This is nice. Posted the other day on the UKDN forum by Mark, Barry, Victoria, Jim, Karen, Kayla and Maya - "The Hunters Events Team", the guys in the green wellies promoting their superior "business plan":
'It is with great sadness that I inform you that after our Berkshire dig on 27th March 2011 we will be ceasing to run any more events. This is due to the fact that many of the sources of our advertisement have now refused to publish our adverts because of the unsubstantiated criticism we have received and the criticism they are now receiving for advertising us. They too are trying to run a business and have informed us that they cannot risk losing their customers due to the criticism we have received and for nothing more than trying to bring metal detectorists land that may otherwise would have been unavailable to them. Unfortunately this land will probably remain unavailable as without more detectorists joining us we are doomed to not succeed'.Sad eh? All those archaeological sites out there waiting to be looted for collectables and there will be no fee-paying access to them for the majority of those eager detector-using collectors. Wait a minute, does that not mean they are for the moment safe from erosive commercial exploitation?
Personally I would have thought the way to deal with "unsubstantiated criticism" is simply to set out the other side of the story. Of course its a different thing if the criticism is not only justified but substantiated, isn't it? Readers can judge for themselves whether those criticising this operation gave their reasons for doing so, thus substantiating their arguments.
The "Hunters" add:
As a team we worked very hard to bring this together and it is a shame to see it ending, it was lovely while it lasted and but our dream to bring our fellow detectorists land is now over.All that innocent dreamy altruism met with incomprehension by those "sources of our advertisement [who] have now refused to publish our adverts because of the unsubstantiated criticism we have received and the criticism they are now receiving for advertising" - like eBay.UK then? First time I've heard of eBay.UK reacting to criticisms of its role in the commercial exploitation of the archaeological heritage - still there's a first time for everything I guess.
But I ask, is it the lack of prior advertisment that is the problem, or that responsible (or other) metal detectorists simply did not like the set-up of this organization and what it stood for and did not buy the tickets?