9th January 2014, 02:41 PM
not sure that i like your substitution in my quote gnomeking!
my point was that answering the questions asked will not highlight anything of value.
more to the point is that they appear deliberatley designed to elicit unsupported data from industry professionals, to be used in a spurious argument/vendetta against metal detectorists. attempting to quantify the rate of metallic finds from excavated sites without regard for location, methods of recovert, type of site et etc etc and then comparing with the amount of metal finds reported from an entirely different region can only be the work of somebody who knows nothing about archaeology.
i said pointless and ill conceived because i have no doubt that any archaeologist worth employing who read the request would see through this clumsy attempt to be used and would not supply the requested data.
my point was that answering the questions asked will not highlight anything of value.
more to the point is that they appear deliberatley designed to elicit unsupported data from industry professionals, to be used in a spurious argument/vendetta against metal detectorists. attempting to quantify the rate of metallic finds from excavated sites without regard for location, methods of recovert, type of site et etc etc and then comparing with the amount of metal finds reported from an entirely different region can only be the work of somebody who knows nothing about archaeology.
i said pointless and ill conceived because i have no doubt that any archaeologist worth employing who read the request would see through this clumsy attempt to be used and would not supply the requested data.
If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about answers