The next question: recording

[P Prentice]

Thank you for once again so assiduously demonstrating the problem, by stating the one thing no-one seems to be quibbling about - that everyone involved should be following the highest standards - but continuing to fail to even acknowledge the issue that the policing of such standards may not be best left in the hands of those who themselves are not policed, who are not representative of that which they claim to serve, nor who appear even to be aware of the realities of life on the ground for so many in the industry. Oh, and who says their standards are actually the ones that will best serve archaeology? So please, if you want people to take you seriously, don't deliberately misrepresent what others are saying, and offer something concrete. This concept that having chartered archaeologists overseen by an institution that many field archaeologist have nothing to do with is the panacea for all of the ills of the industry is frankly bizarre when no-one can even explain where they get their legitimacy from. As Jack so rightly says, it's a scenario that largely fails in other circles, it can offer no guarantees, has no track-record worthy of mention, and may in fact damage the practice of archaeology by imposing a one-sided view on how it should be done imposed by those who themselves may not be the best practitioners, but with no recognisable recourse to consensus view.

reading your recent posts i am left with the impression that you have not bothered to read the ifa literature. i dont know anybody who thinks it is perfect or cant be improved but i do know that most of its membership, at every level, care about their profession. a few might well care about money and prestige but they are a minority. most in senior positions (contracting) spent their time at the coal face and most worked very hard to get where they are. most in entry level positions have ambition to rise within the profession and do research. some are happy just digging up interesting shit. most people in the profession deserve to be paid more and have better job prospects, better terms and conditions. a significant majority of professional archaeologists have joined together to try and do better. membership acting in the best interest of the membership is not a crime against non-members it is the basis of any democratic movement. carping on about legitimacy is frankly as ridiculous as impugning members for possibly not being the best practitioners as no other body has any measurable standards. ifa has 3000 voices and you have listened to how many?