Paul Barford

I don't know of any non-celebrities who have quite as many blogs devoted to being rude about them as Paul Barford. Normally I'd consider it sad that someone would waste their time in this way - but given his frequent rages at assorted people, it's hardly surprising ... I guess this is turning into a case of him reaping what he sowed?
It's beginning to remind me of self-proclaimed anti-looting crusader Michel van Rijn (in reality a convicted felon, forger and smuggler: see Kanakaria mosaics) - except that MvR's rants were motivated by money (ie he'd remove them for cash).
I refused to read MvR or give in to his demands, and I don't bother to read Barford ... But I do find it amusing that those he targets have turned his own methods against him.


  1. Hi Dorothy, Thank you for highlighting my blog on Paul Barfords site. After he has spent the last 6 weeks attacking me on his blog, I thought I would give him a little of his own medicine, the hunter has now become the hunted. I have tried to reason with the guy, but he is on a one man mission to evoke as much trouble as possible.

    I hope to force him down the ratings when you google Paul Barford, and put him on the second page where people won't look. He certainly won't want to copy and paste pieces from my blog onto his, so I will make them a crude as possible, as I know it is slowly getting to him.

    Regards Steve

  2. I am surprised that you have condoned this very offensive and vulgar blog on your site.

    It is not very professional of you Dorothy and does not do you any favours.

  3. Most thinking people would think the real Paul Barfords arrogant and sneering blogs (he has more than one) offensive and nasty, not the spoof one.

  4. I wouldn't say it's 'condoning' Barford's blog - I've also made it clear that I don't read Barford's blog. I support the right of people to free speach and to express themselves - but I also assert my right not to have his views forced on me.

  5. Criticise a persons views certainly however Steve Taylor's blog is both personal and vindictive.

  6. I think what Paul has writen about me on his blog has been personal and vindictive. I have done nothing different that 100000 other detectorist do, that is enjoy my hobby. He has made libelous comments which I had asked him to remove.He has also breached my copyright which he also ignored. I told him if he didn't remove the comments from his blog I would start my own, it was his choice. Also his comments are being fueled by a Gloucestershire archaeologist who is known to me, which I find quite unprofessional. Paul is a trouble making oink! and he knows it. He selectivly doctors peoples comments and rewrites a sensational story around it.

  7. I have to be honest, I don't read either blog - and at this point am confused about which one people are commenting about. The bottom line is that Free Speach has to be applied universally - if one believes in it, one has to believe in it across the board not "except when people are rude about me" or "except when people say something I disagree with" ...

    I tend to take down a lot of posts, as my aim is to just keep to proper ones where I blogged something not just a link to a story or something that was annoying me - and this is one of the ones that will go in a week or two.

    There are so many Cultural Property blogs, most of which are firmly on one side or another, and tend to take things to extremes. One of the few that tries to see both side is http://illicit-cultural-property.blogspot.com/

  8. Please, Dorothy - keep this post up! It's pertinent and relevant to the cultural property debate.


I do not moderate comments, but I remove spam, overt self-promotion ("read [link] my much better post on this") and what I consider hate speech (racism, homophobia etc).

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.