[open-archaeology] conference call August 18th

Mon Aug 16 12:11:32 UTC 2010

Hi Jo and all,

This is all still in my court and I'm increasingly time-poor at the moment.
Impending arrival of baby 3 will place me in a temporal desert (this is a
good thing ;-).

That said things are still moving. I've spoken to people at the Portable
Antiquities Scheme on generic issues. It's my intention to go to London and
meet up with the team to find out how their experience of navigating the
ethical conundrum of setting up the PAS. For those who don't know the PAS
team effectively bridged two polarised communities (#generalisation
metal-detectorists and archaeologists) and had to transcend a number of
ingrained negative views. The "night-hawker" ethical issue was overcome. I
hope the outcome of this meeting will provide the body of a statement and a
clearer view of what other questions need answering, what else needs
including and what other organisations should be canvassed or included as
signatories. This would be on the etherpad so we can all edit it.

Regarding other organisation I was thinking of keeping it UK focussed but
including: ADS, EH, RCAHMS, RCAHMW, HS, CBA, IfA, ALGAO.

I have tweeted with Mike Heyworth at the CBA and he seems quite supportive
(I'd like to think that this would also mean that Dan Hull in Ireland can be
roped in). Regarding the rest, many representatives will be out at the
September conference and can also move these under the noses of appropriate
people via organisational representation on the DART project. An IfA member
would be best to do some movement their (possibly a data ethics SIG - I
might actually join the IfA then). An ALGAO contact would be appreciated

Finally, a meeting........

I can't think of a way to get things to move faster, unless someone else can
contribute travel/meeting time to this. Although, if we can exploit each
others networks we can save time in getting the right people quickly (but to
be honest I think I can do that quite easily with most of the organisations
I've listed).

The other thing that would be useful is a list of the higher level aims for
an ethics statement on the etherpad we set up. If the views of this forum
aren't articulated then I will do what I think is right. I have no problem
in doing this but do realise that it is unlikely to be representative

Does that sound like a sensible course?

A

On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 8:16 AM, Jo Walsh <jo at frot.org> wrote:

> dear archaeologists,
>
> Woke up this morning / thinking about ethics...
>
> Cf. Ant Beck, exhibit A the original post on ethics -
> http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-archaeology/2010-May/000055.html
> Exhibit B the blog post on "open archaeology and ethics"
>
> http://blog.okfn.org/2010/06/11/dig-the-new-breed-open-archaeology-and-ethics/
>
> I may likely enough have missed some later exhibits, given i never come
> to your Skype meetings etc because IANAA.
>
> However i wonder if the ethics conversation is due a nudge. My
> recollection of the plan was
> a) to do some phone/Skype interviews with institutional representatives,
> asking them how they feel about ethics and to publish, if they have one,
> an ethics statement
> b) to draft some kind of collective statement on ethics and the opening
> up of (born-digital) archaeological data
> c) to get lots of people together (in York?) to discuss and anneal the
> statement, and figure how to get institutions to adopt it.
>
> Are there developments that i have totally missed?
>
> with love,
>
>
> jo
> --
> Jo Walsh
>
> Unlock places - http://unlock.edina.ac.uk/
> phone: +44 (0)131 650 2973
> skype: metazool
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> open-archaeology mailing list
> open-archaeology at lists.okfn.org
> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-archaeology
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-archaeology/attachments/20100809/e1a63349/attachment-0002.html>