20th February 2006, 03:09 PM
On a point of order - the gent in question is a PIFA, not a MIFA. He has not therefore been validated as being competent to perform MIFA-level responsibilities.
He was recently reported to the IFA for some unfortunate comments/ actions; they took action, and he published an apology/ retraction. Not all action by the IFA need necessarily result in removal of membership - that should be the ultimate sanction, not the first resort.
As for his book - I haven't read it, but the information quoted on this thread does sound as if he studied Roman military archaeology from a different text book than I used. It is unlikely that he would have been able to publish this information in a peer-reviewed journal.
However, publishing claptrap is not a disciplinary offence in itself. If we made it an offence to publish interpretations that do not agree with accepted wisdom, then we would never make significant interpretative advances. Part of the price we pay for that academic freedom is that it also applies to crackpots. My own view is that, rather than getting our ethical knickers in a twist about this, we should just laugh and read something else.
No-one can be disciplined for publishing rubbish (unless they are publishing primary evidence, e.g. information from their own excavations, and can be shown to be deliberately distorting it). However, if you know that someone is carrying out work for which you do not think they are competent, and you can sustain that with evidence, you are free to complain to the IFA - who are then bound to investigate. They are also bound to take action against the individual unless the evidence is too weak.
1man1desk
to let, fully furnished
He was recently reported to the IFA for some unfortunate comments/ actions; they took action, and he published an apology/ retraction. Not all action by the IFA need necessarily result in removal of membership - that should be the ultimate sanction, not the first resort.
As for his book - I haven't read it, but the information quoted on this thread does sound as if he studied Roman military archaeology from a different text book than I used. It is unlikely that he would have been able to publish this information in a peer-reviewed journal.
However, publishing claptrap is not a disciplinary offence in itself. If we made it an offence to publish interpretations that do not agree with accepted wisdom, then we would never make significant interpretative advances. Part of the price we pay for that academic freedom is that it also applies to crackpots. My own view is that, rather than getting our ethical knickers in a twist about this, we should just laugh and read something else.
No-one can be disciplined for publishing rubbish (unless they are publishing primary evidence, e.g. information from their own excavations, and can be shown to be deliberately distorting it). However, if you know that someone is carrying out work for which you do not think they are competent, and you can sustain that with evidence, you are free to complain to the IFA - who are then bound to investigate. They are also bound to take action against the individual unless the evidence is too weak.
1man1desk
to let, fully furnished