Diver out of air? Not really? Cozumel.

[Down2bizDiver]

Youtube says your video is private.... booooooooo!!!

Yes, sorry, I took it down ... too much controversy over it here on scubaboard and elsewhere.

 

[Gombessa]

That might have been your intent, but that's not how your original comment reads to me.

Well, whatever was happening here, I'm sure that poor guy wouldn't appreciate you plastering his face all over the front of the video

All I mentioned was that you didn't need to include a drawn out shot of the "panicked diver's" face at the beginning of the video in order to make your point about dive safety.

Well, if you really think it's out of line, feel free to mod the post. I think a plain reading pretty much supports what I claim.

Fact is, he had a chance to talk to the diver afterwards and actively declined to do so ("He didn't speak to what happened with the sharing of air and I didn't press him on it ... in the end everything turned out OK and I didn't think it my place to interrogate him about the incident.") And yet he sees fit to drag the poor guy's face into the court of public opinion via a video and thread highlighting a point-by-point dissection of a bad dive, and when called on it, 1) replies with snark about how the diver should perhaps be thankful for this abuse ("Note: I charged nothing for this memento of the dive!"), and 2) acts intentionally obtuse and further lies about having made edits to his post (I quoted his post in my reply at 10:39pm, his last-edited footnote clearly displays 10:48pm, and either way, the question I answer is clearly outlined in the quoted post. What more do you want?).

I can only think that the OP received flak elsewhere (other boards, PM) and is responding to that here.

I dunno. Again, for the record I think the discussion is good, but showing the diver's face on the boat is public shaming and unnecessary to make the point.

 

[Cave Diver]

Well, if you really think it's out of line, feel free to mod the post.

I'm not posting as a mod, just as another user. I also didn't say that it's out of line. I just said that the original post you made reads different to me than your followup. Apparently it read differently to the OP as well, which may have contributed to the type of response he gave you.

 

[Gombessa]

There is no "drawn out shot of the 'panicked diver's face' at the beginning of the video" and you can't see his face because he is wearing a dive mask.

Since the video is down, I'm not quite as worried about Barbara-Streisanding the guy, but I think you know I'm talking about the on-the-boat shots, not in the water. But given your tendency to be somewhat disingenuous in your discussions, I find it difficult now to take you at your word. Sorry.

 

[SoccerJeni]

Since the video is down, I'm not quite as worried about Barbara-Streisanding the guy

What would that involve? I'm not familiar with this term.

 

[Gombessa]

What would that involve? I'm not familiar with this term.

"The Streisand effect is a primarily online phenomenon in which an attempt to hide or remove a piece of information has the unintended consequence of publicizing the information more widely."

Wikipedia

Essentially, I'm arguing that including an in-boat pan clearly showing the diver's face clearly identifies him publicly, but going into detail describing it only draws more unwanted attention to the identity of the diver (and if it was me, I would be absolutely mortified seeing that video, and a bit pissed off that the guy posting it didn't have the stones to talk about it with me in person when he had the chance).

Since the video is now private, I feel I can discuss the clip a bit more candidly without fearing exposing the guy, though with the drawback of the whole thing becoming a he-said, she-said situation since there's no way to confirm or refute it either way.

 

[SoccerJeni]

"The Streisand effect is a primarily online phenomenon in which an attempt to hide or remove a piece of information has the unintended consequence of publicizing the information more widely."

Wikipedia

Essentially, I'm arguing that including an in-boat pan clearly showing the diver's face clearly identifies him publicly, but going into detail describing it only draws more unwanted attention to the identity of the diver (and if it was me, I would be absolutely mortified seeing that video, and a bit pissed off that the guy posting it didn't have the stones to talk about it with me in person when he had the chance).

Since the video is now private, I feel I can discuss the clip a bit more candidly without fearing exposing the guy, though with the drawback of the whole thing becoming a he-said, she-said situation since there's no way to confirm or refute it either way.

Aaah! Well, if it makes you feel any better, I couldn't have told you which person on the boat was the one who was filmed in the water. But, I know others pay closer attention to things like that than I do.

 

[Gombessa]

Aaah! Well, if it makes you feel any better, I couldn't have told you which person on the boat was the one who was filmed in the water. But, I know others pay closer attention to things like that than I do.

There was only one person with the same build, hair, mask, wetsuit and gear config. And the camera stayed on his face for several seconds. I didn't catch it the first time either because I was just watching for the dive portion, but once you start wondering if he shows up in the boat scene at the beginning, it sticks out like a sore thumb. I'm just glad the OP didn't draw a neon arrow pointing straight to the guy.

 

[Cave Diver]

There was only one person with the same build, hair, mask, wetsuit and gear config. And the camera stayed on his face for several seconds. I didn't catch it the first time either because I was just watching for the dive portion, but once you start wondering if he shows up in the boat scene at the beginning, it sticks out like a sore thumb. I'm just glad the OP didn't draw a neon arrow pointing straight to the guy.

I'll agree that the boat scene could be edited out and it would ensure a degree more of privacy. When I first read your post about the panicked diver I thought you were referring to the underwater portion though. I never gave much thought to the boat portion.

 

[Gombessa]

I'll agree that the boat scene could be edited out and it would ensure a degree more of privacy. When I first read your post about the panicked diver I thought you were referring to the underwater portion though.

Thanks for the clarification, I can see now how that could have been construed differently than how I intended.

I never gave much thought to the boat portion

I did not give the boat scene any thought at first either, but noticed it plainly on a second viewing. Also, Since I video and post up almost all of my dives as well, I know that when you include a particular clip in a video, there's almost always a specific reason for doing so (though I did not originally call this out as it's just pure conjecture).