Yes. I've read the thread. BUT this is entirely an "if, then" argument.
Allow Speculation?-Split from Catalina Diver died today
- Thread starter Cave Diver
- Start date
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
Yes. I've read the thread. BUT this is entirely an "if, then" argument.
OK. Thanks for the answer. I stand corrected. I do now see how in that situation speculation may have helped others gain some situational awareness. And in that context maybe something will come of this. But all in all, I feel most of this is way off base.
Other topics covered: Safe ascent rates, when to do deep dives in AOW classes, clearing of CO2 buildup, affects and possible symptoms of coronary issues, OOA sequence (immediately hand alt air or confirm low air first), dropping weights, even the effect of having a non-standard mouthpiece.
Obviously not all (or in fact most applied to this particular incident. But all had some good bits of information that may not have been brought up on their own. So although some may have come by out of curiosity, and may have made useless or distracting comments, a number of divers may have learned or been reminded of some very good points.
Obviously not all (or in fact most applied to this particular incident. But all had some good bits of information that may not have been brought up on their own. So although some may have come by out of curiosity, and may have made useless or distracting comments, a number of divers may have learned or been reminded of some very good points.
Ken Kurtis
Contributor
Good points but . . .
I think what gets lost in the shuffle here (at least from my perspective) is that the original forum is called "Accidents & Incidents." Then there's a thread about a particular accident. Shouldn't the discussion within that thread pretty much attempt to talk about that accident?
I'm NOT saying don't discuss these other things. And yes, there's value in not dropping your ditched weightbelt on someone's head. And if thats something you picked up from ANY thread, bravo. Making yourself a better diver is a good thing.
But if every accident dicussion evolves into a myriad of safety topic disciussions, even though the accident may have provided a jumping off point, would that be better served as a separate thread (as is the case with the topic we're discussing now)?
Setting aside the whole fact vs. speculation thing, the value of any thread diminishes when you've got 100 posts and maybe 30 of them dicuss the actual incident while others delve into ascent rates, weight ditching, CO2 retention, etc. All good things, but not necessarily germaine to the point at hand and perhaps worthy of their own focused thread.
- Ken
OP
As the Moderator who has assumed the responsibility of trying to keep the recent accident threads on track, I've been watching, but refrained from participating in them. However, I would like to address this particular point.
Thus far, there have been four spin-off threads from the recent discussions that I can recall. The very nature of discussion will cause things to drift off the original topic. If there seems to be enough interest in the new topic, then perhaps it warrants a new thread (like I did with this and Dave did with the CO2 one).
But many topics run their course and die off quickly. Our collective attention span is short and threads are quickly forgotten in favor of the "hottest topic." Monitoring these threads for relevant content, separating them, posting notices, etc. is time consuming. It also generates another thread that requires time and resources as debates get heated.
There is no perfect answer. No matter what is done with a thread, there will always be some percentage of readers that disagree with an action. Some days, the best we can hope for is a little tolerance and understanding of another's viewpoint.
I guess its a yes and no answer Ken. If we could stick to the actual incident, which would be a very short and probably inconclusive thread, then that would be ideal for discussing that specific occurrence. It would be great to know that Diver A had a panic episode which drove them to ascend too rapidly (x ft/sec according to their dive computer), despite their buddy trying to slow the ascent, Rescue breaths were given until EMT help arrived in 5 minutes and CPR and O2 was given, etc....Rapid ascent causing an AGE and cause of death. There might still be a question about what triggered the panic, but everything else would be answered.
On the other hand, one thing that comes from the speculation is a discussion about some things that may not be discussed otherwise. I'm not sure I would read a thread about "dropping weights, yes or no?" So exposure to some of these topics educates, reminds or re-educates some divers. As happened here, there were two threads split off for specific topic discussion.
So I guess I have a question based on all this: Is the purpose of this forum to learn about specific incidents and promote ways to avoid, handle or correct them, or is it to promote diver safety in general, covering a multitude of topics?
On the other hand, one thing that comes from the speculation is a discussion about some things that may not be discussed otherwise. I'm not sure I would read a thread about "dropping weights, yes or no?" So exposure to some of these topics educates, reminds or re-educates some divers. As happened here, there were two threads split off for specific topic discussion.
So I guess I have a question based on all this: Is the purpose of this forum to learn about specific incidents and promote ways to avoid, handle or correct them, or is it to promote diver safety in general, covering a multitude of topics?
But those same discussions spawn new questions and they need to be addressed and answered. I split the thread once on CO2 and maybe we (as moderators) need to watch those threads for rabbit trails and split them more frequently.
bjjman
Registered
Bjjman - I probably shouldn't be offering my resounding thanks for this post, because I'm the one who went into such detail about how we all need to disagree respectfully yadda yadda. And your post does have a wee bit of hostility in it. But I can't help myself...I just gotta say a resounding THANKS!
Thanks for cutting to the chase and explaining why these "anti-speculators" are really the ones who are mucking up these accident threads, while the rest of us are trying to talk about the incident and LEARN from it. Every single accident thread gets hit with these stop-speculating-rants. Now I have hope that the mods will dump all of 'em in THIS thread, and allow the valuable (and sometimes speculative) incident discussions to continue!
Thank you for appreciating my post. It's easy for me to get hostile behind this keyboard, but I do try cool off and be respectful prior to posting (with a little pointed humor thrown in for good measure).
That being said, I do appreciate the opinions of those who want less speculation, and I agree that some of the speculation is worthless, but IMO sifting through the "noise" is well worth learning valuable lessons from both the facts of a particular incident, as well as those things that could have caused, or are related to, the incident. I don't know how to put this any better, so I'll say this: It's like having five incidents to learn from instead of only one.
Similar threads
