Anthony,

There is nothing funny or polite when you recover the body of someone
partially eaten by crabs or bloated beyond recogntion or foaming and
bleeding at the mouth and ears after having been hauled up from 50 fathoms.
It is even less funny when you find that the direct or indirect cause of
death was some idiocy such as lack of bottle marking, overweighting, deep
air, failed bungee wings or solo diving or some other  inexcusable nonsense.
When you see that such practices are either taught by or endorsed by
technical dive agencies or rogue dive instructors you become even more
incensed.

There is no language or manners foul enough to convey my displeasure with
those who encourage and promote practices which lead to death and misery.
Don't you think for one moment that the relatives of these dead people
simply forget about them in the same way that the "list" forgets their names
and their lives.

Before you go agreeing with the Dave Suttons, Kevin Flynns, Gregg Kuipers
and other offended people of the techno dive world with engorged "killfiles"
you stop and ask yourself if you would rather that you have someone such as
George Irvine speak out on  your dead behalf or you would prefer some lame
and pathetic eulogy to the effect that "Why Anthony was a charming lad who
died happily while doing what he enjoyed most".

The fact is that George's so called "manners" get your attention and those
of the others in much the same way as good car wreck stops traffic,  all the
while everyone complains about the traffic delay, but they rubber neck and
gawk anyway.  Maybe when  they observe the tragedy they are more careful
next time around.

And then I have ask myself, what sort of "tough guy" who really go and jumps
off the back of a pitching dive boat into 50 fathoms of dark water is
offended by some internet hyperbole.  When I listen to some of the "epistles
of the offended" , which by the way have been pretty consistent over the
years in terms of complaint content, I am stunned by the pompous indignance
of the outraged.  They rarely address the underlying issues, but instead
argue with the nature of the message delivery.  Why don't these guys ask
themselves and others why Irvine is attacking some perceived stupidity?
Instead it is alway something like "he called the training agency which said
it was ok to breath from unmarked bottles  dumbfucks" or he said that "the
accident scene was like an evidence table at a stupidity investigation" or
"they should provide free shovels with Inspriation Rebreathers" or I could
go on and on. I would rather that they take the  same time that they
invested in the little public complaints to write out the names, published
on this list, of the people who died in the last two years while in engaged
in some form of technical diving, where the cause of death was preventable.

If you or anyone can't figure out why Irvine is apoplectically pissed off,
and instead get your panties in a wad, then feel free to email me privately
and I will be happy to explain to you quite civilly the genesis of the
problem. Or of course, you can do as John Strohm does and simply ask Irvine
politely and privately and you will receive a very rational, articulate,
deferential and polite answer.

Best wishes,

Bill Mee

-----Original Message-----
From: Anthony Appleyard <mclssaa2@fs*.mt*.um*.ac*.uk*>
To: techdiver@aquanaut.com <techdiver@aquanaut.com>
Date: Thursday, October 21, 1999 6:48 AM
Subject: controlling manners on channel


  Someone wrote:-
> Irvine quickly got added to my killfile, and it
> amazes me why anyone listens to his drivel.

  john.r.strohm@BI*.co* replied (Subject: Re: A question about who is the
mouth):-

> Well, I'll tell you, Dave.  I listen to George because he and his team
have
> done some absolutely incredible things, with a safety record that is
> several orders of magnitude better than anyone else. ...

  There are these two sorts of things that people may object to on channel:-
  (A) If in some matter of diving, I say that X=2, and Irvine says that X=3,
then each may say that the other's opinion is drivel, but they are both
reasoned statements and have a right to be heard, whether each is right or
wrong. I know it's annoying if the two persist in differing, but that's
life.
  (B) Abuse and bad language, such as one recent message that contained 2
screenfuls of lavatory-mouthing in uppercase, I pity any women on channel
who
must wade through that sort of stuff. To me, it isn't just the
offensiveness,
but the bulk for me to wade through before I start work in the mornings:
e.g.
today half of my incoming email was the "A question about who is the mouth"
thread. Does "a stroke" as often used on this list as an accusation mean
"someone who strokes his own ego"? If not, what?, so we know what we are
talking about. Who on this list has heard of netiquette?

  PLEASE why can't this list temporarily have a moderator until peoples'
manners and tempers simmer down? Reiteration and bad language don't get
through on email groups as Tolklang and Virus-L that have a moderator.
  ...................................................................
Anthony Appleyard, http://www.buckrogers.demon.co.uk (sci-fi stories, 3D
graphics, software)
--
Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'.
Send subscribe/unsubscribe requests to `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'.


--
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]