18th January 2012, 08:46 AM
Good start... <wipes brow>
What we do is spin in circles. I won't support the IfA as they have no teeth and don't prosecute bad practice ------- but that is what the curator should do ----- but the contractor should have standards ---------------- but the ifa should enforce them--------------------- the ifa don't have teeth. etc.
This is a consultation. there is much in it to support, some to discuss and some to be quite worried about. you choose your own future.
What we do is spin in circles. I won't support the IfA as they have no teeth and don't prosecute bad practice ------- but that is what the curator should do ----- but the contractor should have standards ---------------- but the ifa should enforce them--------------------- the ifa don't have teeth. etc.
- We can all agree that the archaeology is the most important thing? OR is it the making of an international corporation?
- We can all agree that standards must be policed? OR is that already happening... and this does not actually change anything other than forcing people into the IfA (not in the club? Not allowed to work)
- We can all agree that it is about time we grew up and acted like a profession? OR is that not the point of archaeology - why can't you be professional AND independent?
- We all agree that rules are needed? OR is one of the problems with archaeology is we are trying too hard to be like the big boys of business and forgetting the support we need from the people (or as we call them in NewSpeak: the engaged inclusive community individual )
This is a consultation. there is much in it to support, some to discuss and some to be quite worried about. you choose your own future.