7th September 2007, 05:43 PM
"They are vetted by means of a CV/job application and checking their references"
perhaps in theory... now I ain't saying that anyone is bad or ought.. I am jsut saying that vetting, of the sort you are suggesting is not really happening.
I agree about briefings etc... but we have to look at the reality of it.
gary does have a point, (though I suspect it is half- tougue in cheek) I don't think detectorists should follow archaeolgoists.. as that would be like saying that all local societies must follow contract archaeology as well.. etc... they are an independant group, quite capable of producing their own "standards". Though please let it not take as long as archaeology
) They are after all a hobby, and can't be controlled with the employment rules that archaeology must abide.
etc....
"No job worth doing was ever done on time or under budget.."
Khufu
perhaps in theory... now I ain't saying that anyone is bad or ought.. I am jsut saying that vetting, of the sort you are suggesting is not really happening.
I agree about briefings etc... but we have to look at the reality of it.
gary does have a point, (though I suspect it is half- tougue in cheek) I don't think detectorists should follow archaeolgoists.. as that would be like saying that all local societies must follow contract archaeology as well.. etc... they are an independant group, quite capable of producing their own "standards". Though please let it not take as long as archaeology
) They are after all a hobby, and can't be controlled with the employment rules that archaeology must abide. etc....
"No job worth doing was ever done on time or under budget.."
Khufu