DIR/GUE Attitude: I just don't see it

[rlynch]

On the wiki, I made a slight run at fixing it, but the hostility I encountered was amazing from the other contributors. The wiki is useless and frankly centered on a negative impression of DIR, with enough true detail to provide negative rebuttal. Anyway I gave up on it since I had better things to do than deal with all the ego. Btw none of the current contributors are DIR trained unless I missed someone whom has contributed lately.
Wiki is what you get for free, no wonder it is not allowed as a reference for any higher academic institution that I am aware of.

 

[rlynch]

On another tangent... It's funny this weekend I spent most of it (after my fundies tech pass dives) providing a constant depth reference for our local primer class, AND trying to stop all the other dive groups (instructor lead) from running right through our class. The UTD instructor (whom did not cruise through us, I might add as he had the situational awareness to see us) immediately tagged us a GUE when we spoke at the entrance. His class was in control and light years ahead of the other OW classes we saw that weekend. Kudos to him and I am truly sorry for having to thump an instructor on the head to get hime to see us, as he headed right into us completely unaware that our instructor was demoing a valve drill.

 

[boulderjohn]

O Btw none of the current contributors are DIR trained unless I missed someone whom has contributed lately.

I remember when all of this started. I pointed out that as bad as the DIR explanation was, the PADI explanation was even worse. Both were clearly written by people who were opposed to each. We ended up having some discussions with the Wiki people, and they (amazingly) maintained that it was better if there was no one from the groups involved writing the content, because then it be more likely to be an objective assessment rather than a puff piece. Of course, with that approach to a controversial subject, they run the risk of having just the opposite, which is indeed what they have.

 

[ucfdiver]

Wiki is what you get for free, no wonder it is not allowed as a reference for any higher academic institution that I am aware of.

Actually, I think wikipedia is darn accurate, especially when you put it up against other public sources. Wikipedia address that here, it's interesting at least
Reliability of Wikipedia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

I thought it would be interesting to bring in this post from another thread. The writer is explaining why the shop for which she teaches (she is NAUI) only accepts students for continuing education from a select list of agencies, and neither UTD nor GUE make that list.

Our shop has been teaching diving since 1972, including the local university academic diving program-- certified over five thousand students. We have fifteen instructors, including six course directors and four cave instructors.

As other posters have stated on this forum, GUE and UTD are not agencies by definition, they are more akin to regional dive clubs (there are others like them as well). We do not agree with the intent of GUE's teaching standards, which are more inline with indoctrination than that of instruction which results in independent thinking divers.​

Just so you don't have to look a the entire thread, I could not find a single post in which anyone offered any statement at all about UTD or GUE not being agencies by definition, so I don't know where that came from.

It came from the same place so much other misinformation in scuba diving comes from ... ignorance, ego, and self-interest. If they don't teach/sell it, it'll kill you ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[rjack321]

HERESY!

On the other hand, one piece of twisted, silty rusty metal looks very much like another . . . here's a challenge, Guy. Can you show me how to get as excited about wrecks as I am about caves? (I sure have more access to wrecks . . . )

You need to put in the time and effort to find a never before known one. That's what keeps us coming back.
I have invested 1000s of hours and a ton of money to find some fairly obvious things and some complete busts. For instance, I found the Louie, Skookum, and Gigolo, Boyd and I stumbled onto what he calls the Dreamscape, but came up empty handed after a 15hr drive to Yellowstone lake with Limeyx looking for the Zillah.
There's nothing like being #1 on a wreck though.

 

[nadwidny]

There's nothing like being #1 on a wreck though.

Or #4.

 

[rlynch]

Actually, I think wikipedia is darn accurate, especially when you put it up against other public sources. Wikipedia address that here, it's interesting at least
Reliability of Wikipedia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

when you read the study by IBM in 2003 - it states that vandalism is repaired extremely fast (...) this also go for counter opinions (even when referenced appropriately). the thing that got to me was the constant issue with quoting Jarrod's materials and the other contributors saying they were irrelevant. And the constant lack of published material to back up the counter claims they presented both on Wiki and privately. In the end I guess they won b/c I just don't have the time or inclination to fight high school conflicts again. I'm diving too much I personally feel that Wiki is well a good source of general info that may or may not be accurate, I do not trust it for facts. Generally I only use it for top level browsing b/c it comes up first in a lot of searches.

 

[boulderjohn]

... the thing that got to me was the constant issue with quoting Jarrod's materials and the other contributors saying they were irrelevant. And the constant lack of published material to back up the counter claims they presented both on Wiki and privately. ..

That was what baffled me the most. They do not allow any of the original source material to be used. Although I did not actively participate, I was watching the frustration about the efforts with DIR, and I communicated directly with them about some of the super inaccuracies related to PADI. They invited me to put information into the PADI article myself, but when they told me the restrictions on what I could use, I realized I had nothing to say. Even as a PADI MSDT with a library of PADI materials, there was nothing I could use. On the other hand, it was OK to use a totally inaccurate CDNN article as a reference.

 

[leabre]

There's nothing like being #1 on a wreck though.

Or #4.

Or #975 if it's your first on that site I'm just happy to dive wrecks, period!