VBB wrote: Sanctuary wrote: VBB wrote: Sanctuary wrote: moss wrote:
'Nice' to see Stonehenge take a distant back seat as well :-)
Makes you wonder why a handful of tma-ers want to change that rating to see it come nowhere!
What by reinstating what was meant to be there if you are referring to Avebury VBB or have I misunderstood?
I was referring to Avebury, which aside from a few interpretation quibbles, a sprinkling of planning disasters, a quite awful fast food joint and unbelievably huge notice boards on leaving the car park, for the most part is right up there deserving a 2nd place ranking as a heritage site. Hence, I don't understand why anyone wants to do anything to change the site beyond preserving what we can.
I don't really see how re-instating all the fallen and buried stones is going to alter Avebury's number two status other than elevate it to number one!
|