Mailing List Archive Mailing List Archive
What concerns me about legislation is the fact that the regulators' track=
record is so poor in all industries. Commercial diving is a good expampl=
e,
the OSHA regs. are a joke and the enforcement of those regs (or lack ther=
eof)
is an even bigger joke. Not to mention the contradictions between Coast =
Guard
regs and OSHA regs. Also, don't forget that a large part of the argument=
for
raising standards in the first place is to avoid government regulation in=
the
first place...and yes there are those of us that would like to see it sim=
ply
to avoid people being exposed to unnecessary risk.
As for unprofitability, the problem is that the general public(consumers)=
determine this to a great extent and there is definitely no controlling
consumers. Many have gone bankrupt attempting this. A large part of the=
problem is that the same people teaching students what is good and bad in=
diving, are the same people that are trying to sell all the B.S. What do=
most
instructors teach their students to use...whatever their dive store happe=
ns to
sell, not what is best for the student. So how do we make it unprofitabl=
e? I
would like to say that as educators we teach the consumers properly so th=
at
they can make an informed decision. Then natural selection can take plac=
e. =
But that's the problem in the first place, our educators aren't doing thi=
s and
as long as the public has the wool pulled over their eyes by these guys, =
they
will continue to make unwise purchasing decisions and they will keep
perpetuating substandard instruction and equipment.
Mike
"Mcinnis, Don" <Don.Mcinnis@in*.co*> wrote:
Mike,
I agree, but the $64 question is how do we get them to raise the standard=
s.
You can ask George and JJ how many times they tried and failed. I would
guess that they have lost count by now. There are only two things that wo=
uld
force the agencies to raise the bar: legislation or unprofitability. Ther=
e
is no industry pressure since strokes buy the high dollar shinys and
danglies that a DIR diver only laughs at.
Legislation scares the hell out of me, so the only answer is to make it
unprofitable for them to keep teaching teh way they are.
Don
=
-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Gault [mailto:gaultmike@ne*.ne*]
Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2000 3:53 PM
To: Mcinnis Don
Cc: techdiver@aquanaut.com
Subject: Re: [RE: Is there a thing like inofficial training? was Re:
Bondage Wi ngs]
Don,
You said it yourself, Don. Their defense is that they "taught to their
agency's standards". Why not raise the standards? I can assure you that=
if
the instructor does not teach to the standards his/her ass *is* on the li=
ne.
I don't know how it is in your market, but where I'm from it is very
difficult
to justify a high price on entry level training by running a more thoroug=
h
course. Most of the consumers are shopping price and schedule convenienc=
e
and
most do not consider a longer class more convenient. With the current lo=
w
standards, if one chooses to be more intensive they simply stear unknowin=
g
consumers to the strokes that produce more strokes. If the standards are=
raised across the board, then the consumers get a thorough class anywhere=
they
are taught to standards. Not teaching to the standards will subject thos=
e
to
Darwinism. And for the consumers that still are not willing to pay in ti=
me
and money for a thorough class...well we don't want them anyway.
Mike =
"Mcinnis, Don" <Don.Mcinnis@in*.co*> wrote:
I agree that it opens a door that is scary, but how do you stop them
otherwise? The only way to stop these guys from mass producing strokes is=
to
make it unprofitable to do so. If they learn that charging a little more =
for
intensive courses that turn out divers instead of strokes then we are all=
better off. If they don't learn the lesson, they will be out of business.=
Natural selection at its finest.
Don
-----Original Message-----
From: Ted Phelps [mailto:tphelps@ph*.co*]
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2000 5:43 PM
To: Mcinnis, Don; cmilz@Mi*.ED*; techdiver@aquanaut.com
Subject: RE: Is there a thing like inofficial training? was Re: Bondage
Wings
Good God-
You don't know what you are asking for. If you open any part of diving t=
o
litigation, you will be seeing lawsuits for gross negligence leading to s=
ea
sickness.
There oughta be a bullet for everyone who has ever said that "there ought=
a
be a law".
Ted
P.S. I don't disagree with your premise. It's just that your solution w=
ill
turn out to be worse than the problem.
-----Original Message-----
From: Mcinnis, Don [mailto:Don.Mcinnis@in*.co*]
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2000 7:07 AM
To: 'cmilz@Mi*.ED*'; techdiver@aquanaut.com
Subject: RE: Is there a thing like inofficial training? was Re: Bondage
Wings
Claudia,
This is an industrywide problem as I am sure you are well aware of. The
instructors are turning weekend warriors out in all levels of certificati=
on
and justifying it by saying " they are up to my agency's standards ". I
personally think that instructors need to be held liable for cases where
lack of instruction is the obvious cause. This would make for much better=
classes when the instructor knew his ass was on the line for turning out
divers that really knew what they were being certified for.
Don
-----Original Message-----
From: Claudia Milz [mailto:cmilz@Mi*.ED*]
Sent: Friday, March 10, 2000 8:07 PM
To: techdiver@aquanaut.com
Subject: Is there a thing like inofficial training? was Re: Bondage
Wings
Just kicking off a discussion -
A diver with "intro to cave" cert is scootering back in a cave,
doubles on. This is not covered with his formal training.
For what he was doing, he would have needed cave3 with GUE, or a
scooter specialty on top of full cave.
True, this is far away from each other. He could have just gotten the
intro cert, average talented diver, *wrong gear*, average fitness,
and the panicking hints that there was a huge lack of experience and
therefore, an inability to make the right decisions (at that point,
it was too late to find out that some dives are not so easy).
But indeed, the lack of the right cert doesn't tell you a whole lot.
Ehem, how many people have all the formal training they would
officially need for their diving?
I.e. a PADI diver without a "deep diver" cert isn't supposed to go
deeper than 100'/30m. Which is a very good idea regarding narcosis.
But who sticks to that? It is more than common practice to dive
deeper than 60'/18m after the open water training. The chick (it
really was one) with the poorest health who barely made it through
the PADI exam (!!!) went to the Red Sea the weekend afterwards and
did 100'+ dives. Another girl had made her cert on vacation and died
on her 6th dive in cold low viz water, 110' deep.
Maybe people are in general more careful when it comes to technical,
esp. cave diving. But, some people find technical training overly
expensive and play around with gear, deco and whatever without any
clue. This is stupid to say the least, but it seems to be accepted,
as long as nothing happens.
So we have 3 cases:
a) formal training first, dives to gain experience
b) S#!+ on training
c) informal training
To make a long story short, how is c) regarded in the community?
The prospective student shows the talent, mindset, etc, and knows his
gear. Now an experienced diver *trains* him. The student is very
good, doesn't have a problem, maybe shortcuts a bit.
What if
1) something does happen on an 'inofficial' dive, even if
formal training wouldn't have made a big difference.
2) everything's fine, the former student wants to do dives like
this scooter dive in a cave, has knowledge and ability and - there
are people who wouldn't let him, since he lacks the cert.
What does the list think of liabilities and the moral
responsibilities here?
Thanks, and have a great weekend.
Claudia
> Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 17:40:06 -0600
> To: cavers@ca*.co*
> From: Grady Richardson <grichardson@wo*.at*.ne*>
> Subject: Re: Bondage Wings
> Like Dan and Lance and George said, it wasn't the bondage wings or
> scootering that did the guy in, it was the mind set that did him in. Th=
e
> wings and the scooter were the outward appearances of his attitude.
>
> They were going "too far, too fast". They were taking giant strides wit=
h
> their experiance instead of small incrimental steps. This goes back to
mind
> set and attitude.
>
> Divers are taught in OW1 to dive within their limits (read training).Th=
eir
> mind set allowed them dive way beyind their training. If they had more
> experiance, maybe they wouldn't have been in such a situation in the fi=
rst
> place.
>
> Grady
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
--
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'.
--
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'.
____________________________________________________________________
Get your own FREE, personal Netscape WebMail account today at
http://webmail.netscape.com.
____________________________________________________________________
Get your own FREE, personal Netscape WebMail account today at http://webm=
ail.netscape.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]