Mike, I agree, but the $64 question is how do we get them to raise the standards. 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 would force the agencies to raise the bar: legislation or unprofitability. There 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 line. 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 thorough course. Most of the consumers are shopping price and schedule convenience and most do not consider a longer class more convenient. With the current low standards, if one chooses to be more intensive they simply stear unknowing 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 those to Darwinism. And for the consumers that still are not willing to pay in time 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 to litigation, you will be seeing lawsuits for gross negligence leading to sea sickness. There oughta be a bullet for everyone who has ever said that "there oughta be a law". Ted P.S. I don't disagree with your premise. It's just that your solution will 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 certification 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. The > wings and the scooter were the outward appearances of his attitude. > > They were going "too far, too fast". They were taking giant strides with > 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).Their > 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 first > 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. -- 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]