Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Jim McDougall
Points well taken RDG, and you are of course absolutely right, it is great to have interaction from professionals like yourself and many others who are professionally involved in the care and preservation of these weapons. My main focus was toward concerns about repurcussions which might result from faulty advice given by individuals inadvertantly causing damage or compromise in a subject weapon.
It is well understood that authors of posts here are responsible for the material or comments they present, however in a public venue such as this a distinct location specifically for dissemination and exchange of such specialized and potentially intricate activity as restoration could be construed as officially endorsed commentary. This would easily fall under the umbrella involving legal advice, appraisals or valuations etc.
I should have worded my comments better, and as you know, I understand completely what you mean about preserving these arms and any part of material history from further detioration or damage. I simply think that questions and comments on these matters should continue in context status quo, and that the current standard of presentation is satisfactory. I think that the 'search' feature provided will provide ready access to past notes the same as it does in finding discussed material on certain weapon forms, and I very much encourage members and readers to use that.
I would like to reword my comments concerning conversation included in discussion of historical weapons that pertains to restoration in progress and note that is often integral in examination and observation on the weapon.
I would recommend here that suggestions or tips added by the post author should include a disclaiming statement as a caveat and reminder that there are many variables which should be considered in following the process or materials used in following noted directions.
I am sure you agree that restoration and cleaning should be carried out responsibly and carefully, and that was one of my concerns along with the possible repurcussions....not that weapons should not be conserved.
Thank you for bringing this to my attention so that I might clarify and better express my comments, as well as reminding me of the outstanding work you have performed on the weapons you have presented here. Outstanding work!!!
All my very best regards,
Jim
|
Jim,
To be quite honest, I'd never even considered the legal aspect of this suggestion. Unfortunately - and with the best will in the world - I lay the blame for the modern litigation culture of the West squarely at the doors of Washington! Anyway, facetiousness aside, I do take your point on the legal business very seriously. It's testament to my naiveté that it never crossed my mind. I should, however, think that an overarching disclaimer, applied to the forum (perhaps in the form of a Sticky thread at the very top of its page), might suffice to safeguard our proverbial behinds. "Any and all information, suggestions or opinions provided on this forum are provided strictly on a non-advice basis and if you make a pig's ear of it, well, it's your own damn fault" might work?
Regarding the current standard, I agree that the information is, on the whole, fairly adequate - where the question has been asked, and answered, heretofore. Where it has not, a thread usually forms, concludes, and then vanishes into the ether. I believe that the concentration of such information, as suggested herein, will not only improve the ease and efficiency with which access to this information can be gained, but encourage still greater improvements in learning and in quality of information available. I'm expecting, to use a clichéd phrase, the whole to be greater than the sum of its parts.
Informedly yours,
Meredydd