Gue pollution.
Guy Morin
Recent events on the list are of concern. The published
rules of the newsgroups prohibit commercial operations,
and organizations, from using this forum for promotional
purposes.
The postings from many members of certain organizations
have been in blatant violation of this accord. Specifically,
the "gue" crowd is constantly promoting their "organization".
Perhaps the perpetrators of this rudeness would extend
everyone here the courtesy of confining their self promotion
to the techdiver list, and commercial web sites, where they belong.
If that list is too small, please find some other way to entertain
yourselves, most adults find your bothersome quarrels tiring.
If you really are in a quest for self promotion, get some air
time on tv, that reaches a really big audience.
It seems that most other organizations have the maturity
to treat the readers of this forum with respect, notwithstanding
the occasional dolt who can't make the paradigm shift.
Does gue endorse the drivel and sheer arrogance we see in
this list from it's members, and instructors?
Surely there is someone at the helm of this organization who
can tighten the leash on these renegades.
Regards,
Guy
mike_...@my-deja.com
very long, but I don't seem to recall hearing from any.
Mike
In article <39077524...@videotron.ca>,
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
greg kerr
Guy Morin wrote:
> Does gue endorse the drivel and sheer arrogance we see in
> this list from it's members, and instructors?
Actually they only have about a half dozen instructors. Obviously a very
new and small organization. I haven't noticed any of the names listed on
their web site posting on this ng. It's the same ten or so people on
this ng constantly battling over the pros/cons of GUE/DIR. As I don't
know that much about it at this stage it is best not to show my
ignorance and not join in the flame wars.
JIM HOLCOMBE
have seen is a discussion of the DIR philosophy towards diving and it just
so happens that GUE endorses that philosophy. The reason GUE's name came up
was because someone was criticizing them and some other folks came to their
defense. I've seen the same thing with PADI,NAUI etc.The only pollution I've
seen is your dumbass post. If you don't like the subject line don't put the
mouse on it and click!
--
Dive Safe and Often
Jim
http://www.angelfire.com/ga2/jimh
"Guy Morin" <xn...@videotron.ca> wrote in message
news:39077524...@videotron.ca...
> To the readers of rec.scuba:
>
> Recent events on the list are of concern. The published
> rules of the newsgroups prohibit commercial operations,
> and organizations, from using this forum for promotional
> purposes.
>
> The postings from many members of certain organizations
> have been in blatant violation of this accord. Specifically,
> the "gue" crowd is constantly promoting their "organization".
>
> Perhaps the perpetrators of this rudeness would extend
> everyone here the courtesy of confining their self promotion
> to the techdiver list, and commercial web sites, where they belong.
>
> If that list is too small, please find some other way to entertain
> yourselves, most adults find your bothersome quarrels tiring.
>
> If you really are in a quest for self promotion, get some air
> time on tv, that reaches a really big audience.
>
> It seems that most other organizations have the maturity
> to treat the readers of this forum with respect, notwithstanding
> the occasional dolt who can't make the paradigm shift.
>
> Does gue endorse the drivel and sheer arrogance we see in
> this list from it's members, and instructors?
>
Jerome O'Neil
Guy Morin <xn...@videotron.ca> writes:
> To the readers of rec.scuba:
>
> Recent events on the list are of concern. The published
> rules of the newsgroups prohibit commercial operations,
> and organizations, from using this forum for promotional
> purposes.
You are mistaken. There are no published rules of the newsgroup.
It's rude, but there is no prohabition.
RAL2OOO
>Recent events on the list are of concern. The published
>rules of the newsgroups prohibit commercial operations,
>and organizations, from using this forum for promotional
>purposes.
>
>have been in blatant violation of this accord. Specifically,
>the "gue" crowd is constantly promoting their "organization".
>
>Perhaps the perpetrators of this rudeness would extend
>everyone here the courtesy of confining their self promotion
>to the techdiver list, and commercial web sites, where they belong.
>
>If that list is too small, please find some other way to entertain
>yourselves, most adults find your bothersome quarrels tiring.
>
>If you really are in a quest for self promotion, get some air
>time on tv, that reaches a really big audience.
>
>It seems that most other organizations have the maturity
>to treat the readers of this forum with respect, notwithstanding
>the occasional dolt who can't make the paradigm shift.
>
>Does gue endorse the drivel and sheer arrogance we see in
>this list from it's members, and instructors?
>
>Surely there is someone at the helm of this organization who
>can tighten the leash on these renegades.
>
>Regards,
>
>Guy
Guy I have not seen a post from anyone inside the agency. Most GUE threads
start from a question about certain aspects of the GUE training & standards.
Whats the big deal? People fight about everything on this NG, Padi vs naui,
Scuba pro vs posiden, Black vs reality, whatever.
If the GUE thing bothers you that much use the filter in your brain & choose
not to read it. Yes things get a little rude but that is not just in the domane
of GUE threads.
Its a hot topic of late because people want to know what there options are
for tech training. What is wrong with that? I have yet to see anything that
would comes close to a "Commercal" posting by GUE on this board. When did GUE
advertise on this board? When did any GUE instuctor get on here & advertise GUE
instruction?
This ng topics are mostly dictated by the questions asked , so if someone
asks about GUE courses that is likely to be a topic for a bit. Sorry man its
how it works:-(
Guy Morin
It's always someone else's fault, isn't it? That's another
typical excuse from people who are caught with their
hand in the cookie jar: "Honestly, he made me do it."
Did I mention pathetic?
Dump on anyone who questions the party line?
BTW, what's that at the end of your post? Part
of the scuba industry in Florida? Affiliations?
Investments?
If there wasn't any substance to what I posted, I would
have been ignored. Thanks for endorsing my opinion.
Guy
Scott
GUE doesn't advertise here.
They advertise here: www.gue.com
Scott
"Guy Morin" <xn...@videotron.ca> wrote in message
news:39077524...@videotron.ca...
> To the readers of rec.scuba:
>
Ross Bagley
Guy Morin <xn...@videotron.ca> wrote:
>Recent events on the list are of concern. The published rules of the
>newsgroups prohibit commercial operations, and organizations, from
>using this forum for promotional purposes.
>The postings from many members of certain organizations have been in
>blatant violation of this accord. Specifically, the "gue" crowd is
>constantly promoting their "organization".
Can you provide a deja.com URL of a posting where a GUE employee has
used rec.scuba for promoting GUE classes? I haven't seen any posts
like that recently, but there are a few threads that are now in the
killfile, so I could have missed such a thing.
BTW, I am not a member or employee of GUE but still when I'm asked
about excellent scuba diving instruction, I send people to their web
site. I'll bet you're pretty confused as to why that is.
The discussion of the relative merits of the various dive training
agencies and their policies is directly relevant to this newsgroup.
The closest thing I can remember to what your suggesting is when it
was posted that you had to be a GUE member to dive Ginnie Springs.
I understand that that policy is under review, so that may not even
be true.
>Does gue endorse the drivel and sheer arrogance we see in this list
>from it's members, and instructors?
Again, I haven't seen a post from a GUE instructor. Perhaps you
could provide us with a reference to one?
While there certainly are a number of people on this newsgroup who
feel that GUE provides excellent dive training and some of those are
GUE members, none of them (that I have seen) are employees of GUE, so
GUE as an organization has no ability, beyond membership revocation of
those who have paid dues, to penalize them.
BTW, most of the people reading rec.scuba live in countries where laws
exist to protect freedom of speech. GUE's endorsement is not necessary
or desired in discussions about GUE training programs, so your concern,
while touching, is uninformed.
>Surely there is someone at the helm of this organization who
>can tighten the leash on these renegades.
Shut the fuck up, troll.
welikeair, dontdoair, mjbmd, all the same... But it's fun to play :)
Regards,
Ross
-- Ross Bagley & Associates http://www.rossbagley.com
"We don't write your software, we help you write your software better!"
Ross Bagley
If the 'n' key on your keyboard is broken (the key that many use to
go to the "n"ext article, skipping the current one), you'll need to
buy a new keyboard to fix it.
JIM HOLCOMBE
you'll find half the pictures of me in it are NOT DIR. I don't carry
anybody's party line. Your post was just stupid. If you had read the previos
post you would have known there was know attempt at advertising! And that
was your main gripe - RIGHT?
(I know the spelling sucks - so don't sideline the issue with spell check)
--
Dive Safe and Often
Jim
http://www.angelfire.com/ga2/jimh
"Guy Morin" <xn...@videotron.ca> wrote in message
news:39077C09...@videotron.ca...
> Someone with just as much right to this forum as you.
>
Guy Morin
> That's my personal web page at the end of my post and if you click on it
> you'll find half the pictures of me in it are NOT DIR. I don't carry
> anybody's party line. Your post was just stupid. If you had read the previos
> post you would have known there was know attempt at advertising! And that
> was your main gripe - RIGHT?
> (I know the spelling sucks - so don't sideline the issue with spell check)
Self promotion, arrogance, and drivel, from members. I think that was the
limit
of my comments. I didn't notice any accusation of advertising. (other than
Scott's post. ;-))
Guy
Bob Crownfield
perhaps you confuse 'gue.com', with the DIR philosophy?
For employees of GUE to advertise here is improper.
To discuss the philosophy is very appropriate.
Guy Morin wrote:
>
> To the readers of rec.scuba:
>
> Recent events on the list are of concern. The published
> rules of the newsgroups prohibit commercial operations,
> and organizations, from using this forum for promotional
> purposes.
>
> The postings from many members of certain organizations
> have been in blatant violation of this accord. Specifically,
> the "gue" crowd is constantly promoting their "organization".
>
> Perhaps the perpetrators of this rudeness would extend
> everyone here the courtesy of confining their self promotion
> to the techdiver list, and commercial web sites, where they belong.
>
> If that list is too small, please find some other way to entertain
> yourselves, most adults find your bothersome quarrels tiring.
>
> If you really are in a quest for self promotion, get some air
> time on tv, that reaches a really big audience.
>
> It seems that most other organizations have the maturity
> to treat the readers of this forum with respect, notwithstanding
> the occasional dolt who can't make the paradigm shift.
>
> Does gue endorse the drivel and sheer arrogance we see in
> this list from it's members, and instructors?
>
> Surely there is someone at the helm of this organization who
> can tighten the leash on these renegades.
>
> Regards,
>
> Guy
--
Bob Crownfield, Crown...@Home.com
Photography, Flying, Delphi Rad Addict
Now diving the Pacific in the LA Area.
"Protect freedoms before they become extinct."
Guy Morin
> In article <39077524...@videotron.ca>,
> Guy Morin <xn...@videotron.ca> writes:
> > To the readers of rec.scuba:
> >
> > Recent events on the list are of concern. The published
> > rules of the newsgroups prohibit commercial operations,
> > and organizations, from using this forum for promotional
> > purposes.
>
> You are mistaken. There are no published rules of the newsgroup.
>
> It's rude, but there is no prohabition.
You're right, and I thought it was a law, how foolish.
MHK
Guy Morin <xn...@videotron.ca> wrote in message
news:39077524...@videotron.ca...
> To the readers of rec.scuba:
> The postings from many members of certain organizations
> have been in blatant violation of this accord. Specifically,
> the "gue" crowd is constantly promoting their "organization".
>
You are making a blatant, and unwarranted ascertion.. I'm assuming that I'm
part of the *many members* of the *gue crowd*. But be advised that just
because I believe in there philosophy does NOT mean that I am in any way
affiliated in a technical ( forgive the pun ) sense..
In fact, when you get right down to it, and you can see the listing on the
GUE website, who is there heiarchy. None of them post here. While I think
we would all benefit if JJ or TC would post here, the fact of the matter is
that they don't..
> Perhaps the perpetrators of this rudeness would extend
> everyone here the courtesy of confining their self promotion
> to the techdiver list, and commercial web sites, where they belong.
>
Why don't you stop playing games and say exactly who you are talking
about... Because I think you are mistaken and are applying an affiliation
that does not exsist..
> Does gue endorse the drivel and sheer arrogance we see in
> this list from it's members, and instructors?
>
You have no clue who the members or instructors are, but yet paint the
entire organization with the same brush and then presume to call them
arrogant. What then does that make you, arrogant or stupid???
Guy Morin
> >
> >Does gue endorse the drivel and sheer arrogance we see in
> >this list from it's members, and instructors?
> >
>
Thanks for the answer, it really wasn't clear.
A lot of the posts cast the organization in a strange light. Remember
the age of disclaimers?
From the [apparent] pride manifested by some of it's membership,
I would have thought that members would be more mindful as
to how they made the organization look when they engage is some
of the [distasteful] public exchanges.
> Most GUE threads
> start from a question about certain aspects of the GUE training & standards.
> Whats the big deal? People fight about everything on this NG, Padi vs naui,
> Scuba pro vs posiden, Black vs reality, whatever.
> If the GUE thing bothers you that much use the filter in your brain & choose
> not to read it. Yes things get a little rude but that is not just in the domane
> of GUE threads.
Actually, it's not a bother, but, as I said, more of a concern. How the
membership
presents itself to the world affects how the organization is perceived. They
are the ambassadors.
>
> Its a hot topic of late because people want to know what there options are
> for tech training. What is wrong with that?
Remember that there are probably no divers that start out with a set of twins,
and redundant regs. There is considerable evolution, and a lot of choices to get
there.
Guy Morin
>
> You are making a blatant, and unwarranted ascertion.. I'm assuming that I'm
> part of the *many members* of the *gue crowd*.
Touche.
> But be advised that just
> because I believe in there philosophy does NOT mean that I am in any way
> affiliated in a technical ( forgive the pun ) sense..
Again! ;-)
>
>
> In fact, when you get right down to it, and you can see the listing on the
> GUE website, who is there heiarchy. None of them post here. While I think
> we would all benefit if JJ or TC would post here, the fact of the matter is
> that they don't..
Good for them.
>
>
>
> > Perhaps the perpetrators of this rudeness would extend
> > everyone here the courtesy of confining their self promotion
> > to the techdiver list, and commercial web sites, where they belong.
> >
>
> Why don't you stop playing games and say exactly who you are talking
> about... Because I think you are mistaken and are applying an affiliation
> that does not exsist..
>
> > Does gue endorse the drivel and sheer arrogance we see in
> > this list from it's members, and instructors?
> >
>
> You have no clue who the members or instructors are,
You said they were on the web.
> but yet paint the
> entire organization with the same brush and then presume to call them
> arrogant.
There is a question mark at the end there, therefore that cannot be an
affirmation, I thought the punctuation would help most people. I'll
try to use bold next time.
> What then does that make you, arrogant or stupid???
Litterature was not your strong suit.
You are also a funny guy!
Guy
Lee Willcox
Guy Morin <xn...@videotron.ca> wrote in message
news:39077524...@videotron.ca...
> To the readers of rec.scuba:
>
""""""can tighten the leash on these renegades."""""""
HOW????
Any body can do just about anything and can't be stopped.
There are many, many ways to get around the rules.
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
Guy Morin
> guy:
>
> perhaps you confuse 'gue.com', with the DIR philosophy?
> For employees of GUE to advertise here is improper.
> To discuss the philosophy is very appropriate.
>
>
Bob,
So then, if they are in the business of selling
their philosophy, and that is what the debates
are about, then I believe that we have QED.
Their debating the product and comparing it with
other agencies' product (read: philosophy) is equivalent
to advertising.
Thank you for making my point, I never thought
of it that way. Thanks for setting me straight.
This must be why JJ and company have the good
sense not to post, they perceive these subtle differences.
Guy
Guy Morin
> Any body can do just about anything and can't be stopped.
> There are many, many ways to get around the rules.
>
Maybe the cave training offered by these agencies should
include some social skills. As you know, most professional
curricula include electives to provide the student with added
social graces.
This would sensitize these folks that when they go out there,
they are representing something that aspires to a greater
social good, rather that the petty self-serving interests
of small minds.
Guy
MHK
Guy Morin <xn...@videotron.ca> wrote in message
news:39078B2F...@videotron.ca...
>
> Maybe the cave training offered by these agencies should
> include some social skills.
Let me guess you think a drill sargent in the Marine corps should politley
ask his recruits if it isn't to much of an inconvience would they possibly
give him 50???
Guy you cracked me up with that other one about grammer... But come on with
this bullshit.. Cave diving is not for everyone nor is tech diving.. Polite
has been tried and it hasn't worked.. In fact, it has back fired and now
PADI will start there bullshit about * in the unlikely event* as if tech
and/or cave is for everyone.
I can just see it now in the PADI trimix class, * in the unlikely event you
find yourself in decompression mode, gently push your snorkel aside, look at
what your computer says, hope your bondage wings don't fail, grab your steel
stage bottles, find your most recently purchased c-card, kick you force fins
as fast as they will go, breathe your spare air, spank your new fangled tank
banger, and then bend over, put your head between your legs and kiss your
ass goodbye because you have just been killed*
But don't worry because you have signed a waiver, the instrokter has
followed the PADI system, and the PADI police will protect you in court
because it will be the system and not the instrokter on trial... And we all
know that PADI has too much money invested in this new idea so they will not
loose a lawsuit, so they will sacrafice diver's lives in favor of training
standards for the sake of market share...
I nominate BLACK for the 1st PADI trimix student... I'll even pay for his
class..
Can't you just wait to see the PADI wheel for trimix decompression dives????
BLACK, it just maybe the system for you, they will put up with your 1.9
bullshit as long as you have signed the waiver....
Later
Guy Morin
> Guy Morin <xn...@videotron.ca> wrote in message
> news:39078B2F...@videotron.ca...
> >
> > Maybe the cave training offered by these agencies should
> > include some social skills.
>
> Let me guess you think a drill sargent in the Marine corps should politley
> ask his recruits if it isn't to much of an inconvience would they possibly
> give him 50???
At least in the military, they give you food, salary (however modest)
and the chance to serve. For a course, I'm the one footing the bill,
I want value for money, and dogma isn't it.
>
>
> Guy you cracked me up with that other one about grammer...
Glad you enjoyed the levity, it was intended in the best of spirits.
> But come on with
> this bullshit.. Cave diving is not for everyone nor is tech diving.. Polite
> has been tried and it hasn't worked.. In fact, it has back fired and now
> PADI will start there bullshit about * in the unlikely event* as if tech
> and/or cave is for everyone.
Serious goes without saying. True, it isn't for everyone. Polite? There
is no need to show poor taste, especially when it affects the success of
what you hold as being so precious. It would be crude to say that it was
all marketing.
>
>
> I can just see it now in the PADI trimix class, * in the unlikely event you
> find yourself in decompression mode, gently push your snorkel aside, look at
> what your computer says, hope your bondage wings don't fail, grab your steel
> stage bottles, find your most recently purchased c-card, kick you force fins
> as fast as they will go, breathe your spare air, spank your new fangled tank
> banger, and then bend over, put your head between your legs and kiss your
> ass goodbye because you have just been killed*
Dogma alert. BTW, good trimix training involves selecting the right
instructor, not the agency, as you no doubt know. It is likely that the
PADI format, as it exists today, is not suited to that level of training.
One configuration for all, not likely, unless you're a borg, besides, isn't
that what PADI is all about? ;-)
>
>
> But don't worry because you have signed a waiver, the instrokter has
> followed the PADI system, and the PADI police will protect you in court
> because it will be the system and not the instrokter on trial... And we all
> know that PADI has too much money invested in this new idea so they will not
> loose a lawsuit, so they will sacrafice diver's lives in favor of training
> standards for the sake of market share...
Waivers are a fact of life in diving, as with most inherently dangerous
activities.
So is the reality of a free market economy, again, not the ideal system, but
there is something to be said for being able to vote for who you think is the
best with your money. No agency is perfect, and they are all self serving,
to a point. Few agencies have the distinction of having introduced so many
people to the wonders of the underwater world. Too bad gue can't aspire to
such a noble goal.
>
> Later
Rich Lesperance
Guy Morin <xn...@videotron.ca>
> It's always someone else's fault, isn't it? That's another
> typical excuse from people who are caught with their
> hand in the cookie jar: "Honestly, he made me do it."
OK, so anytime someone mentions PADI, he must have some form of financial
interest? If anyone mentions IANTD, he's an instructor? Your logic is rather
faulty.
This is a SCUBA forum. you know, about diving? GUE is an agency that
trains..... you guessed it! DIVERS.
Rich L
(FTR: my connection with GUE = satisfied customer)
Rich Lesperance
Bob Crownfield <Crown...@Home.com> wrote
> He (MHK) has at least two jobs that I know about, and selling
> dive gear is not one of them.
Lesse, here:
Job # 1 - tax advisor to the rich & nameless
Job # 2 - Appointed pummeler of idiotic ophthamologists?
Rich L
Rich Lesperance
Guy Morin <xn...@videotron.ca> wrote
>
> At least in the military, they give you food, salary (however modest)
> and the chance to serve. For a course, I'm the one footing the bill,
> I want value for money, and dogma isn't it.
Have you served in the military?
Didn't think so, or you would have understood the reference. Regardless of
which direction the money goes, the trainer is in charge of imparting the
knowledge and conditioning to enure the trainee survives (and accomplishes
the mission). Sometimes, that requires dogma.
The big difference between the military and GUE - when I was in the
military, it wasn't always obvious right away why something was done a
certain way. Sometimes, I didn't learn until years later.
With GUE (or, to be fair, any of the competent instructors from other
agencies I've met), if you have a question, you ask, and get an answer. It's
that simple.
Rich L
RAL2OOO
>and redundant regs. There is considerable evolution, and a lot of choices to
>get
>there.
And that guy cuts to the heart of the matter. It is exactly why its important
to evaluate the options at hand.
Step back from the cat fights, go visit their web page. If you are going to
get training in the more advanced arts of diving then ignoring GUE because of
few rude post would be a shame.
RAL
Richard Hyde
: It's always someone else's fault, isn't it? That's another
: typical excuse from people who are caught with their
: hand in the cookie jar: "Honestly, he made me do it."
New to the Net, are you? :-) I suggest reading the FAQs
--
Include "wombat" in Subject line of mail sent to me [to override spamgard]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Richard Hyde | R...@netcom.com | This space intentionally left blank |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bob D.
Guy,
I'm not sure what that is at the bottom of Jim's post.... You talking
about this thing, <A "
http://www.angelfire.com/ga2/jimh">http://www.angelfire.com/ga2/jimh</A>? I
bet a heck of a lot of people will click on it and take a lookie see now that
you've brought it to our attention. I know I sure did ;-)
(Better check my sig...... wouldn't want you to miss out on an opportunity!
...hehehehehehe)
Bob D.
<A HREF="http://www.SportDiverHQ.com">www.SportDiverHQ.com
JIM HOLCOMBE wrote:
> Who the hell are you?!? I have not seen anyone advertise for GUE. What I
> have seen is a discussion of the DIR philosophy towards diving and it just
> so happens that GUE endorses that philosophy. The reason GUE's name came up
> was because someone was criticizing them and some other folks came to their
> defense. I've seen the same thing with PADI,NAUI etc.The only pollution I've
> seen is your dumbass post. If you don't like the subject line don't put the
> mouse on it and click!
>
> --
> Dive Safe and Often
> Jim
><A " http://www.angelfire.com/ga2/jimh">http://www.angelfire.com/ga2/jimh</A>
mike_...@my-deja.com
>
You were the one telling people they didn't have the right to post
certain messages to this group.
Mike
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Bob Crownfield
>
> Bob Crownfield wrote:
>
> > guy:
> >
> > perhaps you confuse 'gue.com', with the DIR philosophy?
> > For employees of GUE to advertise here is improper.
> > To discuss the philosophy is very appropriate.
> >
> >
>
> Bob,
>
> So then, if they are in the business of selling
> their philosophy, and that is what the debates
> are about, then I believe that we have QED.
>
> Their debating the product and comparing it with
> other agencies' product (read: philosophy) is equivalent
> to advertising.
>
> Thank you for making my point, I never thought
> of it that way. Thanks for setting me straight.
Straight maybe, but not in the right direction.
Name one of the posters who is "selling their philosophy",
and name the price he is charging.
This is mostly a philosophical argument. historically, I am one of the
primary guardians against commercialism here, and it never occurred to
me that anyone would be confused enough to think that MHK, for example,
is selling anything. He is a strong proponent of a philosophy, but is
not a salesman. He has at least two jobs that I know about, and selling
dive gear is not one of them.
>
> This must be why JJ and company have the good
> sense not to post, they perceive these subtle differences.
>
> Guy
--
Kevlar
>
>At least in the military, they give you food, salary (however modest)
>and the chance to serve. For a course, I'm the one footing the bill,
>I want value for money, and dogma isn't it.
>
Believe it or not Guy, courses in the military cost money. Alot of money.
The individual soldier may not 'foot the bill', his parent unit does. They
pay for food/clothing/expenses, the whole deal. Then again for all intents
and purposes they *own* the soldier and should be responsible for the
training.
You are paying for training as a sillyvilian because no one 'owns' you.
No one tells you when you can and can't go to sleep, when the toilet
you just spent 3 hours scrubbing is still too dirty, and when you are going
to have to take an extended vacation to some god forsaken desert to
rescue some dirtbags you dont give a good shit about. You are the
only one responsible for yourself, if your employer wanted you trained
for scuba diving the GUE way then I am sure they would put up the
money for your training, eating, and hookers on the weekend just like
the military does.
I don't really care for GUE, although I do respect what they are trying
to do. Some people in this world need to be spoonfed things to get a
good understanding. Some of us don't have that problem. I think GUE
takes their training requirements a bit too far but that is my opinion and
a reason they will never see a dime of my money.
But you seem to have a personal interest in this beyond being a smoker
or having a difference of opinion on their 'doing it wright' gear setup.
Maybe you work for a competitor, who knows, but as a newsgroup member
I enjoy reading about all the training agencies and their pros and cons.
GUE is doing the right thing for some people. I applaud them for that. Some
of us have no interest in diving in a cave environment and really dont think
DIR is the best option so we will pursue training via other sources, but don't
berate people for wanting to share information in a public forum, you sound
like an idiot.
-K
Brian Wagner
>
>> of my comments. I didn't notice any accusation of advertising. (other than
> Scott's post. ;-))
YOu said "commercial operations using this forum for promotional
purposes." That's advertising.
Brian Wagner
>
> So then, if they are in the business of selling
> their philosophy, and that is what the debates
> are about, then I believe that we have QED.
They do not sell philosphy; they sell training.
> Their debating the product and comparing it with
> other agencies' product (read: philosophy) is equivalent
> to advertising.
The product is training.
The philosphy BEHIND the training is debated here by people with no
vested interest. There have been equally harsh discussions of gun
control; does that constitute advertising for Smith & Wesson? No.
Brian Wagner
>
> No agency is perfect, and they are all self serving,
> to a point. Few agencies have the distinction of having introduced so many
> such a noble goal.
>
Um, excuse me, but you just made a positive remark about the most
commercial agency of all, the first (and as far as I know, only) one to
incorporate as a for-profit enterprise. Your comment constitutes
advocacy for a commercial entity, and, BASED ON YOUR OWN FALLACIOUS
DEFINITION, is advertising. Go banish yourself, Mr. Self Righteous.
Iain Smith
Guy - again, you're showing that you've never been in any form of
uniformed service. As was discussed on Techdiver recently, fire-fighters
use identical configurations. I know from my own experience in the
military that identical kit setups are used. Why? Safety. You don't have
to think about where your mate has his kit because it's exactly where
yours would be. Same goes for diving. However, an additional reason is
because most of those who are DIR, or heading in that direction, have
actually thought about how their configs could be improved. It's not
surprising that the same answers come out.
Of course, it helps that those who got there first are sharing their
knowledge. This frequently leads to accusations of lemming-like
behaviour. In some cases, this may be. Normally it is not. If there is a
better way to do things, people are listening. In the time I've been on
rec.scuba, I've seen two suggestions about how it might be done better
(Dan B. - console mounted compasses, and someone else - Dive Alerts for
DIR OW diving) After much discussion, a concensus was reached for use of
the latter (carry, but only fit on the surface), while I pointed out some
problems arising from the former. I hope there may be constructive
discussion arising from that.
> Few agencies have the distinction of having introduced so many people to
> the wonders of the underwater world [as PADI]. Too bad gue can't aspire
> to such a noble goal.
If you regard it as a "noble goal" to produce the sorts of divers frequently
experienced by members of the NG, who honestly shouldn't be in the water,
and to have a commercial ethos about getting the most money for the
minimum output, then yes, PADI do a better job than anyone else
[conclusions drawn from personal experience, anecdotal discussion on this,
and other, fora and PADI material cited]. Personally, I hope that GUE will
continue, and other agencies will evolve towards, the ideal of producing
competent, knowledgable, safe divers. That, to me, is a "noble goal"
Iain
(Who is BSAC trained, a recreational, non-commercial instructor, who is
rapidly adopting DIR, and who has no involvement whatsoever with GUE.)
Bob D.
>commercial agency of all, the first (and as far as I know, only) one to
>incorporate as a for-profit enterprise.
Brian,
Actually, there's probably as many if not more scuba cert agencies
that are for-profit enterprises than those that are non-profit.
Robert (Bob) Decker
PADI./NAUI Inst.
Morehead City, NC
<A HREF="http://www.sportdiverhq.com">SportDiverHQ</A>
<A HREF="http://www.OlympusDiving.com">OlympusDiving</A>
(remove "NoSpam" to reply)
Scott
"MHK" <mhk...@prodigy.net> wrote in message
news:8e82nt$165s$1...@newssvr03-int.news.prodigy.com...
,sniP
> I nominate BLACK for the 1st PADI trimix student... I'll even pay for his
> class.
Carefull there Mike. This illustrates malice and intent. "Black" might sue
you after he drowns. He has a lawyer, you know. And he's buds with the Chief
of Police. They do lunch at the Rotary. Oh yeah, and he's a boat owner.
Scott
Scott
>Few agencies have the distinction of having introduced so many
to
> such a noble goal.
Actually, Guy, GUE aspires to a much nobler goal:
Teaching people how to dive and come home.
Scott
Trace Malinowski
>Iain
>
>(Who is BSAC trained, a recreational, non-commercial instructor, who is
>rapidly adopting DIR, and who has no involvement whatsoever with GUE.)
And whose girlfriend is the only one allowed to call him baby :-)
Trace Malinowski
PDIC Instructor #2075
http://hometown.aol.com/tracemalin/
Mask... $60
Long blade fins... $150
Wetsuit... $200
Weight belt... $25
Expression on a SCUBA diver's face as you wave to him at 120 feet without a
tank... PRICELESS!
Iain Smith
> >
> >(Who is BSAC trained, a recreational, non-commercial instructor, who is
> >rapidly adopting DIR, and who has no involvement whatsoever with GUE.)
>
> And whose girlfriend is the only one allowed to call him baby :-)
Hmm...why do I have a sudden, sinking feeling, that I'm going to be
regretting that post for a very, very long time! :-)
Iain
Scott
"Iain Smith" <im...@hermes.cam.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:Pine.SOL.4.21.0004...@orange.csi.cam.ac.uk...
> > And whose girlfriend is the only one allowed to call him baby :-)
> Hmm...why do I have a sudden, sinking feeling, that I'm going to be
> regretting that post for a very, very long time! :-)
Oh no, with Black around, you'll get off easy. He hasnt started posting yet
today, but he'll get you off the hook soon.
Besides, it was there, if Trace hadnt taken the shot, I would have. =;-)
Scott
spd135
the DIR methods and MINDSET or Philosophy. I know those are big words
but a dictionary is available at any library. I have yet to see GUE
advertise on this site. I do see a growing number of divers who have
seen, and then tried the DIR methods, and were pleasently surprised,
shocked, converted, or just plain blown away with how simple it is and
how much safer it is. Have you ever watched, tried, or even really
listened to someone who uses this method? If you did you would not be
so quick to flame these guys who feels so strongly about something to
better us all. If Padi, Naui, etc. would mopve to these methonds and
teachings they would also be spoken of highly. Most agencies today
seem more concerned about dead presidents than real safety and proper
training of divers. You can go from one cert. to another with no
"experience" diving between. There are LOTS of Open Water Instructors
who have few dives other than training dives. It is like twelve year
olds getting pregnant, and then when that baby is twelve, she gets
pregnant too. We have a lot of babies training babies, and that i
dangerous. This is a fun but inherently dangerous sport. We have to
decide how safe it is going to be, and WE is US. This and many other
things need to change and the only way to change things that have been
done that way for a long time, is to talk loudly enough to be heard.
Before you choose to think DIR, GUE etc. is a bad thing give it a fair
try. If you are then convinced it won't make you a safer, better
diver, you then have the right to bitch about it. It's kind of like
voting, If you didn't, don't bitch about who got elected. Mark
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
tleemay
MHK wrote:
> Guy Morin <xn...@videotron.ca> wrote in message
> news:39078B2F...@videotron.ca...
> >
> > Maybe the cave training offered by these agencies should
> > include some social skills.
>
> Let me guess you think a drill sargent in the Marine corps should politley
> ask his recruits if it isn't to much of an inconvience would they possibly
> give him 50???
> <snip>
>
> I can just see it now in the PADI trimix class, * in the unlikely event you
> find yourself in decompression mode, gently push your snorkel aside, look at
> what your computer says, hope your bondage wings don't fail, grab your steel
> stage bottles, find your most recently purchased c-card, kick you force fins
> as fast as they will go, breathe your spare air, spank your new fangled tank
> banger, and then bend over, put your head between your legs and kiss your
> ass goodbye because you have just been killed*
Ding! Ding! Ding!, It's then time for the bonus round... time to spin the wheel!
Tell'em what he's won Don Pardo...
... why it's the brand new Oxygen Toxicity Specialty complete with CNS hits. You
might be killed or at the very least injured, but damn it you got that patch!
Guy Morin
Brian,
Get a dictionary.
Guy
Guy Morin
Funny thing is, there is no debate when it comes to gue. Their
philosophy is inflexible, so there can be no debate. Absolutes cannot
be debated, and that is obvious from the treatment people get
when they suggest anything that derogates from the "truth".
If absolutes cannot be debated, then it must be like some circus
sideshow to watch people get berated when they engage the
dialog. This is the thesis of my post.
The web site is far more informative, and incorporates no insults.
This, by the way, goes against the philosophy from Bill Main, who
still continued to find more refinements to his gear, and that was
his "way", not to stagnate.
The thing is that the wkpp must have a regimented way to conduct
their dives because of the logistics involved in that sort of operation.
The institution, if it aspires to more than what the wkpp is doing,
obviously needs to adapt to circumstances. Are there really any
absolutes in life?
Think of the separation of church and state.
Yours truly,
Guy
Guy Morin
> Guy Morin <xn...@videotron.ca> wrote
> >
> > At least in the military, they give you food, salary (however modest)
> > and the chance to serve. For a course, I'm the one footing the bill,
> > I want value for money, and dogma isn't it.
>
> Have you served in the military?
That is weak.
Are you a doctor?
Are you an astronaut?
Were you ever a president?
Very, very, petty.
>
>
> Didn't think so, or you would have understood the reference. Regardless of
> which direction the money goes, the trainer is in charge of imparting the
> knowledge and conditioning to enure the trainee survives (and accomplishes
> the mission). Sometimes, that requires dogma.
In the case of the military, you made my point for me, thank you.
The participant isn't paying, is he?
>
>
> The big difference between the military and GUE - when I was in the
> military, it wasn't always obvious right away why something was done a
> certain way. Sometimes, I didn't learn until years later.
>
> With GUE (or, to be fair, any of the competent instructors from other
> agencies I've met), if you have a question, you ask, and get an answer. It's
> that simple.
BTW, it's great that the gue attitude is an improvement from your military
days.
I would hope for an answer, as a paying customer.
>
>
> Rich L
Guy Morin
> >
> >At least in the military, they give you food, salary (however modest)
> >and the chance to serve. For a course, I'm the one footing the bill,
> >I want value for money, and dogma isn't it.
> >
>
> Believe it or not Guy, courses in the military cost money. Alot of money.
> The individual soldier may not 'foot the bill', his parent unit does. They
> pay for food/clothing/expenses, the whole deal. Then again for all intents
> and purposes they *own* the soldier and should be responsible for the
> training.
The state pays from what you are saying here, the fact that cost is borne
by some agency is merely an accounting practice for logistical purposes.
The trainee never assumes costs out of pocket, the state pays, you are
basically making my point here, thanks.
>
>
> You are paying for training as a sillyvilian because no one 'owns' you.
> No one tells you when you can and can't go to sleep, when the toilet
> you just spent 3 hours scrubbing is still too dirty, and when you are going
> to have to take an extended vacation to some god forsaken desert to
> rescue some dirtbags you dont give a good shit about. You are the
> only one responsible for yourself, if your employer wanted you trained
> for scuba diving the GUE way then I am sure they would put up the
> money for your training, eating, and hookers on the weekend just like
> the military does.
That's right, in any course, only the trainee can progress by his free
will. It's just that when the money comes from your savings, you actually
care about the quality of the instruction.
>
>
> I don't really care for GUE, although I do respect what they are trying
> to do. Some people in this world need to be spoonfed things to get a
> good understanding. Some of us don't have that problem. I think GUE
> takes their training requirements a bit too far but that is my opinion and
> a reason they will never see a dime of my money.
>
>
> But you seem to have a personal interest in this beyond being a smoker
> or having a difference of opinion on their 'doing it wright' gear setup.
>
> Maybe you work for a competitor, who knows, but as a newsgroup member
> I enjoy reading about all the training agencies and their pros and cons.
BTW, a more attentive read of my post will reveal that I said nothing
about the quality of the information supplied by gue. In fact, for all you
know, I may have a completely gue compliant rig. I may have tried every
variation on the gue setup and compared them to other, slightly different
configurations. Who knows?
>
>
> GUE is doing the right thing for some people. I applaud them for that. Some
> of us have no interest in diving in a cave environment and really dont think
> DIR is the best option so we will pursue training via other sources, but don't
> berate people for wanting to share information in a public forum, you sound
> like an idiot.
Thank you nameless person. At least I can maintain a civilized dialog even
in the face of many insults, and little forethought on the part of my fellow
readers.
Again, please read my post, reading skills are required.
Guy
>
>
> -K
Guy Morin
> Guy Morin wrote:
> >
> > No agency is perfect, and they are all self serving,
> > to a point. Few agencies have the distinction of having introduced so many
> > people to the wonders of the underwater world [as PADI.] Too bad gue can't aspire to
> > such a noble goal.
> >
> Um, excuse me, but you just made a positive remark about the most
> commercial agency of all, the first (and as far as I know, only) one to
> incorporate as a for-profit enterprise. Your comment constitutes
> advocacy for a commercial entity, and, BASED ON YOUR OWN FALLACIOUS
> DEFINITION, is advertising. Go banish yourself, Mr. Self Righteous.
Hahaha!
Another funny guy. Your reading skills really need improvement.
It's the goal that is noble in that sentence. The part about PADI was
strictly factual, they probably have certified the most people.
And if they are the most commercial, perhaps a lot of people have
voted, with their money, and made them what they are.
Take it easy Brian,
Guy
Guy Morin
> > One configuration for all, not likely,
>
> Guy - again, you're showing that you've never been in any form of
> uniformed service.
BTW, that is by choice.
> As was discussed on Techdiver recently, fire-fighters
> use identical configurations. I know from my own experience in the
> military that identical kit setups are used.
You mean to say that the military doesn't use rebreathers, is that right?
It looks as though your use of absolutes here, i.e. "identical", might not
be accurate in all states, and all fire departments. Maybe you are saying
that they too have adopted a regimented approach to gear configuration,
and many paradigms are use in the configuration. In any event, it's
probably not too constructive to nitpick.
> Why? Safety. You don't have
> to think about where your mate has his kit because it's exactly where
> yours would be. Same goes for diving. However, an additional reason is
> because most of those who are DIR, or heading in that direction, have
> actually thought about how their configs could be improved. It's not
> surprising that the same answers come out.
Yes, and for some applications, and environments, there are differences.
>
>
> Of course, it helps that those who got there first are sharing their
> knowledge.
Don't you mean Bill Main?
> This frequently leads to accusations of lemming-like
> behaviour. In some cases, this may be. Normally it is not. If there is a
> better way to do things, people are listening. In the time I've been on
> rec.scuba, I've seen two suggestions about how it might be done better
> (Dan B. - console mounted compasses, and someone else - Dive Alerts for
> DIR OW diving) After much discussion, a concensus was reached for use of
> the latter (carry, but only fit on the surface), while I pointed out some
> problems arising from the former. I hope there may be constructive
> discussion arising from that.
Cool, a notable exception.
>
>
> > Few agencies have the distinction of having introduced so many people to
> > the wonders of the underwater world [as PADI]. Too bad gue can't aspire
> > to such a noble goal.
>
> If you regard it as a "noble goal" to produce the sorts of divers frequently
> experienced by members of the NG, who honestly shouldn't be in the water,
Read again, and look to the answer to another poster here in regard to what
is noble.
Some people are a danger to themselves, have you looked at some people
driving? And let's remember how safe driving and diving are in comparison.
In principle I do agree that the instuctor/trainee collaboration is key is
giving
participants the best chance at surviving. It does take two to tango.
>
> and to have a commercial ethos about getting the most money for the
> minimum output, then yes, PADI do a better job than anyone else
> [conclusions drawn from personal experience, anecdotal discussion on this,
> and other, fora and PADI material cited].
No comment, it's the capitalist way, you do want your stock portfolio to grow
don't you?
> Personally, I hope that GUE will
> continue, and other agencies will evolve towards, the ideal of producing
> competent, knowledgable, safe divers. That, to me, is a "noble goal"
That does sound like a great goal.
There are also shareholders in gue, as with all other organizations, let's hope
the service to society remains the higher ideal.
Hopefully that doesn't come off as patronizing, that's certainly not the
intent.
Guy
Guy Morin
> Is it Morin, or MORON?
That's so creative, may I use it?
Hahaha!
> I am not a member of GUE but I do subscribe to
> the DIR methods and MINDSET or Philosophy. I know those are big words
> but a dictionary is available at any library.
Why, you too are versed in the black art of reading! (Easy with the pun,
hooligans.)
> I have yet to see GUE
> advertise on this site. I do see a growing number of divers who have
> seen, and then tried the DIR methods, and were pleasently surprised,
> shocked, converted, or just plain blown away with how simple it is and
> how much safer it is. Have you ever watched, tried, or even really
> listened to someone who uses this method?
This looks like some massive assumption here on what I practice, what fun.
> If you did you would not be
> so quick to flame these guys who feels so strongly about something to
> better us all. If Padi, Naui, etc. would mopve to these methonds and
> teachings they would also be spoken of highly. Most agencies today
> seem more concerned about dead presidents than real safety and proper
> training of divers. You can go from one cert. to another with no
> "experience" diving between. There are LOTS of Open Water Instructors
> who have few dives other than training dives.
Yes, and there isn't an issue with trimix diver deaths.
> It is like twelve year
> olds getting pregnant, and then when that baby is twelve, she gets
> pregnant too. We have a lot of babies training babies, and that i
> dangerous.
No comment here on your family history. (BTW, that is a joke, I
couldn't resist.)
> This is a fun but inherently dangerous sport. We have to
> decide how safe it is going to be, and WE is US.
Aren't we them? Who is us?
> This and many other
> things need to change and the only way to change things that have been
> done that way for a long time, is to talk loudly enough to be heard.
Change the world? Good luck with the attitude.
>
> Before you choose to think DIR, GUE etc. is a bad thing give it a fair
> try. If you are then convinced it won't make you a safer, better
> diver, you then have the right to bitch about it. It's kind of like
> voting, If you didn't, don't bitch about who got elected. Mark
Thanks Mark,
Guy
MHK
Guy Morin <xn...@videotron.ca> wrote in message
> Funny thing is, there is no debate when it comes to gue. Their
> philosophy is inflexible, so there can be no debate. Absolutes cannot
> be debated, and that is obvious from the treatment people get
> when they suggest anything that derogates from the "truth".
>
> If absolutes cannot be debated, then it must be like some circus
> sideshow to watch people get berated when they engage the
> dialog. This is the thesis of my post.
>
Guy,
You have been busy today ;-) You seem bright enough even though we are on
opposite sides of this issue. You also seem desirous of engaging in
semantical debates as opposed to diving issiues. But let me respond to your
comments above. Absolutes ( and in that regard you refer to DIR ) can not
be debated and in fact are debated ad nausem, so that aside, what you mean
is that they won't be changed. DIR is, and has always been, an evolving
process and if you or anyone show the inventors of DIR a better way I'm sure
they'll listen. But in point of fact, whenever we get into these type of
discussions with the personal preferance crowd, you never offer an analysis
of your better points, your crowd just cries about how your being told what
to do.. Let me give you a tip, and I mean this politely, if you don't
want to hear what they are teaching don't buy the class. And what they
teach is DIR..
It is no more complicated than that.. GUE teaches DIR, DIR is what JJ and
GI say it is.. If you don't want to hear there methods don't go...
However, if you can get over your whinning and really want to learn a system
that is adaptable to any kind of diving you can imagine then call them back,
put your anomosity aside and go learn to dive..
> The web site is far more informative, and incorporates no insults.
>
Wasn't the very first problem you had with them about there website not
giving you proper information.. You may also want to compare PADI -v- GUE
website and see which one you think is more informative..
> The institution, if it aspires to more than what the wkpp is doing,
> obviously needs to adapt to circumstances. Are there really any
> absolutes in life?
>
This is the thinking that started PADI on the downward slope.. Tech or cave
diving is not for everyone. GUE strongly advocates that and does not try to
assuage anyone into believing it is.. Part of a good tech diver, or any
diver for that matter, is how they mentaly approach and prepare for a dive.
If you can't approach there classroom properly you probably can't appraoch
the kind of diving they do properly.
> Think of the separation of church and state.
To that point, are you suggesting that you could go into a catholic school
and tell them that abortion should be allowed in the catholic religion. If
you don't like what the Pope preaches are you going to go whine and say, I
want to be a catholic but I don't like some of your ideas or some of the
ways that you present them so you should abandon your long held catholic
beliefs and bend the rules so Guy Morin will feel more comfortable???
That notion is absurd as is the notion that JJ and GI should abandon there
principles and JJ should adjust his training regiment so as to accomodate
the personal preferance crowd. You are paying to learn DIR so listen to
what they have to say.
BTW, one of the things that is obvious from your posts is that you haven't
figured out that DIR is much more than a gear configuration.
Later
Michael J. Blitch
wrote:
>Funny thing is, there is no debate when it comes to gue. Their
>philosophy is inflexible, so there can be no debate. Absolutes cannot
>be debated, and that is obvious from the treatment people get
>when they suggest anything that derogates from the "truth".
What 'debates' have you attempted to start or participate in?
Obviously there is something you do not agree with concerning the
system, so why don't you start a new system. I have NEVER seen anyone
say 'that is dumb because GUE does do it that way". You will almost
always be told why something is wrong as well as the way to correct
it. You are making all these 'inflexible' accusation but I have yet
see you try something otherwise.
>The thing is that the wkpp must have a regimented way to conduct
>their dives because of the logistics involved in that sort of operation.
And why should this not be used for OW diving it increase safety and
enjoyment?
>The institution, if it aspires to more than what the wkpp is doing,
>obviously needs to adapt to circumstances. Are there really any
>absolutes in life?
WHAT NEEDS TO BE ADAPTED? Just try to bring up one thing before
complaining.
Ross Bagley
Guy Morin <xn...@videotron.ca> wrote:
>Brian Wagner wrote:
[...snip...]
>> The product is training.
>> The philosphy BEHIND the training is debated here by people with no
>> vested interest. There have been equally harsh discussions of gun
>> control; does that constitute advertising for Smith & Wesson? No.
>Funny thing is, there is no debate when it comes to gue. Their
>philosophy is inflexible, so there can be no debate.
This is a rather interesting definition of the word "debate". A
debate does not have to result in a change of viewpoint by a
particular advocate, as you would seem to require. A debate only
needs an issue and a pair (or more) of advocates to express
differing perspectives on that issue. If nobody among the advocates
or the audience changes their mind as a result of the discussion, it
was still a debate, albeit of limited utility.
Also, contrary to your assertion, the DIR philosophy is flexible,
always bending to do what's right, no matter who's feelings will be
hurt. It just turns out that a DIR equipment rig hasn't required
that many changes through the years because simplicity is hard to
improve on.
>Absolutes cannot be debated, and that is obvious from the treatment
>people get when they suggest anything that derogates from the
>"truth".
>If absolutes cannot be debated, then it must be like some circus
>sideshow to watch people get berated when they engage the dialog.
Well, if you're here to watch the sideshow, understand this: the
harshest words are reserved for people who advocate dangerous
behavior. As it turns out, a large group of experienced divers on
this list follow the DIR philosophy to varying degrees, and tend
to feel a little protective of the Usenet audience. When they see
unsafe practices being advocated, they object and try to make it
clear exactly why they object. If the offending poster continues
advocating unsafe diving, or attempts to argue their untenable point,
then the flames get actively hostile. If you don't like that, don't
read it.
>This is the thesis of my post.
Then don't watch the sideshow. The DIR boys and girls will continue
to advocate their point of view and will also continue to object to
unsafe diving. If you don't like it, don't read the message.
>The web site is far more informative, and incorporates no insults.
>
>This, by the way, goes against the philosophy from Bill Main, who
>still continued to find more refinements to his gear, and that was
>his "way", not to stagnate.
And that's certainly his perogative, but I think you'll find that Bill
Main, like the late Sheck Exley and others like him, have a
substantially higher awareness of the real risks they assume from
their gear choices, and knowing those risks better than anyone, choose
to dive in circumstances and to extremes that would have everyone but
those with big brass balls back on dry land enjoying a hot drink.
Bill will try stuff, but doesn't advocate that anyone else follow his
latest experiment. A DIR kit will change to reflect real improvements
in various products, it just does so deliberately and with a great
deal of thought. DIR will never change on a whim.
>The thing is that the wkpp must have a regimented way to conduct
>their dives because of the logistics involved in that sort of operation.
>
>The institution, if it aspires to more than what the wkpp is doing,
>obviously needs to adapt to circumstances. Are there really any
>absolutes in life?
You're seeing absolutes where few exist. There are stupid things to
do, and for someone in a position of authority (instructor, doctor,
etc.) to advocate a stupid practice could endanger the lives of people
who respect that authority. From what I've seen, the DIR crowd only
really jumps on people who do exactly that (mjbmd as the poster boy).
Regards,
Ross
-- Ross Bagley & Associates http://www.rossbagley.com
"We don't write your software, we help you write your software better!"
Iain Smith
> > use identical configurations. I know from my own experience in the
> > military that identical kit setups are used.
>
> You mean to say that the military doesn't use rebreathers, is that right?
I don't believe I said that anywhere. I would pretty much guarantee that
the do. I would also guarantee that every military user will rig his
'breather in exactly the same way.
> It looks as though your use of absolutes here, i.e. "identical", might not
> be accurate in all states, and all fire departments. Maybe you are saying
> that they too have adopted a regimented approach to gear configuration,
> and many paradigms are use in the configuration.
They may well have differences between different fire depts. (I don't know
- I have no involvement with them) However, everyone working together in
that dept. will use the same configuration.
> > Why? Safety. You don't have
> > to think about where your mate has his kit because it's exactly where
> > yours would be. Same goes for diving. However, an additional reason is
> > because most of those who are DIR, or heading in that direction, have
> > actually thought about how their configs could be improved. It's not
> > surprising that the same answers come out.
>
> Yes, and for some applications, and environments, there are differences.
Exactly. There are differences in the DIR setup for different environments.
There is no point in wearing double-95s (or whatever) for a 15m OW dive
(except for training purposes). Equally, a 7' hose would not be necessary
(but might well be used to maintain continuity). There are minor
differences in the end product, but the philosophy and attitude to arrive
at the eventual config remains the same.
> > Of course, it helps that those who got there first are sharing their
> > knowledge.
>
> Don't you mean Bill Main?
I mean those who are pushing the limits of human experience in
environments in which I am unlikely ever to see. I believe that I can
learn much from them and their approach. The record holders are, I
believe, Irvine and Jablonski. They and their support teams have killed
no-one, and had a minimum number of incidents (Scott, Rich might be able
to put a number on that). That tells me something about how effective
their approach is.
[snip a couple of examples of where an approach has been discussed and/or
modified]
> Cool, a notable exception.
I would have to disagree there. In my experience on this forum (about 18
months now, I think) there are always going to be people who go for the
snappy sound-bites, and if the truth be told, are not overly-helpful in
creating useful discussion (Jammer is a classic example, even though he's
frequently spot on). However, there are many more who are perfectly
willing to discuss issues, as long as the other party is prepared to
discuss without getting stuck into personal attack and/or obtuse
stupidity.
> > > Few agencies have the distinction of having introduced so many people to
> > > the wonders of the underwater world [as PADI]. Too bad gue can't aspire
> > > to such a noble goal.
> >
> > If you regard it as a "noble goal" to produce the sorts of divers frequently
> > experienced by members of the NG, who honestly shouldn't be in the water,
>
> Read again, and look to the answer to another poster here in regard to what
> is noble.
I'll have to find that and get back to you - my current email client
doesn't allow me to switch between messages.
> Some people are a danger to themselves, have you looked at some people
> driving? And let's remember how safe driving and diving are in comparison.
Your point is, I believe, that some people should not be participating in
the activities in which they are. I totally agree.
> In principle I do agree that the instuctor/trainee collaboration is key is
> giving participants the best chance at surviving. It does take two to tango.
True - but that requires the right attitude from both participants - the
willingness to stay up-to-date and to continue his own education on the
part of the instructor (it's expected of a doctor - indeed a doctor who
fails to do so is on very shaky ground) and a willingness to learn as much
as possible on the part of the student.
> > and to have a commercial ethos about getting the most money for the
> > minimum output, then yes, PADI do a better job than anyone else
> > [conclusions drawn from personal experience, anecdotal discussion on this,
> > and other, fora and PADI material cited].
>
> No comment, it's the capitalist way, you do want your stock portfolio to grow
> don't you?
I do not, and will never, invest in organisations who's product is the
delivery of life-preserving training. To do so encourages the problem.
Capitalism is all very well until it puts lives at risk through an
obsession with money (see what happened to people during the Industrial
Revolution for a classical example)
> > Personally, I hope that GUE will
> > continue, and other agencies will evolve towards, the ideal of producing
> > competent, knowledgable, safe divers. That, to me, is a "noble goal"
>
> That does sound like a great goal.
> There are also shareholders in gue,
Are there? I had the impression that there were not. Anyone know one way
or the other?
> let's hope the service to society remains the higher ideal.
> Hopefully that doesn't come off as patronizing, that's certainly not the
> intent.
Not at all. I agree totally.
Iain
Iain Smith
> philosophy is inflexible, so there can be no debate.
The philosophy (in abbreviated form) is: Simplicity and Safety. IOW take
each dive on its own, and choose the most appropriate way of doing it,
giving you the maximum chance of achieving your objective, and the maximum
chance of coming back uninjured.
> Absolutes cannot be debated, and that is obvious from the treatment
> people get when they suggest anything that derogates from the "truth".
Guy, people only get a hard time when they post aggressive, misinformed
posts, without actually understanding what the issues genuinely
are. People who ASK, rather than rant, and who are prepared to genuinely
discuss things are treated, as a rule, with courtesy. Once insults start
being traded though...
> The web site is far more informative, and incorporates no insults.
Agreed. However, it seems to me that many people start hammering
DIR/GUE/WKPP without understanding what is on the website. Once this is
understood, the participant is in a position to discuss the issues
(including anything he disagrees with on the site)
> This, by the way, goes against the philosophy from Bill Main, who
> still continued to find more refinements to his gear, and that was
> his "way", not to stagnate.
This is the part of the ethos of DIR, as promoted by GUE, WKPP and
others. None of the DIR proponents on here (AFAIK) have ever suggested
that DIR is the final answer. If one evaluates each dive as suggested
above, then as new equipment/techniques become available, then they are
incorporated if appropriate.
> The thing is that the wkpp must have a regimented way to conduct
> their dives because of the logistics involved in that sort of operation.
>
> The institution, if it aspires to more than what the wkpp is doing,
> obviously needs to adapt to circumstances. Are there really any
> absolutes in life?
If the WKPP aspire (as they do) to do more than they have done, then they
will need to continue their approach of evaluation, learning and
experience as the basis of their success. Anyone else who wants to achieve
what they have done, will need to apply the same principles. As I
understand it, the project run by other divers in the WKP system failed to
do so, and failed to achieve anything close to what the WKPP have
done. (As always, if evidence can be produced to disprove this position, I
will happily examine it objectively)
Regards,
Iain
Richard Hyde
:> Think of the separation of church and state.
: To that point, are you suggesting that you could go into a catholic school
: and tell them that abortion should be allowed in the catholic religion. If
: you don't like what the Pope preaches are you going to go whine and say, I
: want to be a catholic but I don't like some of your ideas or some of the
: ways that you present them so you should abandon your long held catholic
: beliefs and bend the rules so Guy Morin will feel more comfortable???
Actually, I know a fair number of catholics who believe just that. If
they don't agree with the teachings of the church, it is the chuch
who must change rather than the individual -leaving- the church for one with
a more agreeable philosophy.
Given that, you're example might nit be quite what you want it to be :-)
Hell, I suppose there are some people who join bowling clubs and then
complain about the lack of foottball equipment.
CHeers,
Rick
--
Include "wombat" in Subject line of mail sent to me [to override spamgard]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Richard Hyde | R...@netcom.com | This space intentionally left blank |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Iain Smith
> strictly factual, they probably have certified the most people.
Guy - I think I may have you trapped in a contradiction. I'm sure you told
me that PADI's goal was commercial success ("That's the capitalist
way") and yet here their goal is to get the maximum number of people
diving. IMO, both are true. The second allows them to achieve the first,
but it is the first that is the driving force. As I suggested in another
post, the truly noble goal is to maximise the number of divers /with the
best possible attitudes, knowledge and understanding/. I don't think even
the most die-hard PADI supported would claim that for them without a
qualm.
Iain
Iain Smith
> I have NEVER seen anyone say 'that is dumb because GUE does do it that
> way".
I guess you killfile Black, then? :-)
I.
MHK
Richard Hyde <r...@netcom4.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:8eadbu$73e$1...@slb0.atl.mindspring.net...
>
> Actually, I know a fair number of catholics who believe just that. If
> they don't agree with the teachings of the church, it is the chuch
> who must change rather than the individual -leaving- the church for one
with
> a more agreeable philosophy.
>
Richard I chose that example very carefully with just that intended result.
While I agree with you that there are many catholics out there who would
like to see a few changes ( and I count myself in that group ) the fact of
the matter is we can't go around having abortions and stay true to being a
catholic.. While we may believe in everything else that the church stands
for, we can't make that one exception and still be a practising catholic
holding true to the catholic teachings. It reminds me of the scene in
Saturday Night Fever when one of the crew was asking Tony's brother, the guy
that just left the priesthood, if the pope would give him a dispensation if
his pregnant girfriend had an abortion..
I went from catholic kindergarten through catholic college, when I got into
grad school it was finally nice not to have to take a theology class ;-),
but I couldn't picture walking into one of my theology classes and telling
the priest/professor that what he was teaching me was wrong, even though I
enrolled in his catholic university to learn Catholicism, and that the
church should bend for me.. I paid him to teach me the catholic religion
and it's related beliefs, I didn't pay tuition to tell him that the church
needs to change for me.
While the example I'm sure will rage with off topic comments, the point is
the catholic religion ( and by way of my example DIR ) is a well founded and
long standing set of principles. If I go to a catholic university ( and by
the same example a GUE class ) to pay them to learn what they are teaching
they shouldn't bend for me I should listen to what they are saying...
Could I go into a Jewish temple and tell them that I agree with most of your
teachings but I just believe in Christ and then still call myself a Jew???
Could I call for lower taxes, reduced government and capital gains cuts and
call myself a democrat ;-) ( sorry couldn't resist )
But you (hopefully ) get my point....
Later
Guy Morin
> > It's the goal that is noble in that sentence. The part about PADI was
> > strictly factual, they probably have certified the most people.
>
> Guy - I think I may have you trapped in a contradiction.
Oh, no! What of my eternal soul now, will the church make an exception,
perhaps I can purchase some indulgences. ;-)
> I'm sure you told
> me that PADI's goal was commercial success ("That's the capitalist
> way") and yet here their goal is to get the maximum number of people
> diving. IMO, both are true. The second allows them to achieve the first,
> but it is the first that is the driving force.
Are you a venture capitalist? ;-)
> As I suggested in another
> post, the truly noble goal is to maximise the number of divers /with the
> best possible attitudes, knowledge and understanding/. I don't think even
> the most die-hard PADI supported would claim that for them without a
> qualm.
When you have an accident, do we go after the driving school?
The government agency that certified you?
Maybe only in America. (Again, very hard to resist.) ;-)
I digress, bear with me.
Do you believe there are people out there who get driving licences just
to drive fast. There are people who get diving courses to engage in
dangerous diving activities calling for diving in caves, institutionalize
them all?
BTW, in the perfect world where there is only gue, and all water resides
in caves, how does one first get certified to get scuba gear, gue doesn't
offer an open water course, right?
What does that mean? All gue diver were unsafe divers when they
started, because they got certified by a recreational diving institution?
Thank God they're now safely diving within the confines of those
caves. ;-)
This is getting silly, my apologies.
Exploration, right, that was my point. We want to explore, is my
best guess, that where it starts. We accept a certain level of risk
based on our knowledge, and we progress to the next level. We discover
the right way at every level, and hopefully graduate by surviving the
current level of ignorance we suffer from and the danger we happen
to find ourselves in.
Again, DIR is an end to some specific type of diving, and it is adapted
for circumstances, as per the Bill Main ideal. And where the wkpp
dives, there is only one way to dive (exept when they use the 'breathers,
then it's different, and safe in the dangerous environment.)
Guy
>
>
> Iain
Richard Hyde
: Richard Hyde <r...@netcom4.netcom.com> wrote in message
: news:8eadbu$73e$1...@slb0.atl.mindspring.net...
: Richard I chose that example very carefully with just that intended result.
: While I agree with you that there are many catholics out there who would
: like to see a few changes ( and I count myself in that group ) the fact of
: the matter is we can't go around having abortions and stay true to being a
: catholic..
Or more contrversial, and somewhat less black & white, birth control.
: While we may believe in everything else that the church stands
: for, we can't make that one exception and still be a practising catholic
: holding true to the catholic teachings.
I'm a recovering catholic :-), non practicing unbeliever :-) Even
from that background, I think I'm clearly more rabid than you in that
I believe that -every- tenet of the church must be accepted or
followed if you are going to call yourself a catholic.
It's similar to DIR with a major exception. I firmly believe that
if you can show the DIR crowd a better way of rigging or approaching
diving, they will accept and incorporate that change.
If you are going to dive with DIR divers, do it DIR or go somewhere
else. Myself, I'm a stroke, so I doubt I'll get to dive DIR, but I
would like to try the equipment someday.
: It reminds me of the scene in
: Saturday Night Fever when one of the crew was asking Tony's brother, the guy
: that just left the priesthood, if the pope would give him a dispensation if
: his pregnant girfriend had an abortion..
LOL!
: I went from catholic kindergarten through catholic college, when I got into
: grad school it was finally nice not to have to take a theology class ;-),
: but I couldn't picture walking into one of my theology classes and telling
: the priest/professor that what he was teaching me was wrong, even though I
: enrolled in his catholic university to learn Catholicism, and that the
: church should bend for me.. I paid him to teach me the catholic religion
: and it's related beliefs, I didn't pay tuition to tell him that the church
: needs to change for me.
Interesting. I did the kindergarten through most-of-college route
as well. It was the theology classes that put me in the recovering-
catholic category. I'm sure the debates I had with the Benedictines
bored my classmates to death, but it sure showed clearly the difference
between faith and logic. I'm not putting down faith. But Aquinas
and the 10 proofs for the existance of god? jeez. I didn't tell
them they were wrong - who was I to know what they subjectivly
thought. I definitly told they they did not make sense at times.
I can't imagine studying to be a catholic. Except for the cannonical
evil nuns, they were damn fine teachers.
DIR is clearly logic driven, not faith driven.
: While the example I'm sure will rage with off topic comments, the point is
: the catholic religion ( and by way of my example DIR ) is a well founded and
: long standing set of principles. If I go to a catholic university ( and by
: the same example a GUE class ) to pay them to learn what they are teaching
: they shouldn't bend for me I should listen to what they are saying...
The difference is that if you go to a DUI class, you should have the
expectation that the instructors can justify their choices in a reasoned,
logical fashion. If you go to a religion class and corner the
instructor on a point of logic, they only have to invoke "faith"
to get out of jail free.
: Could I go into a Jewish temple and tell them that I agree with most of your
: teachings but I just believe in Christ and then still call myself a Jew???
You would have to ask Dr. Laura that :-)
: But you (hopefully ) get my point....
A fair exchange of points...
Cheers,
MHK
Richard Hyde <r...@netcom4.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:8eafu6$73e$2...@slb0.atl.mindspring.net...
Richard,
fair exchange of points... One question, you said you doubt you would ever
be dir... May I ask why not????
Kevlar
> BTW, a more attentive read of my post will reveal that I said nothing
> about the quality of the information supplied by gue. In fact, for all you
> know, I may have a completely gue compliant rig. I may have tried every
> variation on the gue setup and compared them to other, slightly different
> configurations. Who knows?
>
A more attentive read of your post reveals that you seem to disagree with
the fact that people are discussing the training offered by GUE. What I ask
is does your problem lie with GUE itself, (if so then I really could care less and
will end this discussion) or do you have a problem with the fact that people
are hear to share information on any diving related topic. I read this list at least
weekly, daily if I am involved in a discussion, and I have seen no one endorsing
GUE in the form of advertisements.
Are you just trolling for attention?
If so you are doing a good job at getting it.
>
> Thank you nameless person. At least I can maintain a civilized dialog even
> in the face of many insults, and little forethought on the part of my fellow
> readers.
People insult you because you come off like a pompous ass. I would wager
the same happens to you alot in your life outside of usenet no?
-K
Guy Morin
> Richard Hyde <r...@netcom4.netcom.com> wrote in message
> news:8eadbu$73e$1...@slb0.atl.mindspring.net...
> >
> > Actually, I know a fair number of catholics who believe just that. If
> > they don't agree with the teachings of the church, it is the chuch
> > who must change rather than the individual -leaving- the church for one
> with
> > a more agreeable philosophy.
> >
>
> Richard I chose that example very carefully with just that intended result.
> While I agree with you that there are many catholics out there who would
> like to see a few changes ( and I count myself in that group ) the fact of
> the matter is we can't go around having abortions and stay true to being a
> catholic..
So, if my dir harness kills me in conditions in which there is a safer
alternative, at least I died pure?
It looks as though you are, once again, making my point for me. First
you say safety, now you say dogma.
> While we may believe in everything else that the church stands
> for, we can't make that one exception and still be a practising catholic
> holding true to the catholic teachings.
You folks are building a church of technical diving. They say real life
is more bizarre than fiction.
> It reminds me of the scene in
> Saturday Night Fever when one of the crew was asking Tony's brother, the guy
> that just left the priesthood, if the pope would give him a dispensation if
> his pregnant girfriend had an abortion..
This is funny.
>
>
> I went from catholic kindergarten through catholic college, when I got into
> grad school it was finally nice not to have to take a theology class ;-),
> but I couldn't picture walking into one of my theology classes and telling
> the priest/professor that what he was teaching me was wrong, even though I
> enrolled in his catholic university to learn Catholicism, and that the
> church should bend for me.. I paid him to teach me the catholic religion
> and it's related beliefs, I didn't pay tuition to tell him that the church
> needs to change for me.
And did you purchase any indulgences, you know that these things can
shorten your time in purgatory, and you'll make it to heaven a lot faster.
That's right, the catholic religion did away with that practice, it was
unfair, there were going to be too many rich people in heaven.
Shall we discuss the Spanish inquisition now? It seems to be relevant
to the initial post. ;-)
>
>
> While the example I'm sure will rage with off topic comments, the point is
> the catholic religion ( and by way of my example DIR ) is a well founded and
> long standing set of principles. If I go to a catholic university ( and by
> the same example a GUE class ) to pay them to learn what they are teaching
> they shouldn't bend for me I should listen to what they are saying...
Got it, even if it kills me.
>
>
> Could I go into a Jewish temple and tell them that I agree with most of your
> teachings but I just believe in Christ and then still call myself a Jew???
>
>
> Could I call for lower taxes, reduced government and capital gains cuts and
> call myself a democrat ;-) ( sorry couldn't resist )
The kicker is actually when the republicans complain about it. ;-) (me
neither)
>
>
> But you (hopefully ) get my point....
>
> Later
Guy
Guy Morin
Guy Morin <xn...@videotron.ca> wrote in message
> Funny thing is, there is no debate when it comes to gue. Their
> philosophy is inflexible, so there can be no debate. Absolutes cannot
> be debated, and that is obvious from the treatment people get
> when they suggest anything that derogates from the "truth".
>
> If absolutes cannot be debated, then it must be like some circus
> sideshow to watch people get berated when they engage the
> dialog. This is the thesis of my post.
>
Guy,
You have been busy today ;-) You seem bright enough
Flattery will get you nowhere.
even though we are on
opposite sides of this issue.
You also seem desirous of engaging in
semantical debates as opposed to diving issiues.
another poster, rec.scuba has preserved a relatively high quality
over the years, I'd hate to see it look like the techdiver list.
And yes, the diving that is going on seems better than ever.
But let me respond to your
comments above. Absolutes ( and in that regard you refer to DIR ) can not
be debated and in fact are debated ad nausem, so that aside, what you mean
is that they won't be changed. DIR is, and has always been, an evolving
process and if you or anyone show the inventors of DIR a better way I'm sure
they'll listen. But in point of fact, whenever we get into these type of
discussions with the personal preferance crowd, you never offer an analysis
of your better points, your crowd just cries about how your being told what
to do.. Let me give you a tip, and I mean this politely, if you don't
want to hear what they are teaching don't buy the class. And what they
teach is DIR..
but there are conditions here that are, well. The dir rig can work, but it's
not the safest. There are some dives here where the currents actually make
some part of the harness a hazard. Some people here claim that it isn't
a hazard, but the maneuvers they suggest are a contrivance, and present
at a minimum, a transgression of the inherent safety consciousness of hog.
So, my point is that if gue trains only for wkpp diving period, then
that's
great, now we know the product, the market, the customer. If
gue wants
to apply to the world, there is a lot of room for flexibility.
It is no more complicated than that.. GUE teaches DIR, DIR is what JJ and
GI say it is.. If you don't want to hear there methods don't go...
Gue only applies to wkpp diving, is that right?
However, if you can get over your whinning and really want to learn a system
that is adaptable to any kind of diving you can imagine then call them back,
put your anomosity aside and go learn to dive..
Hahaha! The fishing expedition continues, you didn't mention you
liked to
fish. My initial post is quite specific. Is your memory
failing you? Or is someone
else filling in for you? Is someone spoofing your identity?
> The web site is far more informative, and incorporates no insults.
>
Wasn't the very first problem you had with them about there website not
giving you proper information.. You may also want to compare PADI -v- GUE
website and see which one you think is more informative..
Your imagination is getting the better of you, does your browser not support
the ability to read the initial post?
> The institution, if it aspires to more than what the wkpp is doing,
> obviously needs to adapt to circumstances. Are there really any
> absolutes in life?
>
Growing the market is probably the reason, the philosophy usuallyThis is the thinking that started PADI on the downward slope..
follows the primary drive. Sort of like gue, extreme exposure, and
halcyon subsidizing wkpp, is that a fact? Simple answers on that last
question please, that was a question borne of genuine curiosity.
Tech or cave
diving is not for everyone. GUE strongly advocates that and does not try to
assuage anyone into believing it is.. Part of a good tech diver, or any
diver for that matter, is how they mentaly approach and prepare for a dive.
If you can't approach there classroom properly you probably can't appraoch
the kind of diving they do properly.
Gee, I didn't know I was trying to approach the classroom. What was I thinking?
> Think of the separation of church and state.
To that point, are you suggesting that you could go into a catholic school
and tell them that abortion should be allowed in the catholic religion. If
you don't like what the Pope preaches are you going to go whine and say, I
want to be a catholic but I don't like some of your ideas or some of the
ways that you present them so you should abandon your long held catholic
beliefs and bend the rules so Guy Morin will feel more comfortable???
This whole issue is dealt with in a future post, it was more interesting for a moment.
That notion is absurd as is the notion that JJ and GI should abandon there
principles and JJ should adjust his training regiment so as to accomodate
the personal preferance crowd.
No, rather, to the real-life conditions in other parts of the world. Besides, what
are you afraid of? That is the true hogarthian way. Surely there must be some
coffee out there? ;-)
You are paying to learn DIR so listen to
what they have to say.
Again, if dir means diving wkpp, then we understand the dynamics.
BTW, one of the things that is obvious from your posts is that you haven't
figured out that DIR is much more than a gear configuration.
Way ahead of you.
Later
Guy Morin
And you surly have a name, o fearless sir.
Guy
Richard Hyde
: fair exchange of points... One question, you said you doubt you would ever
: be dir... May I ask why not????
Good question. I currently have a Zeagle Express 48# BC with Octo+.
This BC rolls up very tightly for travel. Since we spend half of
out dive time in Monterey and half in warm water, this is a reasonable
compromise for me. I'm seriously considering adding a 5" hose with
a "real" second on a necklace per DIR. I have a Scubapro Mk20/G250
as a regulator, drysuit and skins, and, of course, jetfins. :-)
My wife is set up almost exactly the same. We know our own equipment
well, and the way I maintain it, it should last forever. I don't
dive with anyone as a buddy except my wife.
DIR looks attractive, no doubt about it. I especially like the descriptions
of how the backplate, wings, and storage systems work, and especially
the underwater handling characteristics.
However, we have well maintained kits that work for us. The question
I have to ask is: is the purportedly better handling of the backplate
and wings sufficiently better than my own rig to justify the expense
required to rip-and-replace it. The second, actually first, question,
is: do the added safety benefits of a DIR rig justify a rip-and-replace?
The safety question is harder to quantify. I'm already accepting
some risk by diving, piloting a plane, and climbing on to the roof
to do maintenance without using a ladder :-)
Without statistics to go on, my gut reaction is that the rigs we
dive present acceptible risks for our profiles and while DIR could
reduce those risks still further, the incremental advantage is
not significant. Again, for -our- dive profiles YMMV.
Without having [dived, divin, dove] a DIR rig, I can't tell if
the enhanced handling would cause me to dump my existing gear
and not look back.
I'd be interested in your comments.
CHeers,
MHK
Richard Hyde <r...@netcom2.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:8eaimf$21j$1...@slb7.atl.mindspring.net...
> MHK <mhk...@prodigy.net> wrote:
<snip a discussion worth having>
Richard,
I'm heading out right now and will be in Wakulla with the DIR boy's until
late Monday or early Tue but I would like to follow up when I get back.
BTW, I dive Monterey quit a bit... I did my tech training with Wings at
Ocean Odyssey..
Let's follow up next week
Later
Richard Hyde
: I'm heading out right now and will be in Wakulla with the DIR boy's until
: late Monday or early Tue but I would like to follow up when I get back.
: BTW, I dive Monterey quit a bit... I did my tech training with Wings at
: Ocean Odyssey..
: Let's follow up next week
Ciao. Have a great time!
MHK
Guy Morin <xn...@videotron.ca> wrote in message
I don't dive in Florida caves, and my rig looks an awful lot like a dir rig,
but there are conditions here that are, well. The dir rig can work, but it's
not the safest.
I have posted repeatedly my diving experiences but I have yet to learn about your experiences so why don't you enlighten us....And while you are at it, tell us what you think is safer than the dir rig, as you call it, DIR is a philosophy that incoprates a rig.. But I heard you are ahead of me on that ;-)
There are some dives here where the currents actually make
some part of the harness a hazard.
Please give deatils if you want to discuss specifics. I've dove some pretty serious currents and have had no problem with my configuration...
Some people here claim that it isn't
a hazard, but the maneuvers they suggest are a contrivance, and present
at a minimum, a transgression of the inherent safety consciousness of hog.
We are happy to discuss any of these concerns but you first must tell us what they are not just that some unkown perceives there exsistence..
So, my point is that if gue trains only for wkpp diving period,
You are wrong here.. Where did you get that notion???
It is no more complicated than that.. GUE teaches DIR, DIR is what JJ and
GI say it is.. If you don't want to hear there methods don't go...Gue only applies to wkpp diving, is that right?
Do you know Dr. Black??? The 2 of you read things that no one else sees.. Whoever said that GUE only teaches wkpp???? What they teach is a philosophy in diving that has been successful during wkpp explorations...
Hahaha! The fishing expedition continues, you didn't mention you liked to
fish. My initial post is quite specific. Is your memory failing you? Or is someone
else filling in for you? Is someone spoofing your identity?
Actually you are right, I got you confused with the GUE reality nut... Sorry ignore these points they don't apply to you...
. Sort of like gue, extreme exposure, and
halcyon subsidizing wkpp, is that a fact? Simple answers on that last
question please, that was a question borne of genuine curiosity.
Yes, GUE ( founded by Jarrod Jablonski ), Extreme Exposure ( owned in part by JJ ) and Halcyon support wkpp. JJ of both GUE & EE, is a primamry member of the wkpp team and is primarily responsible for many of the wkpp advances...SO what's your point????
Gee, I didn't know I was trying to approach the classroom. What was I thinking?
You weren't
This whole issue is dealt with in a future post, it was more interesting for a moment.
I can't wait...I'm running out until Tue so hopefully we'll continue this when I get back. I'll tell the boys in Wakulla that you were asking about them....Later
Rich Lesperance
Guy Morin <xn...@videotron.ca> wrote
>
> Funny thing is, there is no debate when it comes to gue. Their
> philosophy is inflexible, so there can be no debate. Absolutes cannot
> be debated, and that is obvious from the treatment people get
> when they suggest anything that derogates from the "truth".
Guy,
You are incorrect. Have you tried debating any of these things with them? Or
with anyone here, even?
We are _always_ open to a better way to do things, and I'll betcha, if you
were to point out a better way to do it to JJ & crew, they'd adopt it on the
spot.
Rich L
Rich Lesperance
Richard Hyde <r...@netcom4.netcom.com> wrote
>
> Actually, I know a fair number of catholics who believe just that. If
> they don't agree with the teachings of the church, it is the chuch
> who must change rather than the individual -leaving- the church for one
with
> a more agreeable philosophy.
Why must the church change?
We have two parties here, the church, and the dissenters. You said "the
church must change", as if it were the most obvious thing in the world.
When an institution's authority is 'divine', and it concedes no democracy on
core matters of the faith, then it has every right to adopt an inflexible
attitude. It may require its adherents to agree, be silent, or leave.
FWIW, I'm a Catholic, who disagrees with the Vatican on a few important
issues (not abortion, but let's please not start that debate), but I am
under no illusions about the church having to change to meet _my_
preceptions of how things should be.
Rich L
Rich Lesperance
Guy Morin <xn...@videotron.ca> wrote
> Rich Lesperance wrote:
> >
> > Have you served in the military?
>
> That is weak.
> Are you a doctor?
> Are you an astronaut?
> Were you ever a president?
>
> Very, very, petty.
>
Sorry, my attempt was not to belittle you. My attempt was to highlight the
fact, that you used an analogy that you thought supported your position,
when anyone who has experience with it knows it's just the opposite.
>
> BTW, it's great that the gue attitude is an improvement from your military
> days.
>
> I would hope for an answer, as a paying customer.
>
And you would get one, to your satisfaction, if my experiences are at all
standard.
At the risk of reading sarcasm into your "improvement from military days"
comment, your lack of military experience is again showing. No offense, but
unlike most other fields of endeavor, there are occasionally times when you
have to yell at someone to do something exactly a certain way, and expect
them to do it without any other explanations.
Even when I was a rank private, in the military, and something like the
above happened, I could go back after the fact, and have the reasoning
explained to me. Just not right then and there when it was happening <g>.
Regards,
Rich L
Guy Morin
> Guy Morin <xn...@videotron.ca> wrote:
> >> Is it Morin, or MORON?
> >
> >That's so creative, may I use it?
> >Hahaha!
>
> Given that this guy has made no other postings of any topic in any
> newsgroup with the xnet id, what else should we conclude but that he's yet
> another muck racking trollboy, one who apparently has a Bill Main fetish?
You need to read the manual on how to do a search. Not very thorough, are
you?
>
>
> And like the other one topic wonders, he seems to be sporting a double
> digit IQ.
Look who's talking.
>
> --
> Jason O'Rourke j...@best.com www.jor.com
> Last dive: April 22nd, Whyte Islet, Vancouver
> 60 mins at 95ft max, 41F
Lee Bell
Rich Lesperance wrote
If the topic is why a religion should change, the easy answer is that they
should not. Once divine knowledge has been alleged, as it has in the case
of the Catholic Church, any subsequent change diminishes the probability
that there ever was, or ever will be divine knowledge. Still, major
religions have changed basic, previously divinely ordained beliefs, the most
obvious of which is probably the Catholic faith under discussion.
Please note, that I'm not speaking for or against any church's belief in
divine knowledge, only of the perceptions of those willing to question their
religious organization. I am a religious person, but I do not believe in
any organized religion. It is my opinion that all are tainted with all too
human surrender to temptation. Faith, as I see it, is a totally personal
thing. I find it highly unlikely that anyone believes exactly as I, or any
other person does. Unfortunately, there's only one way to know for sure,
and so far, nobody's come back to set us all straight.
Lee
JGreene
BAGLEY......for being the first to correctly identify the mystery guest on
tonight's episode of Name That Pest.
Tune in tomorrow night for more fun and excitement. We're going to be giving
away free EYE EXAMS!!!!!
"Ross Bagley" <r...@jump.net> wrote in message
news:8e7ubh$re4$1...@news.jump.net...
<snip
>
> Shut the fuck up, troll.
>
> welikeair, dontdoair, mjbmd, all the same... But it's fun to play :)
JGreene
You can also find them here: www.gue.com and at www.gue.com
good luck,
Jim Greene
Not affiliated with www.gue.com
but interested in what they have to say at www.gue.com and by no means
hoping to pick up some endorsement bucks from www.gue.com
WWW.GUE.COM not responsible for the content of this message
"Scott" <sco...@hctcremovethis.com> wrote in message
news:sgev1ma...@corp.supernews.com...
> Guy,
>
> GUE doesn't advertise here.
>
> They advertise here: www.gue.com
>
> Scott
>
> "Guy Morin" <xn...@videotron.ca> wrote in message
> news:39077524...@videotron.ca...
> > To the readers of rec.scuba:
> >
<burp>
JGreene
"Guy Morin" <xn...@videotron.ca> wrote in message
news:39078B2F...@videotron.ca...
> > HOW????
> > Any body can do just about anything and can't be stopped.
> > There are many, many ways to get around the rules.
> >
>
> Maybe the cave training offered by these agencies should
> include some social skills. As you know, most professional
> curricula include electives to provide the student with added
> social graces.
>
> This would sensitize these folks that when they go out there,
> they are representing something that aspires to a greater
> social good, rather that the petty self-serving interests
> of small minds.
>
> Guy
>
>
JGreene
Are you an eye doctor?
Do you have friends that are eye doctors?
Just curious.
"Guy Morin" <xn...@videotron.ca> wrote in message
news:3908A662...@videotron.ca...
> Rich Lesperance wrote:
>
> > Guy Morin <xn...@videotron.ca> wrote
> > >
> > > At least in the military, they give you food, salary (however modest)
> > > and the chance to serve. For a course, I'm the one footing the bill,
> > > I want value for money, and dogma isn't it.
> >
> > Have you served in the military?
>
> That is weak.
> Are you a doctor?
> Are you an astronaut?
> Were you ever a president?
>
> Very, very, petty.
>
>
> >
> >
> > Didn't think so, or you would have understood the reference. Regardless
of
> > which direction the money goes, the trainer is in charge of imparting
the
> > knowledge and conditioning to enure the trainee survives (and
accomplishes
> > the mission). Sometimes, that requires dogma.
>
> In the case of the military, you made my point for me, thank you.
>
> The participant isn't paying, is he?
>
> >
> >
> > The big difference between the military and GUE - when I was in the
> > military, it wasn't always obvious right away why something was done a
> > certain way. Sometimes, I didn't learn until years later.
> >
> > With GUE (or, to be fair, any of the competent instructors from other
> > agencies I've met), if you have a question, you ask, and get an answer.
It's
> > that simple.
>
> BTW, it's great that the gue attitude is an improvement from your military
> days.
>
> I would hope for an answer, as a paying customer.
>
> >
> >
> > Rich L
>
>
JGreene
This is critical thinking again!!!!!
"Guy Morin" <xn...@videotron.ca> wrote in message
news:3908C271...@videotron.ca...
Rich Lesperance
Richard Hyde <r...@netcom11.netcom.com> wrote
> You must have mis-read me. I agree 100% with what you said. I
> don't agree with those catholics who belive the church should
> change to suit them.
Oops, I did misread you. It was that ee cummings / stream of conciousness
punctuation that got me <g>.
Rich L
Reef Fish (Large Nassau Grouper)
>
> Jason O'Rourke wrote:
>
> > Guy Morin <xn...@videotron.ca> wrote:
> > >> Is it Morin, or MORON?
> > >
> > >That's so creative, may I use it?
> > >Hahaha!
> >
> > Given that this guy has made no other postings of any topic in any
> > newsgroup with the xnet id, what else should we conclude but that he's yet
> > another muck racking trollboy, one who apparently has a Bill Main fetish?
>
> You need to read the manual on how to do a search. Not very thorough, are
> you?
Coming from Jason, it's not surprising. He was talking about making
a CD Rom titled "Who's Who in Dumbass in rec.scuba" and sell it for
$59.95. Not to be left out, he is trying hard to make that list.
I think he qualifies, don't you?
Anybody except him and his newly acquired partner, IDIOT CPR86,
could have found your postings, dating back to 7/2/1999 and 7/3/99
in the two groups
Forum
27 rec.scuba
1 de.rec.sport.tauchen
>
> > And like the other one topic wonders, he seems to be sporting a double
> > digit IQ.
>
> Look who's talking.
One with a single-digit IQ? :-)
> > --
> > Jason O'Rourke j...@best.com www.jor.com
> > Last dive: April 22nd, Whyte Islet, Vancouver
> > 60 mins at 95ft max, 41F
-- Bob.
Bob McNair
Bob Crownfield <Crown...@Home.com> wrote in message
> This is mostly a philosophical argument. historically, I am one of the
> primary guardians against commercialism here,
and a fine one at that Bobby :-)
Jason O'Rourke
>Remember that there are probably no divers that start out with a set of twins,
>and redundant regs. There is considerable evolution, and a lot of choices to get
>there.
Indeed. and for free, these divers can go to the gue.com website and get
all the information they need in order to experiment with [rental] gear
and become a DIR OW diver. Don't need to take any courses unless they
want to.
So what's your problem, exactly?
Jason O'Rourke
>> which direction the money goes, the trainer is in charge of imparting the
>> knowledge and conditioning to enure the trainee survives (and accomplishes
>> the mission). Sometimes, that requires dogma.
>
>In the case of the military, you made my point for me, thank you.
>
>The participant isn't paying, is he?
Umm, certainly. When a man enlists, he commits to two (3?) years of his
life with the armed forces. He is a soldier close to 24x7, at a rate of
pay that is certainly far lower than he'd get as a security goon working
anywhere, nevermind a more serious career. He most certainly is paying
for what the army is providing to him. Even with base pay, the housing
and food, and the max education scholarship given after the enlistment
period, it's not a picnic.
Those in the Reserve might be doing well - when the Gulf War came, many of
them squawked rather loudly about being called up. Seems like before
that, they were content to get all the benefits with none of the
responsibilities.
Jason O'Rourke
>> Is it Morin, or MORON?
>
>That's so creative, may I use it?
>Hahaha!
Given that this guy has made no other postings of any topic in any
newsgroup with the xnet id, what else should we conclude but that he's yet
another muck racking trollboy, one who apparently has a Bill Main fetish?
And like the other one topic wonders, he seems to be sporting a double
digit IQ.
Dan Bracuk
"GUE is doing the right thing for some people. I applaud them for
that. "
This may surprise some ng regulars, but I don't agree with everything
gue preaches either.
I will, though, applaud them for one thing. Not being happy with the
situation they saw, they did something about it. They did not just
whimper & whine.
Dan Bracuk
Toronto, Canada
It's bad luck to be superstitious.
rec.scuba faq http://scifi.squawk.com/scuba.html
Jim.Gr...@cc.gatech.edu
>
>To the readers of rec.scuba:
Congratulations, Guy - you are the first person ever to make into my
killfile on the basis of just ONE posting. Hope you like it in there.
-JimG
--
Jim Greenlee (j...@cc.gatech.edu) There were bugs in the code, but I
Instructor, College of Computing never saw them hiding. No, I never
Georgia Tech, Atlanta, GA 30332 saw them at all, `til there was Foo
Richard Hyde
: Richard Hyde <r...@netcom4.netcom.com> wrote
:>
:> Actually, I know a fair number of catholics who believe just that. If
:> they don't agree with the teachings of the church, it is the chuch
:> who must change rather than the individual -leaving- the church for one
: with
:> a more agreeable philosophy.
: Why must the church change?
You must have mis-read me. I agree 100% with what you said. I
don't agree with those catholics who belive the church should
change to suit them.
Cheers,
Dr Solomon's Virus Patrol
the following newsgroup(s):
rec.scuba
Message header follows:
>Message-Id: <8eajng$3pm8$1...@newssvr03-int.news.prodigy.com>
>From: "MHK" <mhk...@prodigy.net>
>Subject: Re: Gue pollution.
>Date: 27 Apr 2000 23:50:08 GMT
Dr Solomon's FindVirus/VirusScan report follows:
Dr Solomon's FindVirus IN-HOUSE version. Copyright (c) 1999 Network Associates Inc.
Virus data file v9999 created Apr 27 2000
Scanning for 51579 viruses, trojans and variants.
[HTML part] ... Found the WScript/Kak.worm virus !!!
You can download a free evaluation (yet fully functional) copy of
the latest released version of Dr Solomon's FindVirus/VirusScan from
the following locations:
WWW: http://www.nai.com/asp_set/buy_try/introduction
FTP: ftp://ftp.nai.com/pub/antivirus
CompuServe: GO DRSOLOMON or GO MCAFEE
AOL: SAFETYONLINE
--
Dr Solomon's Virus Patrol UK Support: sup...@drsolomon.com
NAI Anti-Virus Emergency Response Team US Support: sup...@nai.com
WWW: http://www.mcafeeb2b.com UK Tel: +44 (0) 1296 318700
CompuServe: GO DRSOLOMON USA Tel: +1 408 988-3832
Jammer Six
<xn...@videotron.ca> wrote:
>€ Surely there is someone at the helm of this organization who
>€ can tighten the leash on these renegades.
Yup, we can.
And if you don't shut the fuck up, one of the Dive Gods here is going
to up and SMITE your silly ass.
Now be good, or we'll tighten your leash.
--
"C'mon, you sons of bitches, you want to live forever?"
-First Sergeant Dan Daly
Jammer Six
<xn...@videotron.ca> wrote:
>€ Very, very, petty.
Actually, it's not.
We don't expect you to see that, since you aren't.
It just disqualifies your "judgement".
Jammer Six
<xn...@videotron.ca> wrote:
>€ If absolutes cannot be debated, then it must be like some circus
>€ sideshow to watch people get berated when they engage the
>€ dialog. This is the thesis of my post.
No one has any reason to debate anything with you, guy.
GUE was formed by people who hold world records for depth, time, and
distance under water.
You don't.
No one, least of all GUE, has any reason to debate anything with you.
Their methods work, they have a body count of zero.
In contrast, you have only access to the internet to offer.
If you wish, you will be allowed to learn from them, but your posts all
indicate that that will never happen.
You are what is called a "never, ever".
The ridicule you because they know, from long, long experience, that
when some idiot with a thin skin shows up and starts whining like you
have been, there's no hope of ever showing him, and ridiculing him is a
lot more fun than being nice.
History shows that when idiots are hit with 2x4s, some of them learn.
When nice, polite manners are used, people die.
You aren't unique, you aren't original, and you have nothing new.
Just the same old refrain, "they hurt my feelings!"...
Stroke alert, in spades.
Jammer Six
<bra...@pathcom.com> wrote:
>€ This may surprise some ng regulars, but I don't agree with everything
>€ gue preaches either.
It's no surprise, Dan.
You've admitted that you don't understand the system, so not agreeing
with it seems like the next natural step for you.
You know, contempt prior to investigation.
Kevlar
is Kevin Sumlar, if you hit reply to me instead of the newsgroup
you will also see that I even use my *real* email address.
Oh the horror.
-K
>And you surly have a name, o fearless sir.
>
>Guy
>
Iain Smith
Nope - I'm a medical student. My girlfriend could probably tell me what a
venture capitalist is - she studied theology (and is being physically
restrained from jumping in on the Religion thread!) and is about to start
training to be an accountant. Mammon won!
> > As I suggested in another
> > post, the truly noble goal is to maximise the number of divers /with the
> > best possible attitudes, knowledge and understanding/. I don't think even
> > the most die-hard PADI supported would claim that for them without a
> > qualm.
> When you have an accident, do we go after the driving school?
> The government agency that certified you?
No - but if the driving instructor taught me that I should drive a falling
apart rust-bucket with no seatbelts, when I discovered the faults with
this, I would be rightly pissed. Even more so if this contributed to an
accident.
> Maybe only in America. (Again, very hard to resist.) ;-)
British by birth, Scottish by the Grace of God! Wrong side of the
Atlantic, sorry!
> Do you believe there are people out there who get driving licences just
> to drive fast. There are people who get diving courses to engage in
> dangerous diving activities calling for diving in caves, institutionalize
> them all?
A driving license does not certify one to do "adventurous" driving. I
believe that there are courses to do for motor racing...? However, my
basic driving license taught me to drive safely. IMO, the majority of
entry-level courses do not do the same for diving.
> BTW, in the perfect world where there is only gue, and all water resides
> in caves, how does one first get certified to get scuba gear, gue doesn't
> offer an open water course, right?
I heard rumours that they were putting one together - obviously (and
understandably!) it wasn't their first priority. FWIW, I gather that IANTD
have just started an entry-level course. In the meantime, in the
entry-leve courses I teach, I make sure that the students at least get
exposed to the gear rational of DIR.
> What does that mean? All gue diver were unsafe divers when they
> started, because they got certified by a recreational diving
> institution?
To misquote Top Gun, IMO, "A diver is compelled to always evaluate what
has happened, so that he can apply what he has learned". I think Rich L,
Scott, MHK are better qualified to answer the specifics of that question
(I've not dived with the WKPP, or been trained by GUE. I do know that my
diving now is much safer since I started adopting DIR practices. And I
know WHY)
> Exploration, right, that was my point. We want to explore, is my
> best guess, that where it starts. We accept a certain level of risk
> based on our knowledge, and we progress to the next level. We discover
> the right way at every level, and hopefully graduate by surviving the
> current level of ignorance we suffer from and the danger we happen
> to find ourselves in.
>
> Again, DIR is an end to some specific type of diving, and it is adapted
> for circumstances, as per the Bill Main ideal.
In which case, if the adaption is appropriate, it's still DIR.
Iain
Brian Wagner
>
> On Thu, 27 Apr 2000 16:35:12 -0400, Guy Morin <xn...@videotron.ca>
> wrote:
>
> >Funny thing is, there is no debate when it comes to gue. Their
> >philosophy is inflexible, so there can be no debate. Absolutes cannot
> >be debated, and that is obvious from the treatment people get
> >when they suggest anything that derogates from the "truth".
>
> What 'debates' have you attempted to start or participate in?
Obviously, none at all. His whole initial thesis was that DIR advocacy
constituted commercial advertising and didn't belong here, so, in
essence, he advocated the silencing of at least one whole side of the
debate. He didn't try to participate in a debate, he attempted to shut
it down.
Brian Wagner
>
> Brian Wagner wrote:
>
> > Guy Morin wrote:
> > >
> > > No agency is perfect, and they are all self serving,
> > > to a point. Few agencies have the distinction of having introduced so many
> > > people to the wonders of the underwater world [as PADI.] Too bad gue can't aspire to
> > > such a noble goal.
> > >
> > Um, excuse me, but you just made a positive remark about the most
> > commercial agency of all, the first (and as far as I know, only) one to
> > incorporate as a for-profit enterprise. Your comment constitutes
> > advocacy for a commercial entity, and, BASED ON YOUR OWN FALLACIOUS
> > DEFINITION, is advertising. Go banish yourself, Mr. Self Righteous.
>
> It's the goal that is noble in that sentence. The part about PADI was
> strictly factual, they probably have certified the most people.
Being factual does not make it any less advertising. If it's not
factual, and is asserted as such, that's false advertising. Most ads
cite factual information to promote their product. You clearly cited
that fact as a good point about PADI (although many here would consider
it a bad point.) It was every bit as much commercial promotion as
anything posted here about GUE.
> And if they are the most commercial, perhaps a lot of people have
> voted, with their money, and made them what they are.
Just like any whore.
Brian Wagner
>
>
> If the topic is why a religion should change, the easy answer is that they
> should not. Once divine knowledge has been alleged, as it has in the case
> of the Catholic Church, any subsequent change diminishes the probability
> that there ever was, or ever will be divine knowledge.
This is not necessarily so. There is the concept of progressive
revelation.
Richard Hyde
:> Are you a venture capitalist? ;-)
: Nope - I'm a medical student. My girlfriend could probably tell me what a
: venture capitalist is - she studied theology (and is being physically
: restrained from jumping in on the Religion thread!) and is about to start
: training to be an accountant. Mammon won!
Jump!, Jump! Junp!
:-)
Rick