are not eligible for inclusion on the Portable Antiquities Scheme (PAS) database
To provide an easy-to-use and supportive self-recording environment for detectorists, which employs the latest technology and methods of communication?
To make the UKDFD database accessible as an internet resource for the identification and research of items recorded, and to preserve that information for the benefit of future generations
There is a difference in the two databases
There are significant questions that our critics should be asking themselves too...
1. Are UKDFD (and the PAS) recording exclusively for the benefit of archaeologists and heritage professionals?
2. What proportion of the total number of UKDFD (and PAS) users are likely to be archaeologists and heritage professionals?
3. Should we not cater for the wishes of the majority of our database users?
4. Did PAS consult with pre-established databases like the CCI and the EMC when they constructed their coin templates?
5. How would a PAS-cloned UKDFD encourage detectorists who don't record with the PAS to do so with its clone?
6. Why should we emulate a database that is widely believed to be very flawed (unless you're an archaeologist)?
7. Why should UKDFD emulate data collection methods reliant on costly and outdated methods of communication?
You see that we believe that the information and heritage belongs to everybody not just archaeologists. I am not knocking archaeologist as I have a lot of respect for the profession but some of you do live in a square box and can not step outside that framework. The UKDFD is a fantastic achievement by volunteers (we don?t have ?8million) to collect and record data that would not have been collected for what ever reasons and to pass on that data if the recorder wishes it to be so. Please take a visit over to http://www.ukdfd.co.uk and take a look at some of the excellent ID.s and the way it is structured. Everybody can understand (Joe Public), try the search system and print out a record.
I am sorry but ?credit where credit is due? Many people in your profession ask for responsible metal detecting but only when its maybe meets certain ?biased criteria? is it classed as responsible.
It must also be known that I have great respect for your forum owner and his forward thinking and his ability to ?step outside the box?. Keep up the good work.
This post is not meant to inflame and is written with honesty and goodwill as its only intent.
http://www.ukdfd.co.uk
Recording OUR heritage for future generations.