Too much coffee for one man, or unit perhaps?

[Unitof1]

stoneyciclewoman got us here and I think that she got into archaeology because she was interested in archaeology and is now starting the slight re-alteration that could quite possibly make her consider becoming a dc as the only way out. And I think that archaeology is an interest in archaeology and that?s about is sum worth- real navel gawking stuff. But what we have is archaeology is for and owned by the state and this has come to be pervasive and something that requires monitoring and control, basically restrictions with carrots and sticks and exclusions, disciplinaries and confidentialities- state secrets even and don?t worry everythings ok even if the whole bloody maps painted red. I think what we have unfairly diminishes the ownership of archaeology that is for the individual (including the landowner) and I pity the state that tries to honour or distance its self from subjects such as oppression, war and slavery or skewers the record by emphasising the banal which is something that the metal detectorists are pointing out in this forum. Or don?t you want me to think about these things- as some, how-funded, self-appointed, government within a government like algao will sort it out for me.

what I am trying to say is that curators should spend all their time recommending conditions and drop specification of works requirements and all other things still needing approval as a waste of time and tax payers money.

basically eating the raw bean