I never saw Wrolf's original message, but the references to "foul
mouthed" and so forth are not even close to the mark. I am in New York
now as much as I am in Florida, and will speak at any of the dive clubs
if that is what you guys want to see. I don't do anything at night but
work out and sleep anyway.

Current is stronger in the Gulf Stream than anyplace up there. The
position of the boat has nothing to do with DIR configs. The visibility
is nasty in Leon Sinks most of the time, and that again has nothing to
do with DIR config. As we have said over and over and over, the cold
water issue just means we use gloves and we use larger bolt snaps. The
Swedes,  Alaskans, etc have no problem with any of this. The Germans
have no poblem with it. I do not see why cold, current, or vis means
putting on bondage wings, "poney", steel tanks with a wetsuit, stuffing
hose, or otherwise making a mess of your rigs. I don't get it.

I can speak anywhere, and there is is no way anyone anywhere wi;l be
able to walk away without understanding the logic of what we are doing.
If they then want to do something stuiopd, have at it, but they will
know why it is stupid.

They will also find out that people that do what I do routinely have no
fear of getting  in front of a hostile audience and getting face to face
on the issues. 

Ingemar Lundgren wrote:
> 
> Wrolf Courtney wrote:
> 
> "I look forward to the time when consideration is given in the DIR system
> for low vis, high current, cold
> water, anchored boat diving."
> 
> The DIR system works in any environment and i think that has been proven by
> DIR divers around the world. Myself and a lot of other people dive DIR in
> Sweden where the water is very cold and the vis is somtimes bad. We dive DIR
> because we feel that it is the system best adopted for cold water wreck
> diving.  Especially in cold water with heavy gloves on you need a simple,
> efficient and no junk configuration.  Christmas tree configurations are
> especially ill suited to cold water diving.  Same goes for low vis and high
> current.   Diving from anchored boats is a bad idea in my experience. If
> diving from an anchored boat you should have a separate down line.  I can
> not see why the DIR system could not be used from an anchored boat though.
> The problem with you guys is that you do not have any arguments for your
> configuration.  What you do is fabricating arguments such as DIR can not be
> used in cold water and heavy currents efficiently which is utterly bull
> shit.  It is time to realise that the conditions you have in NJ is not
> unique.
> 
> Wrolf Courtney wrote:
> 
> > Ingemar Lundgren wrote:
> > >
> > > I have assembled some of Dave Suttons most entertaining posts
> > ...snip...
> >
> > Dave Sutton certainly gives an accurate picture of NE wreck diving.  You
> > seem to regard it as entertaining, but it is still an accurate
> > picture.
> >
> > WKPP/DIR/Hogarthian techniques are known to many advanced NE wreck
> > divers, and
> > almost without exception rejected.  I do not understand why.  I do not
> > know whether they are rejected because they are inappropriate for
> > conditions here;
> > because people are resistant to change; or because of the foul mouthed
> > venom
> > for which the proponents of DIR are well known.
> >
> > I suspect a little of each.  DIR techniques have no leading proponents
> > in the
> > NY/NJ area, and have made no adjustments to it.  I look forward to the
> > time when
> > consideration is given in the DIR system for low vis, high current, cold
> > water, anchored boat diving.
> >
> > Of course, people are resistant to change, especially when they do not
> > see a
> > problem with what they are doing.  A little evangelism could help here.
> > Unfortunately none of the DIR proponents that I have invited to speak at
> > local dive clubs have taken me up on the offer.  I make it again: if
> > George
> > or Jarrod are prepared to speak in front of the local New York clubs,
> > drop me a line and I will arrange it.
> >
> > The foul mouthed garbage on this list turns many people off
> > immediately.  This
> > is what this list is known for in the diving community.  As one of the
> > founding members of this list, this still infuriates me.  It totally
> > destroys
> > the message.  Think of a car salesman (or bond salesman if you prefer),
> > trying
> > to sell to a new customer by calling them a "bone smuggler".  Not only
> > do you
> > put off that customer that time, you probably put them off permanently,
> > and
> > put off a bunch of lurkers at the same time.
> >
> > If you have not made the sale, then move on.  Maybe you can make the
> > sale later.
> > Burning bridges does not pay.
> >
> > --
> > Wrolf
> >
> > Wrolf's Wreck: http://wrolf.net
> >
> > "Thank you for your support"  -- 1980s Bartles and James advertising
> > slogan.
> 
> --
> 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]