23rd October 2008, 01:37 PM
Perhaps they would answer this, as they do sometimes look here, but often feel that they are under attack on BAJR, and prefer not to see this, as it could be quite hurtful, if you feel that it is unjustified.
But isn't this the sort of thing they SHOULD be looking at?
Personally, I find a head-in-the-sand attitude a sure-fire, easy way of dealing with a problem. Alternatively, I've tried blinkers, turning a blind eye, blame-storming and even tried out making it an SEP (someone elses problem). Each one worked for a while, but in the end the problems were still there (if not bigger).
But, no-one directly funds me in order that I can bury my head in the sand. The IfA should be answerable (even contactable?) to all of its members and, dare I say, the 7731 people directly earning from archaeology (Profiling the Profession 2007-0:face-thinks:. And, if they aren't answerable... why not?
But isn't this the sort of thing they SHOULD be looking at?
Personally, I find a head-in-the-sand attitude a sure-fire, easy way of dealing with a problem. Alternatively, I've tried blinkers, turning a blind eye, blame-storming and even tried out making it an SEP (someone elses problem). Each one worked for a while, but in the end the problems were still there (if not bigger).
But, no-one directly funds me in order that I can bury my head in the sand. The IfA should be answerable (even contactable?) to all of its members and, dare I say, the 7731 people directly earning from archaeology (Profiling the Profession 2007-0:face-thinks:. And, if they aren't answerable... why not?