highflowdiver
Contributor
It's useful if you are both using the same definition and your definition is that limited. Most defintions are not so limited and almost everyone includes cave, wreck penetration and deco in their definitions with or without a change in gasses/regulators. If you are talking with most folks and they use the term, it will be worse than useless to you, it will be misleading as almost no one uses your definition.
Everyone seems to have their own definition for the
word. That certainly IS useless. There is those that
have decided to make the word useFUL. The definition
I have cited is very useful and to the point. The person
that came up with this definition was at conference of
other pros in the field and they all concurred it to be the
best. I agree.
Instead of just some vague term that is
only of use for marketing ploys it now is useful to those
out doing the activity. The definition is clear, concise,
and to the point. There is no guessing. Now isn't that
nice? But, alas, just like the term, 'recreational cave
diver', most will object to it because it takes away their
thought of being the macho 'cave explorer'.
Some folks want to think of themselves as tech divers
because they dive dry. Some want to think of themselves
as tech divers because they dive doubles. Some want to
think they are tech divers because they dive deeper than
130 ft. Not so. sorry. If your dive requires multiple gases
and stage switches,, it is technical.
Kal