Trey; He's a WASTE of your time in my opinion. Stick to those of us on DIR-QUEST who WANT to LEARN and are not convinced we are god's gift to the diving world line this TWIT. haha L8R Trey wrote: > Idiot, every post you make shows that you are a neophyte and a complete > stroke. In the first one, which I have reproduced below, you do "not see the > need for a focusable beam light". That is because you are too fucking stupid > to know why we use them ( to signal ) and too much of a rookie to know you > can not see down a passage without them in order to make an exploration > decision, but that is beyond you anyway. Also, the mere fact that you have a > piece of shit like the light you mention is proof of cluelessness beyond the > pale,. and ignorance of anything to do with real diving or dive gear made > for real diving. Then, we have the post from you where you are trying to > pawn off the worst regulator made, and we have the post from you where you > do not get why we do not use zippers on dry suit pockets, and finally this > series of babbling bullshit out of you about your worthless stroke opinion. > > You want my opinion? You are a moron. Here is some more proof: > > From: "David E. Smith" <dsmith218@ho*.co*> > Subject: RE: 10W HID ? > Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 23:14:03 -0500 > > To those who care: > I dive a Dive Rite HID (Wreck1/10W). I have about 10 cave dives with it. > I have really enjoyed it. I have definitely not found the beam to be too > small. Several of us have been diving them and have been experiencing > 3+ hour burn times on a very compact and lightweight canister. There have > been times when I would have preferred a focusable beam, but have not > had a case where it was detrimental not to have it. In my opinion, I don't > see how you can beat it for the price and size/weight!! > > dsmith218@ho*.co* > > -----Original Message----- > From: David E. Smith [mailto:dsmith218@ho*.co*] > Sent: Monday, April 16, 2001 7:54 PM > To: Trey; Mike Rodriguez > Cc: Joel Silverstein; RDecker388@ao*.co*; rikard.lundgren@sw*.se*; > techdiver@aquanaut.com > Subject: RE: Isolating Manifold Question > > I agree with one of your earlier posts. Nothing around here ever changes. > As usual > you have chosen to not address any of the facts of any my posts. You have > failed to > counter anything in my posts specifically. You simply chose to spout off in > your normal > manner, without knowing what or who you are talking about. You don't know > me, or what > I do. But that is irrelevant, anyway. Facts are facts. And you choose to > ignore those > in a discussion and just rely on your holier than though rhetoric about how > everyone > who is not WKPP MUST be on the "other" side. > > If you ever read a post carefully, you would have seen that I actually dive > my isolator > fully open. However, some of the arguments expressed in that discussion > were garbage (IMHO). > But, you can feel free to make your assumptions regarding my background; > which, you make with > no basis. So bravo, psychic one! > > dsmith218@ho*.co* > ICQ# 25409809 > > Moderation is for the poor, and the healthy...of which I am neither. - > Polver > > -----Original Message----- > From: Trey [mailto:trey@ne*.co*] > Sent: Monday, April 16, 2001 7:26 PM > To: David E. Smith; Mike Rodriguez > Cc: Joel Silverstein; RDecker388@ao*.co*; rikard.lundgren@sw*.se*; > techdiver@aquanaut.com > Subject: RE: Isolating Manifold Question > > I have seen enough of your opinions on here - they are worthless because you > have no clue, and you prove it with each and every post you make. I am sick > of idiots who do nothing yet have all the answers. You are one of many who > fit that category. > > Unfortunately, there are enough of you out there that the accident stats > keep racking up, so your bullshit needs to be treated as bullshit and offset > with the real story, which many on here who do have a clue and who do dive > have already done. > > I noticed some of your posts and read them only because we have a "David > Smith" in the WKPP. It only took a few of your dumb ass comments for me to > realize this was not our David Smith. > > -----Original Message----- > From: David E. Smith [mailto:dsmith218@ho*.co*] > Sent: Monday, April 16, 2001 7:06 AM > To: Trey; Mike Rodriguez > Cc: Joel Silverstein; RDecker388@ao*.co*; rikard.lundgren@sw*.se*; > techdiver@aquanaut.com > Subject: RE: Isolating Manifold Question > > Trey, > Why don't you tell me what part of my post is not factual or clearly > indicated as opinion. Meanwhile, I will forget your errors in pointing > out the "obvious". > > dsmith218@ho*.co* > ICQ# 25409809 > > Moderation is for the poor, and the healthy...of which I am neither. - > Polver > > -----Original Message----- > From: Trey [mailto:trey@ne*.co*] > Sent: Monday, April 16, 2001 6:35 AM > To: David E. Smith; Mike Rodriguez > Cc: Joel Silverstein; RDecker388@ao*.co*; rikard.lundgren@sw*.se*; > techdiver@aquanaut.com > Subject: RE: Isolating Manifold Question > > Dave, you obviously do not dive, and you obviously do not understand any of > this, and you are wasting everyone's time with bullshit. Tukker hit the nail > on the head. > > -----Original Message----- > From: David E. Smith [mailto:dsmith218@ho*.co*] > Sent: Sunday, April 15, 2001 10:49 PM > To: Mike Rodriguez > Cc: Joel Silverstein; RDecker388@ao*.co*; rikard.lundgren@sw*.se*; > techdiver@aquanaut.com > Subject: RE: Isolating Manifold Question > > Mike, > If you read my posts you will see that I have not advocated any of the > options for how to operate your valves. I have stated only that it is not > "common sense" that the valve should be fully open. I have stated that a > valve not fully shut is open (this in response to the statement that a valve > not fully open is shut). I think if you think of the "system response" to > the 2 scenarios (partially shut = open or partially shut = shut) you would > have to agree with my version. In any case, I think these "arguments" have > little to do with the real discussion of whether or not a valve should be > fully open or not. I haven't even really gotten into that. I am simply > commenting on the "absolutist" posts that make statements of common sense or > fact because it suits someone's argument. To this end, what is your source > on the design basis of scuba valves being several turns to shut as an > "intrinsic safety factor". Also, I think you would have to admit, (without > coming to a conclusion on how you should operate your valves) their is a > difference in the likelihood of rolling shut an isolator vice an orifice > valve. If this argument were made to me, I would counter with.."There is > still the likelihood..." But then, that is why we have good technique and > don't contact our manifolds. And when in spite of that technique, we > do...we check. (Not to start another thread, but my isolator knob is > inverted and CAN'T contact the overhead!) > In any case, it may amuse you to discover that I keep my isolator fully > open. I didn't used to. And I arrived at this decision based very little > on any of the arguments posed so far. I just take issue with the fact that > some have arrived at conclusions/statements of FACT, without any proof or > "authority". > > So as I go on and on....Let me state one more time what I CONSIDER to be > fact...whether it is relevant to the main issue or not. > > A partially open valve will act like an open valve. > A partially open valve will be more easily shut (whether intentionally or > not). > I should notice an inadvertently shut isolator by monitoring my SPG. > If I am too stupid to open my isolator before mixing/filling, then that is > Darwin at work. > > Now, there are many more, more relevant facts. These are just the ones > presented (or contradicted) in order to arrive at the decision that the > isolator MUST remain fully open. (Lest you be a farm animal or something. > <g>) So I plead, argue/discuss/whatever the merits...That is why we are all > here (I presume). Let us not dispute fact with opinion and state it as a > fact. > > Happy Diving! > Dave Smith > > dsmith218@ho*.co* > ICQ# 25409809 > > Moderation is for the poor, and the healthy...of which I am neither. - > Polver > > -----Original Message----- > From: Mike Rodriguez [mailto:mikey@ma*.co*] > Sent: Sunday, April 15, 2001 5:43 PM > To: David E. Smith > Cc: Joel Silverstein; RDecker388@ao*.co*; rikard.lundgren@sw*.se*; > techdiver@aquanaut.com > Subject: RE: Isolating Manifold Question > > At 11:11 AM 4/15/2001 -0400, David E. Smith wrote: > > Hello David, > > >If it is not shut, it is open. > > A bump on a fully open valve results in a non-event. The same bump > on a mostly closed valve can result in an accident, maybe a fatal one, > as analysis of several diving deaths over the years related to > inadvertently closed isolators suggests. If it can happen to other > divers, it can happen to any of us, including you. > > -Mike Rodriguez > <mikey@mi*.ne*> > http://www.mikey.net/scuba > Pn(x) = (1/(2^n)n!)[d/dx]^n(x^2 - 1)^n > > -- > 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'. -- You Don't HAVE to be NUTS to be a SysAdmin./WebMaster. BUT it Helps! http://www.thecrusaderbbs.com -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- GAT dpu s+: a++ C UL++++ P+ L+++ E- W+++ N+ o-- K w O M- V-- PS PE Y PGP- t-- 5 X- R- tv+ b++ DI++++ D G- e h--- r+++ z+++ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK----- -- 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]