Diver missing at Ginnie?

[doctormike]

I'm more speaking in general; the whole "let's not talk about it" attitude....like maybe it will go away. It extends from even mentioning a death, to mentioning the name, to mentioning the circumstances and especially the equipment...oh, my, someone might get offended. If the only people who are "allowed" to know and discuss these things are a small group of insiders....isn't that the actual problem?

But that's not the attitude at all, at least not the point of the forum rules. The point of this forum is to discuss the specific diving related details of an accident or fatality, and to learn from that discussion. The name of the diver is irrelevant to that goal. This forum is not here to help people pass on condolences to the family.

Of course, one of the silliest statements (at least in the US) that you read here is "let's wait until the official report comes out to discuss it".

That will never happen. But it's also reasonable to wait until SOME of the details of the incident are made public, because otherwise you get useless generic speculation like in the recent Bonaire thread ("maybe it was a heart attack, maybe it was bad air, maybe it was the COVID vaccine").

 

[PfcAJ]

I'm sure the Rug and Broom committee with handle the reporting and analysis just fine.

 

[tursiops]

The name of the diver is irrelevant to that goal.

Mostly, yes. But I'm sure we've all had dive buddies with some questionable equipment/techniques/attitudes/practices so that just knowing the name may provide a lot of additional information.

 

[DandyDon]

I fail to see why waiting to release the name online until the family can be notified is such a pressing issue.

For one, the forum rules prohibit it until published, and the owner has that right.

 

[tursiops]

For one, the forum rules prohibit it until published, and the owner has that right.

You are conflating "notified" and "published."

 

[DandyDon]

You are conflating "notified" and "published."

Nope, just referencing the forum rules. How you all twist that to notifications is on y'all.

 

[doctormike]

Mostly, yes. But I'm sure we've all had dive buddies with some questionable equipment/techniques/attitudes/practices so that just knowing the name may provide a lot of additional information.

So are you saying that you would post in the A&I forum - where the point is to figure out what the contributing factors were - something like "Oh, I know Joe, he never carried enough bailout. That's probably what happened here".

 

[tursiops]

So are you saying that you would post in the A&I forum - where the point is to figure out what the contributing factors were - something like "Oh, I know Joe, he never carried enough bailout. That's probably what happened here".

The first sentence, maybe. The second sentence, never. I avoid speculating -- especially about accidents, and I try and minimize hearsay and questionable "facts."

 

[doctormike]

The first sentence, maybe. The second sentence, never. I avoid speculating -- especially about accidents, and I try and minimize hearsay and questionable "facts."

Seems like rhetorical parsing. Why would you post the first sentence then?

Would this be better? "I know Joe, and he never carried enough bailout. Readers of this forum should ignore that fact, however, since I don't know if that was a factor in this tragedy."

I mean, what would the point of publicly stating your concern about a dive buddy's practices unless you were attempting to make some sort of point about the topic of the thread?

 

[tbone1004]

alright, name has been published. Gloves off boys.

Don't do stupid sh!t. Just because you're certified to do a dive doesn't mean you're still qualified after many years out of the water. Don't be a cowboy. There are old divers and there are bold divers but no old bold divers. 62 wasn't "that" old, but a far cry from many others still diving in their 70's and 80's. What actually caused this death is largely irrelevant because the root cause is he shouldn't have been back there this soon after getting back in the water.
Please note the date of this post, the signature at the bottom, and please ignore any comments about @Superlyte27 as they are not relevant.
Post taken from this thread

http://www.cavediver.net/forum/showthread.php/34178-A-controversial-concept-but-maybe-a-good-one.?p=335322&fbclid=IwAR2E_nZvW7R5CNXgQz2ZWMetrQkE1nnXAwsXcbsWUPEIQm9Yk1GKKQP7HsU#post335322