[Stones] Longman of Wilmington Abuse

[Andy Norfolk]

littlestone wrote:
> "Is this a wind-up?"
And you seem to be quite deliberately missing the point yet again.
> No, Andy, the petition is there and signed by more than 200 people;
I'm not really that interested in the petition because I'd rather find 
out why people are so annoyed about this. One of the problems with 
on-line petitions is that they are frequently set up with little 
explanation of the issues involved. They are becoming so frequent and 
cover such a bewildering range of topics that I think their value is 
diminishing.
> I cannot see that you have made any reference to it however (though 
> you seem happy to quote the opinions of archaeologists who, as far as 
> I can gather, have not visited the Longman site since the stunt and 
> who, IMHO, are not qualified to pronounce one way or t'other whether 
> any damage has been done.
If people's concerns are that the hill figure has been damaged in some 
way then surely archaeologists are very well placed to comment. 
> I agree, perhaps we could start with the common courtesy of answering 
> each other's questions. There're a couple of questions in my last 
> post, directed to you, which remain unanswered - perhaps you would 
> like to answer them now?
OK - first give me your evidence that the hill figure has been damaged. 
> Yes, I'm one of those affronted as I see the use of the Longman for 
> commercial reasons as inappropriate - both from a 'religious' point of 
> view and also as setting a dangerous precedent where similar stunts 
> may take place at more vulnerable sites in the future. Snip 
> Furthermore, your use of the word 'significant' is unacceptable. /Any/ 
> damage, to /any/ natural or historical site /anywhere/ is unacceptable 
> - but especially when that damage is caused by the cheap commercial 
> interests of big business and attention-seeking wannabes.
So you don't like it that someone might make money from an ancient site 
- is that it? I have no doubt that Sussex Archaeological Society made 
some money out of this event. Perhaps you don't think that generating 
funds for archaeological conservation of ancient sites is something that 
should be done? I think perhaps you are deliberately misunderstanding 
what I have been saying. I have said a number of times that sites should 
not be damaged.

Andy N


---
avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 000754-4, 06/07/2007
Tested on: 11/07/2007 19:51:50
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2007 ALWIL Software.
http://www.avast.com