DIR wars...Is it the name?

[detroit diver]

Every group has 'em.

Wow, 250 replies. But then again, this topic tends to be a hot one that pops up every 3 to 4 months.

SO.....not to be left out and feel like I'm the only one who has not had a kick at this can, here is my great and most enlightening addition to the conversation.


As of right now, I have meet in person only 4 divers who were self described DIR divers. Unfortunately for the rest of the DIR divers out in the world, they came across as the most self-centered, self-righteous, and self-absorbed group of jerks one could ever have the displeasure of crossing paths with. The most egregious verbal assault was made to myself and my buddy, who at that time were gearing up for a dive to 260 feet. This was our 6th dive to that spot that month and our dive plan was simple, photograph the quartz vein along the wall that had a 2cm wide vein of gold in it, remove a small sample and have it tested. This was being done for some University of Manitoba geology students for “academic” purposes. The lake cannot be commercially mined because it is in a provincial park. The “DIR” divers however took great pleasure in pointing out that our gear was crap. My gear was simple, twin 120’s with a custom blend of 15/50 mounted on a Dacor BP&W, an Apex ATX200 on long hose with a Mares Abyys on necklace, 36 percent in an AL80 with an older USD Conshelf and 100 percent in an AL80 with a new Mares Axis Pro. Lift bags, wreck reels, wrist slates with run times, bottom timers, bail out tables, cameras, simple tools for taking samples, and lights rounded out the gear. According to the “DIR” divers, I was a dead man walking. My gear would kill me because it did not say Halcyon or Apex on everything. They made a point of being loud and very noticed. Unfortunately for them, most everyone else at the dive site knows both my buddy and me. The impression that was left with most of us has been next to impossible to change, and DIR has had a very poor if not hostile reception ever since.

That was 2 years ago!

You divers who follow the DIR philosophy of diving have your work cut out for you if you are ever to repair the damage left behind by DIR divers like those I have meet.

 

[Viscya]

But the goal is to find the right way. You can't go looking for what you don't believe exists.

You are so not listening.

I said "we agree with the goal". How can you say I don't belive it exists?

Hello.... You there?

Saying Do It Right implies that it is the only way to do it. All others are wrong.

Exactly - it's called honesty. Anything else is dishonest.

No, it’s arrogant, which is the question of the whole thread. You sound like a guy arguing over Chevy vs Ford. I'm not going to argue that one is better.

Reading your comments, it's clear to me that you are wrong to believe you are even making the search, since you seem to deny the existence of what you claim to seek.

You are obviously not reading my comments at all!


As for the rest of your post. Novadiver's right. I need to get my boots.

 

[dweeb]

You are so not listening.I said "we agree with the goal". How can you say I don't belive it exists?

OK, slowly now.

What is the goal?

No, it’s arrogant, which is the question of the whole thread. You sound like a guy arguing over Chevy vs Ford. I'm not going to argue that one is better.

There's nothing arrogant about it. It PRECISELY describes the goal - to
"do it right." That is their goal, to do it right. Not to do it the way they like it, not to do it the way you like it, but to do it right.
That is what they are striving for. Obviously, if one is striving to do it right, and the way one is doing it is not the right way, one must change how one does it. Thus, when they do it a certain way, if their goal is to do it right, the way they are doing it is, of necessity, what they see as the right way. When they see evidence that it's not, they'll change how they do it, so how they are doing it will no longer be how they do it.

Now, if, as you claim, you share the goal to do it right, then either the way you are doing it is what you see as the right way, or you are changing how you do it. If you see the way you do it as the right way, then any other way is, by comparison, less right, more wrong. If another way wasn't the wrong way, you would shift to that way.

The fact that you don't see any way but the way you do it as wrong indicates you do NOT share the goal of doing it right, and that you don't even understand what that goal means. Either you're doing it right, or you're doing it wrong. It's a question of optimization. If you are doing it sub-optimally, then you are not doing it right. You can define what is optimal any way you please, but you can only have one definition, and once you've made it, you can't deviate and still claim to be doing it right, without changing your definition, and thus rendering the old definition wrong.

I suspect you are confusing doing it right with doing it the way you like the most. That's precisely what the DIR people are opposed to. The way you like most to dive is not a valid yardstick for doing it right. In the end, doing ANYTHING right requires that one is prepared to subordinate one's personal preference to the logical application of valid principles. In any endeavor, the right way always requires restraint of one's emotion-based preferences and impulses. The only thing about DIR that makes them different is they have not only committed to that restraint, but they have organized around that commitment. Others have made such a commitment, but not organized around it. Still others refuse to ever commit to such restraint.

 

[dweeb]

Has anyone seen my shovel, no the really big one, Oh it's with my boots..... thanks

You're welcome to say something substantive in rebuttal, whenever you feel you're up to it.

 

[dweeb]

Can't the same be said of our freind dweeb?

I welcome you to point out where I've even approached making a comment like your shovel statement. Oh, that's right, you can't.

I could easily play the game of such comments, but I was told that's not how things are done around here.

 

[dweeb]

Personally I didn't understand where the heck he was comming from.

That much was clear. It's a question of the nature of right and wrong, and one's convictions about those concepts.

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

That much was clear. It's a question of the nature of right and wrong, and one's convictions about those concepts.

... which, of course, implies that your "convictions" are a matter of faith, since "right" and "wrong" are almost always a matter of perception.

With respect to scuba diving, it's entirely possible to be doing it right without "Doing It Right". And there's an entire spectrum of "doing it" variations between DIR and DIW.

This whole conversation is, frankly, a waste of time.

Dive Safe ... that's all any of y'all should be worried about. The rest of this stuff has about as much relevence as the old argument about angels dancing on pin heads ... or in this case, perhaps with them ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[GreenDiverDown]

There's no excuse for that. That said, it's generally met with a correction from those that actually know the difference.

That's true, DD.

"It's quite another thing for the ANSWER to come from someone that is not DIR. Not only could the message/answer be incorrect, but if it's allowed to continue then any message from that person could be construed as being always correct." DD

But who's to say who is DIR enough to respond to these questions. I mean where do you draw the line?

I think that the line is so grey that as long as the answer is a DIR answer it should be welcomed by all...even if the responder lays no claim to DIR.

Stephen

 

[Viscya]

The fact that you don't see any way but the way you do it as wrong indicates you do NOT share the goal of doing it right

There are too many negatives in that sentence to make sense of it. I think I disagree, but I can’t be sure.

It's a question of optimization. If you are doing it sub-optimally, then you are not doing it right. You can define what is optimal any way you please, but you can only have one definition, and once you've made it, you can't deviate and still claim to be doing it right, without changing your definition, and thus rendering the old definition wrong.

Cool. I therefore declare optimally to be the best safest way to do it on a boat in the Northeast. That’s solo. Now I’m DIR!!!!!

....
I suspect you are confusing doing it right with doing it the way you like the most. That's precisely what the DIR people are opposed to.

Sorry dude, I was with you right up to the last paragraph.

There is no personal preference in my configuration. (unless you want to argue brands of gear, but we will not go there). My rig is a Hog rig. Breath the long hose.. Work out, don’t smoke … However, on boats up here, you can not dive full DIR. Now what? If I want to dive, I can’t be DIR. The personal preference is to dive. You can show restraint and not dive if you want, but I want to dive.

Now there is a trade off. If we have to come up an anchor line, are we still DIR? If you can’t take of the tank boots, are you still DIR? Where is the line drawn? If I’m not with a DIR buddy am I still DIR? How about no buddy?

Now let’s talk about the gear. You say that DIR is a question of optimization. I agree. The question is who make the decision on what is optimum? Optimized for Florida caves and NE ocean are two different things. Does DIR decide for both? Who? I’ll leave personal preference out of it. I know what the majority of people here dive. Is that now DIR? I know how most of them dive. Is that DIR? Of course not! But who decides what is?

I support and pursue the goal of diving optimal way (get into the best health, configure the best rig, practice and hone your skills). It's GUE decision on what is DIR that I don't support.

Now I going to agree with NWGratefulDiver. This conversation is not optimal, and therefore not DIR.

 

[detroit diver]

...............
I think that the line is so grey that as long as the answer is a DIR answer it should be welcomed by all...even if the responder lays no claim to DIR.

Stephen

That's where I have to disagree with you. The answer may be correct, but it then lends itself to potential problems in the future. Remember, a newbie knows nothing (or very little) about the subject. That's why he/she is asking a question. Given a response by, for instance, novadiver, (with "solo diver" attached to his name) lends credibility to a dive practice that is the anithesis of DIR. So you've now attached a correct answer to a DIR question with someone who advocates solo diving. After a while, the two can become intertwined.

Putting nova to the side for a moment, you're correct about asking who is legitmate DIR and who is not. Tough to find out sometimes. But there are enough "in the know" that will correct someone who gives an incorrect or misleading response. Or if we don't know, we will get a DIR instructor on here that can clear up the issue.