4th October 2010, 10:04 AM
(This post was last modified: 4th October 2010, 10:10 AM by Unitof1.)
Quote:[SIZE=3]The system is supposed to work by accrediting only those who are competent. Its a problem for the IFA, which will have to be resolved but this is a different subject.[/SIZE]
Oh no its not.
It’s the very core of the problem with ify and therefore its “amalgamation” of people who think there is such a thing as “archaeological” illustration. Ify seem to want there to be such a thing as an archaeologist but also one that satisfies the “original concept of MIFA as defined was
Quote:"a person judged to have expertise and years of experience, capable of managing all aspects of complex projects”.
Is this like having somebody trained as a doctor who is not allowed to qualify until they have run a hospital. Mifa and ify are civil servant constructs based on civil servant organised archaeological projects that attempted to concentrate the authority of archaeology in a management/consultant structure.
The amalgamation of archaeologists who mostly ply their trade through illustration which a bunch of …(Cant go on trying to think of the right term for a mifa) will expose this discrepancy. Presumably if they give the lowly illustrators mifa on the grounds that drawing something, exhibits the “experience, capable of managing all aspects of complex projects”, it will undermine mifa pedastool (sic) and if they don’t give mifa status it will show the inherent contempt of fellow archaeologists which the ridiculous construct that the mifa position creates.
-of to draw a redundant church tower using a digi camera and small B&Q tape on a project which should have had listed buildings consent but hay like me its briefless
Enjoy your breakfast.
Reason: your past is my past