If you go back and read my earlier post, you will see that I am not denying the fact that Graham is entitled to praise and recognition for the work he has done:
"I understand that Graham was instrumental in organizing the dive and in getting the various groups involved, and he should be proud of his accomplishments, but I don't believe that his first post describing the initial conclusions of the dive should concentrate so much on the fact that his name was not mentioned in the media release."
"I am not saying that Graham should not get credit for the work he has done, that is absurd"
Stickler has also pointed out that the GROUPS involved were recognized, just not INDIVIDUALS. I would be more sympathetic if other individuals had been mentioned but Graham was left out.
My question was, which is more important? The finds or the recognition?
The FIRST statements from Graham concerned the omission of his name and his disscussion of the finds took a back seat.
Look, I am a flawed person who has made many mistakes in life, and I really have no right to judge Graham's (or any other person's) actions. I was just disappointed to see Graham respond the way he did. I thought he was above that. Everyone seems to be saying that he has a RIGHT to be angry and upset, so I shouldn't question his actions. I agree that he has a RIGHT to be angry, but I would be so incredibly impressed with him if he had that right (which he does) but chose not to exercise it. It takes a rare and wise man to refuse rightful retribution when he has been wronged. I try and fail on a regular basis. It just bothered me that he made it such a big issue when he could have taken the higher road and concentrated instead on the real issue here which are the ruins that have been found. Examine the thread and compare the amount of disscussion of the ruins to the amount of discussion of Graham's name being omitted from the press release. Again, my question is: which is more important?