DIR: God's gift to diving or Hell spawn?

[JeffG]

One of the writers on this Board has posted the following: "The enemy here is Darwin, and he's the only one DIR divers are concerned with."

I have noted other posters following that theme, with comments like: "This one wins the Darwin Award."

If I may just clear up a small misconception, it is MR. MURPHY who is the real enemy. He is always lurking, and trying to make sure that our day ends up badly; sometimes extremely so!

The "Darwin Award", historically and genetically speaking, goes to those who successfully adapt and SURVIVE.

So it would be Murphy that DIR folks, and all of us, especially instructors, are concerned about!!!

--------------------------------------------------

:cwmddd: "Well, monkey, I don't give a peddler's damn whether you wank DIR or dive Supreme."---(Mr. Natural)

But some people have a nack for meeting Mr Murphy more often then others....hence Darwin

 

[BigJetDriver]

But some people have a knack for meeting Mr Murphy more often then others....hence Darwin

True! After Mr. Murphy has done his work, IF one survives it, then Mr. Darwin comes into play!

-------------------------------------------------------

:cwmddd: "Well, monkey, I don't give a peddler's damn whether you wank DIR or dive Supreme."---(Mr. Natural)

 

[JeffG]

True! After Mr. Murphy has done his work, IF one survives it, then Mr. Darwin comes into play!

Well...as long as he hasn't procreated. My buddy has a nack for saying hi to Mr Murphy on our dives, but he has already bred, and now has "fixed" himself. So I guess Mr Darwin "missed" one...LOL

 

[BigJetDriver]

Well...as long as he hasn't procreated. My buddy has a nack for saying hi to Mr Murphy on our dives, but he has already bred, and now has "fixed" himself. So I guess Mr Darwin "missed" one...LOL

Well, for your buddy's sake, thank God!!! :11:

----------------------------------------------

:cwmddd: "Well, monkey, I don't give a peddler's damn whether you wank DIR or dive Supreme."---(Mr. Natural)

 

[BigJetDriver]

I never thought I would be saying what I am about to say in defense of the DIR community, because I have at times had my differences with some of its more agressive and vocal proponents.

In any case, when DIR proponents both recommend and teach that it is BETTER to work harder to achieve good bouyancy skills, they are absolutely RIGHT.

When DIR proponents both recommend and teach that it is BETTER to be in better shape to go diving, and not to smoke, for instance, I fail to see how they can be criticized, for they are absolutely RIGHT.

If they do this through a rather rigid and militarized teaching system, well, having at one stage in my life been taught by Marine D.I.'s, I can at least understand it as a methodology!

Historically, it seems, it has only been the sheer arrogance and effrontery of a few in the DIR community (unfortunately) that has raised the hackles of so many. This is a shame, because it has blurred an otherwise note-worthy message!

----------------------------------------------------

:cwmddd: "Well, monkey, I don't give a peddler's damn whether you wank DIR or dive Supreme."---(Mr. Natural)

 

[db8us]

Bigjet, i understand what you mean.
But on the other hand beeing vocal has done some good things, like get the agencies out of the deep-air corner...
I really believe that they would have not done that with only "polite" sentences.
But it has cooled down a lot and now people that have been "away" come closer so DIR-dudes and the non-dir-dudes start talking.
About the military approach: Consequent, no sugar-coating is the way to go at least for serious technical and cave-stuff in my opinion.
If the rule is that tanks are labeled in a certain way then they have to be that way.
If one does not want to do it, no problem, but he does not fit into that team and can directly drive home..
So nobody is PUSHED, they can have their own will and do what they want, but then they would never be a part of a TEAM in cave-diving....
At least none which i would be part of !

It is like the controller saying to you to change you heading to 270 and you would say..naaaah 250 is also fine for me.
If you want to fit into the system, you have to play by the rules...

We run dives in remote locations over a weekend coordinating around 15 people from up to 7 countries. If you do not put out rules like: Your gear has to be ready and tanks filled you would NEVER EVER get the dive done...

Still we push nobody to take part, we just lay out the rules and people have their choice...
Other groups prefer hanging around filling their tanks on site and "socialising" for one week prior to the dive and everyone is using different gear...
That gets them nowhere, but it is ok for me, since i believe they have fun abd do some diving. It is just a different approach.

Strong solo-cave divers get some things done, because they just do not depend on anything and anyone, but thats a different story.
I like the team-approach and no, it is not a boot-camp,
it is absolutly fun and we often discuss things in the morning or evening, but NOT during the working part of the day...

We rather prefer 4-6 weekends per year and one bigger event than just do one 3-week thing.

And there have to be other private diving trips, talks, meetings, presentations, equipment-tryout-days, etc... So time is the bottle-neck !

Michael

 

[BigJetDriver]

DIR

It is like the controller saying to you to change you heading to 270 and you would say..naaaah 250 is also fine for me.
If you want to fit into the system, you have to play by the rules...
Michael

Good one!!! Great post!!!

 

[Mako Mark]

Besides...getting killed on a dive is itself very un-DIR. Therefore the moment you're killed you are no longer DIR.

:rofl:

I believe this to be true, but I also believe that DIR follows neither Dr Darwin or Mr Murphy.

They follow Mr Ackim, whose Razor states that the more options you have, the more likely you are to F**k up the descision. (sic), therefore keep it simple and follow the rules.

 

[gj62]

They follow Mr Ackim, whose Razor states that the more options you have, the more likely you are to F**k up the descision. (sic), therefore keep it simple and follow the rules.

Sorry Mark, I think you mean Occom's Razor, which states, "The simplest explanation, with the greatest explanatory value, is probably the correct one." It does not state that the more options you have, the more likely you are to have errors...

 

[reubencahn]

Sorry Mark, I think you mean Occom's Razor, which states, "The simplest explanation, with the greatest explanatory value, is probably the correct one." It does not state that the more options you have, the more likely you are to have errors...

Occam with an "a" as in William of Occam or Ockham, the original spelling. The rule is "the plurality should not be assumed without necessity."