Mailing List Archive Mailing List Archive
In a message dated 9/29/98 5:15:40 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
zimmmt@au*.al*.co* writes:
> > A few points my friend.
>
> uh-oh.... sounds like Jesse Helms to Ted Kennedy on the Senate Floor :-)
So if I read the map right, I am a fat liberal drunk and you are an elderly
racist homophobe? Cmon, Im trying not to make this the usual slug fest, but
you aint makin it easy.
>
> > First do you have any emperical data to support your assumption that
the
> > current style of communication actually impairs transmission of the
> message?
>
> I received email today from someone who said they are now DIR but VERY
> nearly
> didn't make it there b/c of the flames.
Elmorian translation : "no"
> If you want Al, let's roll the dice.
>
> Post this question to the lists...
>
> Have you ever hesistated to post a question out of fear of being
> flamed?
Mike, wouldnt this just be proof that the " flame the stupidity" plan is
working?
The true DIR breakthrough is when you realize you shouldnt dive stupid,
just as you shouldnt ask stupid questions. If you think to yourself, I wont
ask that its a stupid question, arent you halfway there?
> If fewer than 20 people say yes, I'll shut up.
You never shut up Mike :->
If even 1 person
> says yes, then we have room to improve. Unless of course you
> have no interest in improvement?
An inherent part of the DIR approach, as well as the basis for Hogarthian
Thought, is the concept that perfection is the goal, and at the same time
unobtainable. Read the last paragraph of the Gavin chapter again.
I just dont think we all need improvement in this area. Instead of trying
to change the people already here, why not add your reasoned impassionate
polite voice to the chorus? I would think the ideal message would include all
different types of approaches to dealing with the knuckleheads, as well as the
new and uninformed.
> > Second, What makes you think that what is posted only to the list(s) is
> a
> > full and fair accounting of how DIR is advocated?
>
> Al, again you widen the scope of the conversation beyond what I stated.
> I was only addressing the advocacy that appears on these lists.
Mike, please. Lets not start fighting over the meaning of "is"
> > questions, most of which are answered in the documents. When you were in
> > school Mike, did the teacher ever answer your question nicely, when you
> > admitted you hadn't read the book?
>
> I didn't see a list of pre-reqs when I joined techdiver Al. However
> a simple FAQ that could be politely pointed out would be a huge
> improvement over the frustration people seem to feel answering the
> same "newbie" questions over and over
Mike, over and over on rec.scuba and here, people are told to go to wkpp.org
and follow the links. Mr. Bentley and Mr. Leonard make it clear that you
should read the various documents. I do think some of the flames are from
frustration at people who havent done their homework prior to asking things
like, "why not stuff the long hose?", and then expect every one to be able to
quote Gavin verbatium.
But you raise an excellent point, and one you would seem well placed to deal
with. Why dont you create a techdiver FAQ and then we can refer people to it?
> > Third , since you preach pure personal responsibility for all
underwater
> > activities, and presumably practice same, how does this square with your
> idea
> > that every diver must have a full and complete understanding of how the
> DIR
> > rig works prior to diving it?
>
> It squares fully. You don't dive gear you don't understand just b/c some
> guy with a 2x4 says you should. If you do dive gear just b/c someone says
> you should then you have abdicated your own sense of judgement. This
> is no different than a "trust me" dive. And you know how I feel about
> them.
Yes I do Mike. However i am unsure what this means:
<<< But I didn't sit down reconfig my gear and go do a real dive
I went to the quarry, did some nice 30' dives and tried out the
> new config. And until it felt good I reverted to my previous methods
> on "real" dives until I felt the new config was ready for prime time.
Mike, I dont understand. Little dives can be trust me dives but big ones
cant? Or can you abdicate responsibility when it seems ok to you?
I think you would do better to simply admit that you had to accept others at
their word before you knew from shallow water practice that the ideas worked.
We aren't going to have to revisit the thread where we tried to determine how
you don't know if you can breathe seawater, because you have never tried it,
are we??
> Understanding the philosophy lets you pick the gear. That does not
> make you expert in the gear. That takes practice.
So now you only need understanding to pick the gear, not to dive it?
>
> > Like Mr. Williams, I too look foward to your coming public and private
> > advocacy of DIR methods and techniques. My hope is that you will reread
> the
> > last paragraph of the Gavin chapter prior to posting nonsense like this
> again.
>
> Too bad you feel that trying to improve on the goal (of saving lives)
> is nonsense.
Improving safety thru censorship is nonsense. If you have something else to
add , add it. Don't tell others how to help, help them yourself. Those who
just dont get it, never will, no matter how you talk to them. That was my
point.
Al Marvelli
--
Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'.
Send subscribe/unsubscribe requests to `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'.
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]