Semantics? I suppose so, because there is a difference between accusing someone of saying they invented something they didn't and saying they simply don't give credit where credit is due. Why the DIR fellows who felt compelled to give us their 2 cents (1 cent maybe) can't see the difference isn't my problem though. Lack of education? Low IQ? Fanatical allegiance to DIR? Who knows?
Ahh...stroke...just one more reason DIR fanatics turn my stomach. Anyone that feels like they must come up with words to disparage divers who don't adhere to their lock step philosophy isn't someone I have any desire to associate with. In fact, if being a stroke means I don't have to dive with jerks then, yes, I am a stroke.
I will say that many DIR trained divers don't refer to the rest of us as strokes, and they'll even dive with the untrained (i.e. no DIR-F training...in DIR terms this is kind of like the unwashed I think). I have no issues with these folks. In fact, most of them are pretty cool guys.
Being called a stroke may turn your stomach, but how is that any different than insulting a persons intelligence? You're living in the past and holding onto every negative word that was spouted off by GI3. GI3 has been out of the picture for at least four years. I'm far from a DIR fanatic. I believe that DIR diving is a great system, has many good things to offer to the dive community, works excellent for project diving (The WKPP is an excellent example of that), and for diving where coming directly to the surface isn't an option. That's not to say that I'm going to get all evangelical on anybody and tell them that they are going to die if they don't dive DIR or go around calling them a stroke. If it doesn't affect me or any of my diving related projects, then I could care less how other people dive.
k-valve:
The bottom line is that some of your peer group went postal because of a little fun with words. That's basically the way it always happens. Like I said, DIR fanatics and their groupies are a sensitive lot. They probably ought to play in their own yards with their own toys and we'd all live happily ever after.
I don't see where anybody has gone postal in this thread. Maybe you're talking about something else? It's been a pretty civilised discussion to this point, even with the attempted baiting. I don't particularly see myself as sensitive to subjects about DIR, but at that same time there is misinformation that I can attempt to clear up. It's a two way road though. I can make my attempts to clear up misinformation, but if your mind is already made up, then I'm not going to waste a whole lot of time trying to be informative.
k-valve:
Here are some more links for your viewing pleasure that prove the points us "strokes" have made in this thread:
It's not about the equipment, huh? Here's a SB thread where you DIR boys are making fun of things like the color of one's tank or reg hose:
http://www.scubaboard.com/forums/dir/114682-dir-gear-setup-photos.html
Here's an article by the infamous GI3...no mention that the DIR gear config is based on Hogarthian gear configurations:
http://www.divexsite.com/node/56
Here's a definition that was deleted from Wikipedia because it cites no sources and (this one is a big surprise) the neutrality of the article is disputed.
No reference to Hog equipment setup...again.
DIR diving (deleted 31 Aug 2008 at 00:26 - Deletionpedia)
Another...
BetterDiving.com Equipment
I still don't understand your fixation on this. You specifically said that the "DIR leadership" wasn't giving credit where credit was due. Where is the DIR leadership discussing the gear configuration and it's history in all these links? While we're at it, let's start giving credit to Sheck Exley for coming up with idea of using thirds, diving with stages, first use of the long hose, using a guide line, and writing his many publications. Lets give credit to Greg Flanagan for the first backplate. Guy Gilpatric for the first use of a mask under water. That list could go on endlessly. If we gave credit to every person who was involved with the development of a piece of gear, a configuration, or a procedure, we wouldn't get anything accomplished. Bill Main developed a way of streamlining gear. There are many interpretations of that. I can see giving credit when discussing the evolution and history of the gear configuration, but every time somebody discusses how the gear is configured? Sounds nit picky to me.
k-valve:
It took all of 5 minutes to round those up. I will say that JJ does often talk about Hog Gear Config, but most of the rest of what I found just makes me want to vomit. Although JJ seems like a pretty cool guy I don't think even he could undo the damage GI3 and his poor attitude did to DIR. Unfortunately, the problem persists because of instructors and dive shops that still push DIR like it is the only way to dive safely. That attitude is just flat out BS...and they don't give credit to guys like Bill Main, Sheck Exley, Bill Gavin, Lamar English, and others for coming up with most of the ideas on which the DIR philosophy is based. Their ideas include a lot more than gear config too...teamwork among them.
I don't think anybody is going to argue that GI3 spouted a lot of bull ****. Beyond the bull ****, he provided quite a bit of valuable information, but again, it you have to wade through the bull ****. As long as you continue to focus on GI3 as your reasons for having a negative outlook on DIR, then you aren't seeing the big picture. DIR and GUE have evolved well beyond that. I have not met any of the instructors or been to any of the dive shops that you talk about. Everybody that I've met has always been down to earth, very anylitical about diving, and willing to share information. Taking a GUE course discusses the history of how the system was developed. Without understanding the history of how the sytem was developed then you really can't understand the "why's..." of the system.
