Who, precisely, are we not permitted to criticize on this board?

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

Wow, can someone tell me how this action turned out? I trust that it was dismissed, with prejudice. Thanks.
We're still here right? And Gundi is not.

The members pitched im to help with legal expenses -we e had a special badge for contributors. I forget the wording but I occasionally still see one in a member signature, The link is bad though,

Brings back bad memories, I was a mod at the time.
 
Man, I wish I had a wayback machine. I was following pretty closely at the time and don't recall reading anything that made me cringe at the time, so I may have read whatever caused offense but don't even know it!

You may have. I used no derogatory terms and made no unfounded accusations.

All I did was repeat the actions that someone in the forum had taken, and the words they used.
 
Yesterday, I was banned for a day, and a host of posts have now been deleted, which concerned the Conception fire.

The reason for the ban and deletion, is that while what I had posted was truthful and accurate, it was also critical of a moderator and financial supporter of this site.

I will not name names here, but there are people on this board who are passing themselves off - and being accepted as - experts on safety, and there are things that those people have said and done that the rest of us need to know about. Both so they can decide how much weight to give to those people's claims, and so they can make their own judgments about which operators are and are not behaving in a safe manner.
Yesterday you were banned for an hour. That is how long it took me to find out it happened and correct it.

What you posted was in violation of the terms of service but not worthy of a ban. You should have been warned and then on continuation you should have been thread banned.

I deleted your posts and several others. Your posts were off topic. You repeatedly made accusations of a criminal nature against another member. That is outside the boundaries for posting here but also this member had no affiliation with the Conception or any potential legal issues regarding the fire and multiple deaths. That thread and this forum is not a venue for you to use in expressing your resentments toward another member.


Quote one thing -- just one thing -- I said that wasn't entirely truthful.

"Frank ran, for years, on a boat which he knew if a fire started it would fully engulf the boat and overwhelm onboard firefighting in seconds. He didn't warn his passengers. He didn't warn the owners of other dive liveaboards whose boats were virtually identical. He didn't warn the NTSB."

That is libel unless you can prove that he actually believed that. You can't simply claim that another man believes his actions to be an endangerment to his passengers when that is a criminal offense in his line of work without proof and if you have that proof this thread is not the venue for its expression.

"While you were concealing from passengers that a prior fire on your boat had engulfed the cabin and overwhelmed onboard firefighting, and you'd taken no action to remediate the problem."

This is another accusation without any evidence that is off topic in a thread about the Conception. I removed the attacks on the other member and the many responses that were in support of him as those were also off topic. If you have proof of your serious accusations then this isn't the place to express them.
 
I want to be clear about something so that it does not appear that I just have hard-on about Frank. (You've brought his name into this...)

The reason I have been posting about this, is not to attack Frank or the Spree. The reason is that Frank has been representing himself as an expert on boat safety standards. In addition, in a discussion about the law applicable to the Conception, Frank made extensive claims about the legal applicability of his "negligence waivers" to circumstances like what occurred on the Conception.


I am raising this issue of his own behavior, because I think it starkly demonstrates that his claims about both applicable safety standards, and the law, are false.

If this is not the place to express my concerns --- what is?

"Frank ran, for years, on a boat which he knew if a fire started it would fully engulf the boat and overwhelm onboard firefighting in seconds. He didn't warn his passengers. He didn't warn the owners of other dive liveaboards whose boats were virtually identical. He didn't warn the NTSB."

That is libel unless you can prove that he actually believed that. You can't simply claim that another man believes his actions to be an endangerment to his passengers when that is a criminal offense in his line of work without proof and if you have that proof this thread is not the venue for its expression.

I can prove it (unless his posts have been deleted or changed). Frank has described publicly the fire on the Spree. He did so in the Conception accidents and incidents forum. It spread so quickly that it engulfed the passenger cabin in seconds, and overwhelmed onboard firefighting. This is by his own description.

I did not accuse him of a crime. I do not believe he committed one. If a subsequent fire had occurred and killed someone, that would likely have been criminally negligent homicide in most states. I did point this out to him (without naming him as the individual involved).

"While you were concealing from passengers that a prior fire on your boat had engulfed the cabin and overwhelmed onboard firefighting, and you'd taken no action to remediate the problem."

This is another accusation without any evidence that is off topic in a thread about the Conception. I removed the attacks on the other member and the many responses that were in support of him as those were also off topic. If you have proof of your serious accusations then this isn't the place to express them.

Again, I can prove it (unless his posts have been deleted or changed). Frank has publicly admitted that he did not warn future passengers about the prior fire ( he then had that thread on Facebook deleted, but I believe he's admitted it elsewhere as well - also, you can ask him). Or warn the owners of other boats with a virtually identical design, including the Conception. He has described his remedial steps on numerous occasions. Although his description of the remedial steps he took changes from day to day, they generally involve installing additional fire *detection* equipment in the cabin. Which is nice, but the problem that occurred was not a failure to *detect* a fire. The problem was, that because of the design of the boat, a fire in the cabin would spread so quickly, engulfing the cabin, that firefighting was impossible. (Again, this is by his own description.)

The connection to the Conception is: (a) the boats had a virtually identical design, and (b) Frank did not inform the Conception owners of the fire on the Spree.

The topics of the discussion were (a) whether satisfying Coast Guard standards is sufficient to avoid liability in circumstances like the Conception; and (b) whether negligence waivers are sufficient to avoid liability in such a circumstance.

I'm well within the rules.
 
POV warriors are a special breed... All we ask is that you be nice and stay on topic.
Bullies are a special breed also, and you have a whole stable of them in your moderator ranks. Look back just on this short thread. "I cheered your ban. I'm sorry to see you back." "Where is your mommy when you need her?" These are the taunts of playground thugs. SB's credibility isn't helped when so much of this crap comes from mods.

Edit, in view of my mistake as discussed in Who, precisely, are we not permitted to criticize on this board?: mods, or from friends of mods or people they have otherwise indulged for too many years.
 
Bullies are a special breed also, and you have a whole stable of them in your moderator ranks. Look back just on this short thread. "I cheered your ban. I'm sorry to see you back." "Where is your mommy when you need her?" These are the taunts of playground thugs. SB's credibility isn't helped when so much of this crap comes from mods.
You appear to be suggesting that the user who made those comments is a SB Moderator.

I do not believe that is true / accurate / correct.
 
When someone is gracious enough to invite me into their home
Unless I lose total control I make sure to not **** on their carpet


SB became a public forum and lost control of its content to the public the instant it created this forum.
And if you don't believe that I'd simply observe that it is good if people don't crap on your floor, but it's even better when you don't crap on your guests.

I'm sure I typed “slip” whereby the owner would
suffer no end of lawsuits brought by my parents


And as owner trumps guest, when you have chosen wisely you still have the dignity card
 
SB's credibility isn't helped when so much of this crap comes from mods.
Language too harsh for your sensitivities?

You miss the entire concept of a fundamental 'burst disk' that keeps this board what it is. Any mod can take his/her hat off and participate in a thread. Once done, that person is no longer forevermore a mod in that thread.
 
You appear to be suggesting that the user who made those comments is a SB Moderator.

I do not believe that is true / accurate / correct.
In that case, I apologize for mischaracterizing his position here. Apparently I made a big mistake in that regard.
 
https://www.shearwater.com/products/teric/

Back
Top Bottom