Mailing List Archive Mailing List Archive
Well, now we're finally getting to something: Mike Z. said: >This is what I think we should have. Simply a NAMA sticker. >Its tells everyone "hey, don't assume this tank has air in it". >It makes no promises of the contents (the content sticker can >be used for that) but serves only to give warning. I think its a great idea. (That's deadpan Rat (Ratpan?) for yes, yes, yes, ...'). We cannot, however, expect others to see today's nitrox labeling as NAMA. Current labeling standards do not say that. Individual interpretation makes confusion and then chaos. Further it is unreasonable for us to expect anyone coming in contact with labeling or identification to "translate" it at all. It says what it says in plain language. >Heck even the NAPI students (rec.scuba joke agency) could understand that sticker. Sorry, never been on rec.scuba - can you clue me in? Regarding Jammer's posting November 16 17:45:15, >>a "boat" tank but, rather, a "personal" tank -- i.e. unavailable for >>public consumption. A boat tank vs a personal one vs a rental vs yours vs mine - ownership / source - is not relevant. Contact with the public, internal contents and external descriptions are. >Our tanks were completely different from the boat tanks. They were >different colors, they were different sizes, and, in the case of my >buddy, had her name written on them. >You could see that they were not boat tanks from the other end of the boat. None of this is, apparently relevant. All this identification' didn't do the job of passing the "don't touch" message on. They did not notify. >On top of which, I disagree. If we show up at the boat with identical >tanks, same size, same color, no distinguishing marks of any kind, who is >responsible at 10 feet and dropping? >IMO, I am. Period. No exceptions, no excuses. Prevention is the point, not affixing responsibility after the fact. Your markings are not sensible precautions used to prevent confusion in the planned circumstances of their use. >It's up to me, and me alone, to determing which tank is mine, and that >responsibility cannot be abdicated. Unquestionable. >Given identical tanks, with different >gasses in each, if I breathe the wrong one, it's not anyone's fault but mine. Correct. >The reason I posted the story was to demonstrate reasons for my opinions, >which were reinforced by the episode. I see the preventable and predictable episode as contradicting your intention. >I don't care if you abdicate your responsibility for your gas, and that >leads to your breathing the wrong gas. One cannot abdicate a responsibility one has not been taught or knows to exist. Your suggestion to make every diver responsible is laudable, but the mechanism isn't there yet to ensure all divers are as informed about issues such as this - as opposed to say, Boyle's law or mask clearing. I'd say this is another whole topic worthy of discussion. >Your position seems to imply that I am responsible for the level of >knowledge of other divers, No. > and that it is up to me to protect them from >hazards they know nothing about, because I have a higher knowledge level. Partially. When dealing in hazards, you, the informed and in control, are under an obligation to exercise due care to warn/protect the uninformed/innocent. You do not have to protect everyone and anyone at all costs. You do have to take fair steps to minimize the easily foreseeable, easily preventable error. I don't think your system goes far enough. Its markings are not obvious. They do not pass on enough information. No one but you is aware of the system or its existence. Do something -proactive- to avoid preventable, obvious mistakes. Both innocent and reckless behavior happens. The motive or the cause doesn't matter. I don't think the speeding analogy works. We are all (supposedly) equally trained and rated as to speed. We all take, roughly the same test. In my state, at least, there are seven classes of driver's licenses. We all share the road, signs, traffic lights, and other basics. These things are common to all our training. Our individual class of training is limited for the most part to only the things we need to know. I have no idea of the truck driver's training. I don't know classes of cargo, but I can tell when a truck is carrying something hazardous. He is trained, in fact required, to inform me, the untrained, of the contents of his truck. (I think where we are in diving.) Conversely, we are all clued in on the meaning of a yellow school bus and flashing red lights. We stop when the lights flash. The driver needs to do nothing. There is little if any confusion. (I think, where we would like to be.) With diving, we are not all equally trained and rated with regards to this type of issue. Sure, its true all new divers *should* be briefed on what they might reasonably find out in the real world. They are not. While we'd like to think or wish things are different, with nitrox, they ain't yet. That's why I say we must be extra careful, not unnecessarily cavalier. Responsible behavior breeds credibility. >Yes, I agree with this. If you're going to label your tanks, label them correctly. >Our tanks were "labeled" (my definition, not anyone else's) with our >names, (which were correct) and the mix they contained (which was also >correct). >My position is that our tanks were labeled, although not to your >standards, and his tanks were *MIS*labeled, although by your standards. >My argument is with your standards, not the need to label tanks. I do >label my tanks, I label them with the mix they contain. While the current labeling standard may be far from evolved, it can be expected to do what it says. On the other hand, you have your own definition, you pre-educate no one, and you expect it to be publicly recognized. I see no sense in decreeing fundamentally unlabeled tanks to (ie no clear unequivocal markings to the contrary) mean something, when to the rest of the world it means something else. > "No one has any business using my equipment." I don't think anyone's ever argued that. Are you doing enough to ensure that it doesn't happen again? We've discussed a lot of things over the course of this thread. I've read many reasons why individuals don't want to label their tanks. I have yet to hear any discussion how or why the current labeling standards, such as they are, can be construed as anti-survival or unsafe. On a completely other note, >#1. You are responsible. >#2. Don't hold your breath. This is wonderful. A new first rule of scuba. I will add it to my basic open water classes from now on. (and give you appropriate credit) To my divers, I will add that much of the rest of the diving public is unaware of and untrained in rule number 1. Art (Rat) Smith
Navigate by Author:
[Previous]
[Next]
[Author Search Index]
Navigate by Subject:
[Previous]
[Next]
[Subject Search Index]
[Send Reply] [Send Message with New Topic]
[Search Selection] [Mailing List Home] [Home]