From the below link where my post below was discussed.
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=8174756573570334952&postID=989979185631645048&page=1&token=1394713247560&isPopup=true
'So why not rename your blog "Detectorist Without a Clue" and then it's clear what you are offering people. OK?'
I imagine he doesn't care but oddly I actually quite like Paul. I think he has some valid ideas. I think with this one though I'll pass.
Here's a big cuddle for you Paul. Sounds like you're having a bad day.
"but oddly I actually quite like Paul...."
ReplyDeleteTrust me, you will be sorry you said that... it's only a matter of time!
Thanks, my day is fine, spring is here, the trees are budding, the forest fragrant, the birds singing, the sky blue, the girls in the PACHI office radiant. My point was if you call a blog something it suggests what you're going to find in it. If you call it "the responsible lepidopterist" I'd expect to find there suggestions and helpful tips about protecting habitats, breeding and releasing various species, writing to the local authorities about where possible keeping roadside verges uncut until the end of the flowering season etc., observing and photographing the little beasties and not catching butterflies to kill them and stick a pin through them to stick, in a cabinet.
ReplyDeleteSo if you call a blog "the Responsible detectorist" it seems to me you are making a claim about yourself, which I now gather is not the case. So why not change the name of the blog to reflect what it is and what you want to do with it?
So, maybe "Exploring Detecting" (quite good as detecting is a form of exploring), "Debating Detecting", Detectorist Debates", "Talking About Detecting/the Past"?
Certainly the title "The Responsible Detectorist" sits badly with two of the blogs you give in your sidebar, neither of which can be said to be in any way related to "responsible detecting". (Stout and Warr) and whatever Mr Baines set out to do, he's gone exactly the same way with nasty personal attacks instead of any real discussion of responsible detecting.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteThanks Paul, I appreciate your comments on the name. It is a good point. Being a 'responsible' detectorist is somewhat evolutionary I think. I mean I currently do everything within the law and report what I don't have to. To some that might make me 'responsible'. To others it doesn't.
DeleteAs you say the blog is a bit of a journey so perhaps the name is a bit confusing so i have updated it with a caveat.
Also I list all blogs and stuff that I read as people can make up their own mind with regard to if they agree to it or not.
DeleteHi there!
Delete"The Evolutionary Detectorist" might be a good title as it implies an upward journey towards a perfect being! Also, it signals that there are less evolved forms far below you. Which there certainly are. People with the moral sensibilities of single celled protozoa.You're in a hobby with no entry criteria, no disciplinary mechanism, no structure and no standards. It has an elite but they keep quiet. You need to seek them out.
For what it's worth, I think "I currently do everything within the law and report what I don't have to" puts you well up the ladder compared with many but to get to the higher rungs you'd have to be able to claim "I do everything for the public's benefit, not my own". (And of course, that applies in other walks of life too!)
So my advice would be to make a single upwards leap straight to the top of the ladder - and certainly avoid discussion en route with those who dress self good as public good for their own good. You'll never evolve if you listen to them!
As you wish, but keep in mind elite detectorists and thousands of amateur archaeologists go straight to the top level of "responsible" without any intervening stages. They just said - "should I work only for the public good - yes" and they got there. The idea that behaving in a way that is socially beneficial has to involve a learning process is erroneous. It's a state of mind that can be self-taught in seconds.
DeleteThanks Dick, I will try and remain polite for as long as is possible but that outburst today was a bit odd.
ReplyDeleteI'm not entirely sure what 'for the public good means' in every instance. For example a homeowner recently contacted me to say could I go detect his front garden as his home used to be a shop. Should I be convincing him he wants an archaeological dig in his front garden? As he, the homeowner and a member of the public, wants me to detect his garden am I then doing it 'for the public good'?
ReplyDelete"am I then doing it 'for the public good'?
ReplyDeleteNo, you're doing it at the request of a member of the public. Dipping into the (whole) public's resource selectively to satisfy the curiosity of one person isn't acting "for the public good" is it? If it was then everyone doing it everywhere would be beneficial. Indeed, sadly, that's precisely the broad assumption upon which "the hobby" bases its claim to legitimacy. But "fun" can't be dressed up as a research project unless it is undertaken in a structured, comprehensive fashion. And that, in a nutshell, is the metal detecting/archaeology/conservation fault line. ;) There ain't no common ground and detectorists can never claim they are practicing a form of archaeology unless they do more than they do.