jonnyj
|
Re: Climbing on Standing Stones
Feb 28, 2012, 21:02
|
|
tonyh27 wrote: Still comes down to opinion though doesn't it !..
People tutting about people that climb on stones while ignoring those that sit on them..
Walk on the banks while shaking their head at those that hug the stones..
Climb Silbury Hill? I wouldn't, if i could. I never did. Nor do I want to go inside Stonehenge
I could go on and on, but the fact is we all see it differently.
No moral high grounds here..
Only a chance to talk amongst ourselves to find a solution that others might take notice of.
A chance not to slag each other off for having differnt ideas. Not to be sarcastic because others don't see our way, or sneer at different points of view..
Time to put that aside and talk about a workable solution that very well might not suit all, or tick all the box's..
Time to stop scoring points and talk with people, not down to them, or at them..
Or just carry on the same old way..
At the end of the day i'm sure everyone here would agree the problem starts when there's potential for damage, i've not seen anything here that could result so.
The fact is EH cannot cover and record every single monument in these isles, so much of the work must come from "amateurs" if we want to go on discovering, if done sympathetically which is the case here, i can't see any problem with it, even if done without the "appropriate" authority, if we waited on all the red tape being cut we'd have a very long wait indeed.
|
thesweetcheat
|
Re: Climbing on Standing Stones
Feb 28, 2012, 21:11
|
|
nigelswift wrote: "Does anyone have any problem with Goff's picture or the way it was obtained?"
Yes of course, showing the public a picture of rock art with your boot next to it isn't a good idea, for obvious reasons, and he has said he knows better now.
So what are the "obvious reasons" Nigel? That really is what I'm trying to get at.
|
thesweetcheat
|
Re: Climbing on Standing Stones
Feb 28, 2012, 21:33
|
|
nigelswift wrote: "the argument seems to be that EH and other professional bodies know best and no-one else (i.e amateurs) needs to get involved and indeed should stay at a safe distance away where they can do no damage to anything."
No, that's a misinterpretation.
Well, it seems that there have been quite a few concerns raised in this thread and others about people visiting sites to take pictures (including "biddies"). I'm afraid it's difficult to interpret those comments in another way. Obviously I have a bias, as I spend most of my free time out and about at sites taking pictures, and I therefore feel defensive about this.
In the hillforts clearance thread a specific concern was raised that allowing "the public" to have access to a site is encouraging them to visit the site with their kids and then take pictures of them there. It was made clear that it was being frowned upon. http://www.themodernantiquarian.com/forum/?thread=65008&message=825291
Earlier in this thread a specific point was made that if someone saw one of us "recording" an upland cairn by climbing onto it, that would also be sending out the wrong message.
http://www.themodernantiquarian.com/forum/?thread=64653&message=821158
Goff has stated that he feels bad about taking the picture of the cupmark, despite the fact that it served as a record of it, with a useful scale (whether it turns out to be non-prehistoic or not) and despite the fact that no damage was caused. I personally don't think Goff has anything to feel bad about.
I am feeling distinctly that access for the public is being viewed as generally bad, as it might lead us all into temptation unless the access is under supervision of a trained professional. Which goes agaisnt what I believe this website is all about. Can someone point out what specific damage is being caused to sites by people like me and Postie, Drew, Gladman, Tiompan and the countless others who post contributions to this site are doing by our actions? Then we'll ask the Eds to set about decommissioning the website.
|
thesweetcheat
|
Re: Climbing on Standing Stones
Feb 28, 2012, 21:35
|
|
jonnyj wrote: thesweetcheat wrote:
Does anyone have any problem with Goff's picture or the way it was obtained? I don't.
Could you please link to it, i haven't viewed it.
http://www.themodernantiquarian.com/post/47269/rubha_charnain.html
|
thesweetcheat
|
Re: Climbing on Standing Stones
Feb 28, 2012, 21:37
|
Hello Tony, nice to see you.
Common sense being suggested, then. :-)
|
jonnyj
|
Re: Climbing on Standing Stones
Feb 28, 2012, 21:40
|
|
thesweetcheat wrote:
Thanks.
I can't see anything wrong there myself, just a map for scale with a foot holding it down so the wind doesn't take it.
I'll also add, what's the difference between that and someone doing the same at the Devils Den?, the climbing part, or as i'd call it, the access. :)
|
drewbhoy
|
Re: Climbing on Standing Stones
Feb 28, 2012, 21:45
|
|
Agree with athing there SC. Should point out that these people listed and many more have probably saved some sites as well by simply speaking and highlighting them to farmers, landowners, archaeos etc.
|
drewbhoy
|
Re: Climbing on Standing Stones
Feb 28, 2012, 22:00
|
|
Agree with everything there Gladman well put. I'd also add that the powers that be who do nothing are the worst!
|
drewbhoy
|
Re: Climbing on Standing Stones
Feb 28, 2012, 22:12
|
|
Shampoo, what is that?
|
tonyh27
|
Re: Climbing on Standing Stones
Feb 28, 2012, 22:16
|
Personally, I can't see any other way..
We should look for consensus..
Regardless if it doesnt archive all aspects of what might be concidered desirable
|
