Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Jul 2009
3rd August 2009, 02:16 PM
Am really not sure why I am bothering to respond to your bizarre reply, but...
Unitof1 said: Sorry that tattershall represents my hatred of anything to do with the national trust, which at the end of the day probably boils down to the word national, after that it becomes easy to not like:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Lees-Milne
Erm, so you hate a trust that takes on the running of country estates so that they are not demolished and instead are opened to the public?
You then post a link to a women's hour piece about some ladies in the 1920s who used to give money to the National Trust on the proviso that they saved certain buildings, saying that you have a particular dislike for them.
You really are a bit weird aren't you?! Do you by any chance post some of this drivel just to get a rise out of people?
Posts: 7
Threads: 3
Joined: Mar 2009
3rd August 2009, 02:23 PM
RE: "Get enough local cowboys together you can then get a posse and defend against the nasty big boys"
hmm...is that not how those 'big boys' happened in the first place?... (but with development rather than fellow archeologists as the 'eemy')
Posts: 7
Threads: 3
Joined: Mar 2009
3rd August 2009, 02:24 PM
i meant "enemy"..oops :>
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Oct 2006
3rd August 2009, 04:31 PM
Sorry lobster I don?t think anything can be held in perpetuity, remember magna carta and mortmain. I think that archaeologists work on finding the real because its rare and most property management is about aesthetics which I find particularly bizarre, mock cockney and all.
nt seems to be a hundred million pound salary world headed by people related to MPs who fiddle expenses. Luckily the halls were so badly build (often by the same people who renovated the churches) round my way that they have all but fallen down but unfortunately not tattershall chimney. Have to admit that I am staggered/frightened by the size of the membership
Hello gnomeking, second icon is an edit button if you want to change the original. Its often used by some to take out whole postings and quite rightly too
Quote:quote:is that not how those 'big boys/girls' happened in the first place?.
which big person did you have in mind?
What did these two people evolve into for instance-
http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/ma...awler=true
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2004
3rd August 2009, 05:10 PM
Have you read and understood the AUP on BAJR?
and our discussion about why you were allowed back.
Just wondering.:face-huh:
Constant development is the law of life, and a man who always tries to maintain his dogmas in order to appear consistent drives himself into a false position.
Mohandas Gandhi
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Jul 2009
3rd August 2009, 05:43 PM
Don't know why am I bothering, but here goes.
Unitof1 - yet more garbled gibberish from you that makes no sense.
Your view of the National Trust is amazingly bleak considering all the great work the charity does by protecting and opening these estates to the public and arranging events.
For instance I was at Calke Abbey this weekend to take part in digging test pits in the former formal gardens, following a series of workshops that were held at the property all week. Last weekend I was at Tattershall helping during a geophysical survey of the grounds. For both of these events I and my colleagues volunteered our time to help out as we are very keen to engage the public and give something back to local communities. The events attracted a lot of people and everyone we spoke to said how much they had enjoyed it and how much they hoped that the National Trust would be doing something similar very soon.
I feel sad for you that you seem to have such a weird twisted view of a charity that is doing what it can to maintain these large country estates (and other places) that would be destroyed otherwise.
Perhaps you should seek some help?
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Mar 2006
3rd August 2009, 05:54 PM
I hesitate to post anything on this thread, but in the interests of clarifying a point that has been raised, here goes. Bolingbroke Castle remains in state ownership, but is managed by Heritage Lincolnshire under a local management agreement. EH formed a number of such agreements in the mid-90s (from memory), in the hope of ensuring more responsive local management of some of the guardianship monuments.
Hope this helps, but I hae ma doots,
Brian
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2004
3rd August 2009, 10:37 PM
Come on weegie, you should know that facts and reality have no business here!
Constant development is the law of life, and a man who always tries to maintain his dogmas in order to appear consistent drives himself into a false position.
Mohandas Gandhi
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Mar 2006
3rd August 2009, 10:59 PM
Sigh. I know. What was I thinking?
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Oct 2006
4th August 2009, 01:47 AM
Hello hosty the aup topic seems to be locked. I do apologise, didnt think that I was remotely aup. The truth is I cant remember what I wrote that you have edited out, I don?t think that I used personal names, companies etc but then I am getting very old and muddled. I think that I said something about trying to get a receipt
. Why was I let back to champion the case for independent self-employed individual humans called archaeologists in the face of collective mobs in obscure institutions. so muddle on thanklessly
Weedgie are you sure. Possibly I am confused over the passing of Bolingbroke by the Ducky of Lancaster into so called guardianship of the government (parliamentarians) in 1949. what occurred in 1949? I imagine some parchment some where with a whopping great wax seal on it. Eh got the deeds have they? Any clauses init?
Great work volueentering charity lobsterpot, Test pits and gphis, keep it up. Sorry I still don?t like country houses held in perpetual ownership, may as well have stayed in the original inhabitants hands, in the case of tattershall an American syndicate for architectural salvage, not sure who they bought it off.
Anyway the lebensraum extension question
